The URL can be used to link to this page

2025-04-15 Council Committee of the Whole1 2 OF BbMG ti Agenda Edmonds City Council 1,00 COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM 121 - 5TH AVENUE N, EDMONDS, WA 98020 APRIL 15, 2025, 6:00 PM COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS ARE WORK SESSIONS FOR THE COUNCIL AND CITY STAFF. COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDAS DO NOT INCLUDE AUDIENCE COMMENTS OR PUBLIC HEARINGS. PERSONS WISHING TO JOIN THIS MEETING VIRTUALLY IN LIEU OF IN -PERSON ATTENDANCE CAN CLICK ON OR PASTE THE FOLLOWING ZOOM MEETING LINK INTO A WEB BROWSER USING A COMPUTER OR SMART PHONE: HTTPS://ZOOM. US/J/95798484261 OR JOIN BY DIAL -UP PHONE: US: +1 253 215 8782 WEBINAR ID: 957 9848 4261 STAFF AND COUNCILMEMBERS ATTEND COMMITTEE MEETINGS VIRTUALLY, AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ARE ENCOURAGED TO ATTEND THE SAME WAY. IF MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC CANNOT ACCESS THE VIRTUAL COMMITTEE MEETINGS WITH THEIR PERSONAL DEVICES, A MONITOR IS PROVIDED AT THE CITY COUNCIL CONFERENCE ROOM AT 121 5TH AVE N, EDMONDS WA. CALL TO ORDER COMMITTEE BUSINESS 1. Day Camp Positions Reinstatement (15 min) 2. Presentation of Supplemental Agreement with SCJ for Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 3 (30 min) 3. Update on 88th Ave Overlay and Sidewalk Repair Project (20 min) 4. 2025 April Budget Amendment (20 min) 5. Update on STEP Housing Permanent Code Language (5 min) 6. Update on Neighborhood Centers and Hubs Permanent Code Work (5 min) 7. Update on Middle Housing Code Work (10 min) 8. Planning Department Position Reclassifications (10 min) 9. Priorities for 2025 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Ideas (40 min) 10. Resolution Recognizing Earth Day 2025 (0 min) ADJOURNMENT Edmonds City Council Agenda April 15, 2025 Page 1 2.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 04/15/2025 Day Camp Positions Reinstatement Staff Lead: Angie Feser Department: Parks, Recreation & Human Services Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History This request is to have City Council reinstate the FTE (full time equivalent) of four (4) Day Camp Assistant positions for this summer to provide a needed summer youth program serving area families; a revenue replacement program; and a recreation program that is projected to generate significant more revenue than expenditure. This action does not require additional department budget expenditure authority nor approval of the fob descriptions. The city's Day Camp Assistant position FTE equates to four positions at 388 annual hours each. The positions are listed and approved in the 2025-26 Budget Book. In addition, they were originally listed in Attachment B (irregular employees) in related Ordinances 4336, 4344, 4359, 4362 and then removed in Ordinance 4381 on January 14 of this year. This action is to reinstate this position the Full Time Equivalent to allow the hiring of these temporary staff to implement the Summer Day Camp program. Implemention of this Summer Day Camp program is to compensate for the unanticipated cancellation of the Adult Softball league due to an unforeseen program expenditure related to City of Lynnwood field usage rates making the program operate at a significant loss. If not replaced with another program, the excess revenue estimated from the Softball program becomes additional deficient to the 2025 General Fund. The Summer Day Camp program is estimated to generate an estimated $34,000 beyond program expenditures. Staff Recommendation Council authorizes the reallocation the Full Time Equivalent (FTE) of the Day Camp Assistant position in the Authorized Employee and Pay Ranges List to allow for the hiring of temporary staff to implement the 2025 Summer Day Camp program. Narrative In 2023, during the preparation of the 2024 Adopted Budget, the City Attorney recommended the city implement a more structured and formal system for employee position control. The 2025-2026 Adopted Biennium Budget highlighted a structural imbalance in the city's General Fund which led to several previously authorized positions being classified as unfunded for this budget cycle. While the position descriptions for these positions remain valid, any positions identified with 0 FTE approved are considered unfunded. However, since this is a replacement program, there is no need to have any additional funding allocated. Packet Pg. 2 2.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 04/15/2025 Presentation of Supplemental Agreement with SCJ for Hwy 99 Revitalization Stage 3 Staff Lead: Rob English/Bertrand Hauss Department: Engineering Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History On October 11, 2022 professional services agreements with SCJ for Highway 99 Stages 3 & 4 were presented to the Parks and Public Works Committee and it was forwarded to full council. On October 25, 2022 professional services agreements with SCJ for Highway 99 Stages 3 & 4 were presented to City Council. On November 1, 2022 the professional services agreements with SCJ for Highway 99 Stages 3 & 4 were approved by City Council. On March 28, 2023, City Council approved the new active transportation recommendations along Hwy 99 and new capacity recommendations at Hwy 99 @ 220th St. SW into the Design phase. On March 19, 2024, a project update was presented to City Council. On June 18, 2024, this supplement was presented to the Parks and Public Works Committee and was forwarded to a future City Council Meeting for presentation and approval. On July 23, 2024, Supplemental Agreement #1 was approved by Council. Staff Recommendation Forward to consent agenda for approval. Narrative The goal of the Highway 99 Revitalization project is to extend the successful transformation of Highway 99 in Shoreline through Edmonds from 244th St. SW to 210th St. SW. Due to the high cost of completing all the other proposed improvements along the corridor, the 2.25 mile stretch was divided into 7 segments. The scope of the Stage 3 segment, from 244th St. SW to 238th St. SW, includes capacity improvements at Hwy 99 at 238th St. SW with the addition of a second left turn lane for the northbound movement. A planter strip, bike lane, new sidewalk, and new street/pedestrian lighting will be added on both sides of the street, along with the completion of various utility improvements, including conversion of overhead Packet Pg. 3 2.2 utility lines to underground. The initial consultant contract only included Design Phase elements with no Right -of -Way Acquisition Phase elements. This supplement consists of the following additional items: Design Elements Additional surveying along 238th St. SW, 240th St. SW, Safeway (23632 Hwy 99) and EC Plaza (23830 Hwy 99) to account for list of items below; Due to the existing roadway grades on the east side of Hwy 99 along 238th St. SW and 240th St. SW, additional design work to regrade both streets and provide wider accessible crossings for the complete streets improvements. Drainage work on the east side of Hwy 99 along 240th St. SW to fix an existing drainage issue at vacant restaurant on SE corner of Hwy 99 @ 240th St. SW (24001 Hwy 99); and Additional site design at (6) private properties due to driveway changes, parking lot reconfiguration, ADA accessibility, and off -site stormwater system modifications: o Campbell Nelson VW (24329 Hwy 99); o Shoreline Academy (23931 Hwy 99); o K&E Motor Inn (23921 Hwy 99); o Safeway (23632 Hwy 99); o Taco Time (23904 Hwy 99); and o Pizza Hut (23830 Hwy 99). ROW acquisition services for 21 parcels Waiver of Valuations; Appraisal, appraisal review, title review, clearing, ROW negotiations, and closing; and Survey staking on private property to delineate ROW lines and Temporary Construction Easements The total cost for this supplement is $783,336. The initial contract amount with SCJ was $3,217,453 with $154,000 in Management Reserve. Supplement 1 totaled $388,571, increasing the total contract amount to $3,606,024 with $154,000 in Management Reserve. The new contract amount will be $4,389,360 with $154,000 in Management Reserve. This supplement will be funded with the State of Washington Move Ahead Transportation Funds and WSDOT funds. WSDOT recently committed to funding design, right-of-way, and construction related to the pavement overlay and complete streets improvements. The total WSDOT funding contribution is currently estimated at $6,122,000. The City is working with WSDOT to finalize an interlocal funding agreement which will be presented to the City Council in May or June. Attachments: Attachment 1 - SCJ Amendment #2 Packet Pg. 4 2.2.a Washington State Department of Transportation Supplemental Agreement Organization and Address Number Amendment 2 Shea, Carr & Jewell, Inc. (dba SCJ Alliance) 8730 Tallon Lane NE, Suite 200 Lacey WA 98516 Original Agreement Number LA-10229 Phone: 360-352-1465 Project Number Execution Date Completion Date N/A 11/01/2022 12/31/2026 Project Title New Maximum Amount Payable Highway 99 Gateway - Revitalization, Stage 3 244th St SW to 238th St SW $4,389,360 Description of Work The objective of the Stage 3 project is to design and construct improvements to Highway 99 from 244th St SW to 238th St SW consistent with the Conceptual Plans developed in the Highway 99 Revitalization Stage 1 planning project and the Highway 99 Revitalization & Gateway Stage 2 construction. The scope of work includes new sidewalks, street lighting, crosswalks, improved storm water management, targeted utility replacements, landscaping, a new dual left turn pocket at 238th St SW and potential utility undergrounding. The Local Agency of City of Edmonds desires to supplement the agreement entered in to with SCJ Alliance and executed on 11/01/2022 and identified as Agreement No. LA-10229 All provisions in the basic agreement remain in effect except as expressly modified by this supplement. The changes to the agreement are described as follows: Section 1, SCOPE OF WORK, is hereby changed to read: See attached Scope of Work. 11 Section IV, TIME FOR BEGINNING AND COMPLETION, is amended to change the number of calendar days for completion of the work to read: N/A III Section V, PAYMENT, shall be amended as follows: The contract will be increased by $783,336 from $3,606,024 to $4,389,360 as set forth in the attached Exhibit A, and by this reference made a part of this supplement. If you concur with this supplement and agree to the changes as stated above, please sign in the Appropriate spaces below and return to this office for final action. By: Scott Sawyer By: Mike Rosen Consultant Signature Approving Authority Signature DOT Form 140-063 Revised 09/2005 Packet Pg. 5 2.2.a Exhibit "A" Summary of Payments Original+ Amendment 1 Amendment #2 Total Direct Salary Cost $710,087 $41,850 $751,937 Overhead (Including Payroll Additives) $1,087,751 $73,158 $1,160,909 Direct Non -Salary Costs $1,572,437 $654,435 $2,226,872 Fixed Fee $235,749 $13,893 $249,642 Total $3,606,024 $783,336 $4,389,360 DOT Form 140-063 Revised 09/2005 Packet Pg. 6 2.2.a 1480-�. SC.J ALLIANCE CONSULTING SERVICES Exhibit A Scope of Work HIGHWAY 99 GATEWAY -REVITALIZATION PROJECT - STAGE 3 244TH STREET SW TO 238TH STREET SW AMENDMENT 2 City of Edmonds, WA Prepared For: Bertrand Hauss, Project Manager, City of Edmonds Rob English, City Engineer, City of Edmonds Prepared By: Scott Sawyer, Project Manager, SO Alliance Date Prepared: April 02, 2025 Introduction At the time the original scope of work was written, the objective of the Edmonds Highway 99 Gateway Revitalization Stage 3 project was to design and construct improvements to Highway 99 from 244th Street SW to 238th Street SW consistent with the Conceptual Plans developed in the Highway 99 Revitalization Stage 1 planning project and the Highway 99 Revitalization & Gateway Stage 2 construction. Those improvements included extending the transformation of Highway 99 in Shoreline through Edmonds. The scope of the project included replacement sidewalks, new street lighting, improved stormwater management, targeted utility replacements, a new dual -left turn pocket for NB traffic at 238th Street SW, potential undergrounding of overhead distribution utilities, landscaping, softscape treatments and other streetscape improvements to speak to the unique character of Edmonds. Since that time, changes have occurred to the nature of the project. WSDOT added a Complete Streets element to the project and the City of Edmonds, in a previous amendment and management reserve request, added work for those changes including the new complete streets element for the project including roadway and stormwater work along 238th Street SW, roadway and stormwater work south of the SR 104 interchange and layout of and design of the new footprint. This amendment includes work for right of way services including Waiver of Valuations, appraisal and appraisal review, title review, clearing and closing for 21 parcels. This amendment also includes design and survey work for off -site drainage impacts where the project is impacting on -site stormwater management at Safeway and at Pizza Hut. Packet Pg. 7 2.2.a Highway 99 Stage 3: Scope of Work- Amendment 2 SC.J ALLIANCE April 2, 2025 CONSULTING SERVICES Page 2 of 11 M Q co M r N Additionally, the amendment includes design and survey work to regrade 238th St SW and 240th St SW to c incorporate Complete Streets improvements since wider accessible crossings will be required at both intersections. Regrading 240th St SW also will require the project to fix an existing drainage issue at the vacant restaurant at the SE quadrant of the 240th St SW intersection. Currently road stormwater is draining onto the property. The necessity of this work became apparent during the development of the Complete Streets Memo and cost estimate requested by WSDOT. Lastly, the amendment also includes work for more detailed site design of five of the impacted properties accounting for additional work on private property. This work is detailed below. Campbell VW • The Campbell VW driveway was not included in the original project scope as work South of the SR 104th interchange was recently completed. Amendment 1 added complete streets work to this property. • Campbell VW has a lease with WSDOT for their driveway and a parking lot. The proposed grading will impact both the driveway and the parking lot. Shoreline Academy of Music and Dance • Additional work has been added along the property for the regrade of 240thSt. • While the original design would have impacted the stairs, handrail, and ramp of the Shoreline Academy of Dance, the effort of redesigning these features and coordinating them with the property owner were not reflected in the original effort for design of the property interface. K&E Motor Inn • The original concept at the 30% plan was to consolidate driveways where possible. The first driveway at K&E Motor Inn was identified with the City as an opportunity as they have a potential internal a circulation. In reviewing the Plan with the right of way team between 30% and 60% it became apparent N that this is not a possibility. The already steep driveway when combined with Complete Streets will result in a retaining wall along the building to keep the first two motel rooms open. m E Safeway E • Design work is needed to relocate the existing private stormwater system due to project improvements Q and right of way acquisition. Work at this property is expected to include rechannelizing the parking lot N depending on where the new flow control and treatment facility is placed. r Taco Time • Work at Taco Time will include rechannelizing their parking lot due to an encroachment on the drive aisle that connects the drive thru to the parking lot. The full extent of this impact was not realized when originally scoping the project. 1201 Third Ave, Suite 550 • Seattle, WA 98101 • Office 206.739.5454 • Fax 360.352.1509 • scjalliance.com Packet Pg. 8 2.2.a -40- -ON- ow SC.J ALLIANCE CONSULTING SERVICES SCOPE OF WORK Highway 99 Stage 3: Scope of Work- Amendment 2 April 2, 2025 Page 3 of 11 Phase 1 Project Management (No Change) Phase 2 Funding and Grant Assistance (no change) Phase 3 Survey and Basemapping (1AG) (added work, SC32, SC33) Task 1 Survey and Basemapping Beyond Curbs (added work, SC32) 1) Survey Control (no change) 2) 3D Laser Scanning (no change) 3) Field Surveying (SC32): Perform additional survey along 2381h St SW, 240th St SW, and at Safeway (23632 Highway 99) and E.C. Plaza (23830 Highway 99) to supplement drainage design work. 4) Office Processing (SC32): Process the additional work collected in Phase 3.1.3. 5) Utility Mapping (no change) Task 2 Survey and Basemapping Between Curbs (no change) Task Survey of Potholing Information (no change) Task 4 Staking TCE and ROW (new work, SC33) 1) Survey PM, Admin, QQ/QC. (new work, SC33) This task includes the survey project management, administrative duties, and quality control required for a project of this complexity and magnitude. Depending on the project requirements, there will be a Survey Project Manager, Assistant Project Manager, and Survey Quality Leader for this project. 2) Survey Control (new work, SC33) This task includes the establishment of survey control, or the recovery of existing survey control, as required for the project. Existing survey control, in conformance with industry standards, will be used for this survey. This survey control is then typically propagated, as required, utilizing standard terrestrial total station measurements. ♦ Geodetic Survey Control (Coordinates) (a) Current coordinate system is NAD83-1991. (b) Horizontal survey work shall reference the Washington State Plane Coordinate System of 1983 as established in accordance with Chapter 58.20 RCW. (c) Vertical Datum for the survey work shall reference the NAVD88. ♦ Cadastral Survey Control (Lines established and marked on the ground by suitable monuments, which are used as starting and closing points in surveys of the public domain of the United States.) Units shall be in US Survey Feet. 3) Field Surveying (new work, SC33) This task includes the field surveying and staking required for this specific effort. Survey will be conducted using a traditional Total Station to stake the positions of the proposed right-of-way lines and proposed temporary construction easements for the 21 properties attached. 1201 Third Ave, Suite 550 • Seattle, WA 98101 • Office 206.739.5454 • Fax 360.352.1509 • scjalliance.com Packet Pg. 9 2.2.a -40- -ON- ow SC.J ALLIANCE CONSULTING SERVICES Highway 99 Stage 3: Scope of Work- Amendment 2 April 2, 2025 Page 4 of 11 4) Office Processing (new work, SC33) This task includes the office processing of the collected survey data, data extraction, field book note reductions, CADD drafting, and other duties required for the generation of the deliverable(s). For the staking efforts, sub -tasks include the office calculations of the proposed right-of-way and temporary construction easement lines, QA/QC of said calculated lines, processing of field data and QA/QC of said staked points, as required. 5) Right -of -Way and Boundary Resolution(s) (new work, SC33). Existing right of way to be researched and resolved. 6) Right of Way and Easement Acquisition Support (new work, SC33) Up to 40 land descriptions and exhibits (2 per parcel) for right of way acquisition and temporary construction easements will be prepared. Understanding ♦ The new work will be incorporated into the deliverables already identified in the original scope. Deliverables ♦ Updated AutoCAD Civil 3D survey base map. ♦ An allowance of $51,642 is included in Task 4 for setting field stakes to delineate TCE's and right of way acquisition limits on properties. This allowance will be used on an as -needed basis and only performed after the City provides written authorization to stake limits on properties identified by City. Field survey will include staked points on the ground, with lathe, designating the limits of proposed right of way and temporary construction easement lines ♦ Signed and stamped PDF copy of up to 40 legal descriptions and associated exhibits ♦ Field book notes, if required ♦ ASCII file of all set points Phase 4 Potholing (no change) Phase 5 Utility Coordination (no change) Phase 6 Geotechnical Engineering (no change) Phase 7 WSDOT Project Development Approval (no change) Phase 8 Traffic Analysis (no change) Phase 9 Design Management and Meetings (no change) Phase 10 Transportation Design (SCJ) (added work, SC29 and SC30) Task 1 30% Transportation Plans (no change) Task 2 60% Transportation Plans (added work, SC29 and SC30) 1201 Third Ave, Suite 550 • Seattle, WA 98101 • Office 206.739.5454 • Fax 360.352.1509 • scjalliance.com Packet Pg. 10 2.2.a -401- -00- 411110� Highway 99 Stage 3: Scope of Work- Amendment 2 SCJ ALLIANCE April 2, 2025 CONSULTING SERVICES Page 5 of 11 1) Roadway Design — 2381h St SW and 2401h St SW (SC30): This subtask is updated to include scope for the roadway design along 238th St SW and 240th St SW east of highway 99. This includes the work associated with regarding the roads to provide accessible crossings wide enough for the complete streets elements. These updates will affect the following plan sheets: ♦ Site Preparation Notes, Plans and Details ♦ Right of Way Plans ♦ Channelization Notes, Plans, and Details ♦ Illumination Design ♦ Roadway Typical Sections ♦ Paving Notes, Plans, and Details. Includes roadway modeling in AutoCAD. ♦ Driveway Profiles and Details. Develop driveway profiles and details as needed for up four (4) driveways. These are driveways along 238th St SW and 240th St SW that are impacted by the regrade and were not included in the original scope. 2) Site Design resulting from Complete Streets (SC29): This subtask is updated to include scope for site design for the five properties that were identified in the introduction above. Work will include driveway grading, additional landscaping, additional curbs, and parking lot regrading. ♦ Site Preparation Notes, Plans and Details ♦ Paving Notes, Plans, and Details. Develop details for paving transitions and interfaces with private property. Task 3 90% Transportation Design (added work, SC29 and SC30) 1) Roadway Design — 238th St SW and 240th St SW (SC30): This subtask is amended to add work to advance the sheets identified in Task 2 to reflect the advancement of the design from the 60% to 90% level. This work assumes one round of review comments. 2) Site Design resulting from Complete Streets (SC29). This subtask is amended to add work to advance the sheets identified in Task 2 to reflect the advancement of the design from the 60% to 90% level. This work assumes one round of review comments. Task 4 95% Transportation Design (added work, SC29 and SC30) 1) Roadway Design — 238th St SW and 240th St SW (SC30): This subtask is amended to add work to advance the sheets identified in Task 2 to reflect the advancement of the design from the 90% to 95% level. 2) Site Design resulting from Complete Streets (SC29): This subtask is amended to add work to advance the sheets identified in Task 2 to reflect the advancement of the design from the 90% to 95% level. This work assumes one round of review comments. Task 5 100% Transportation Design (added work, SC29 and SC30) 1201 Third Ave, Suite 550 • Seattle, WA 98101 • Office 206.739.5454 • Fax 360.352.1509 • scjalliance.com Packet Pg. 11 2.2.a -401- -00- 411110� Highway 99 Stage 3: Scope of Work- Amendment 2 SCJ ALLIANCE April 2, 2025 CONSULTING SERVICES Page 6 of 11 1) Roadway Design — 2381h St SW and 2401h St SW (SC30): This subtask is amended to add work to advance the sheets identified in Task 2 to reflect the advancement of the design from the 95% to 100% level. 2) Site Design resulting from Complete Streets (SC29): This subtask is amended to add work to advance the sheets identified in Task 2 to reflect the advancement of the design from the 95% to 100% level. This work assumes one round of review comments. Understanding ♦ The new work will be incorporated into the deliverables already identified in the original scope. ♦ The work required for WSDOT approvals has already been accounted for. Deliverables ♦ Same as original contract and Amendment 1. Phase 11 Traffic and Electrical Design (no change) Phase 12 Stormwater Design (OCI) (added work SC26 and SC31) Task 1 30% Stormwater Management Technical Memorandum (no change) Task 2 Stormwater Analysis and Drainage Report (added work SC26 and SC31) 1) Drainage Report. Report (SC26 and SC31). This amendment involves including offsite drainage design from properties impacted due to roadway changes in the Stage 3 project. ♦ The change includes revisions and/or redesign of stormwater treatment and verification of existing location of detention systems (by survey in Phase 3) for the Safeway property (at the intersection of Highway 99 and 238th street) biofiltration swale which will be impacted due to the sidewalk on Highway 99 and 238th Street. The scope involves the following: ♦ Providing a maximum of two (2) preliminary design options for stormwater to the City for discussion with Safeway property owners. This will include developing calculations and exhibits to prove the feasibility of the two options. No further options will be evaluated, and the preliminary designs will be used by the City to discuss cost to cure options with Safeway. This conceptual work will be completed as part of the 60% design and will not be advanced into submittal plan/profile/detail sheets and further design submittals. ♦ Three (3) meetings with the property owners for the Safeway property only and one (1) round of comments from the property owners will be incorporated into the options analysis for the Safeway property. ♦ Additional conveyance design changes to upgrade the existing conveyance on 238th per City's request will also be included in this scope of work. ♦ Additional changes to the existing conveyance system are required due to impacts to the conveyance in front of the Pizza Hut property and to carry the design forward through 1201 Third Ave, Suite 550 • Seattle, WA 98101 • Office 206.739.5454 • Fax 360.352.1509 • scjalliance.com Packet Pg. 12 2.2.a -40- -ON- ow SC.J ALLIANCE CONSULTING SERVICES Highway 99 Stage 3: Scope of Work- Amendment 2 April 2, 2025 Page 7 of 11 60%, 90%, 95% and 100% submittals. No flow control and treatment design is assumed in this location since any existing flow control and treatment facilities in these locations are assumed to have no impact based on current survey. ♦ This amendment will also address the existing low point for the property on 240th street that will need to be regraded and conveyance added. Design will be carried forward through 60%, 90%, 95% and 100% submittals. No flow control and treatment design is assumed in this location since any existing flow control and treatment facilities in these locations are assumed to have no impact based on current survey. 2) Site Visits (no change) 3) Update TDAs Delineation. (no change) 4) Calculate Area Updates. (no change) 5) Minimum Requirements. (no change) 6) Modeling (SC 26 and SC31): Update model per changes in Task 12.2.1. 7) Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). (no change) 8) WSDOT Hydraulics Coordination Meetings. (no change) 9) Appendix Exhibits (no change) Task 3 30% Stormwater Design (no change) Task 4 60% Stormwater Design (added work SC26 & SC31) 1) Stormwater Design (SC26 and SC31): This subtask is amended to add work to advance the stormwater design to mitigate for offsite drainage changes as noted in Phase 12, Task 2 of this amendment. Advance the following sheets to reflect the advancement of the design from the 30% to 60% level and develop plans as noted. No plan sheets will be developed for the Safeway property treatment design. All drainage details are assumed to be standard plan details as there will not be any flow control and treatment facilities designed for this added offsite drainage conveyance design work for the rest of the project. ♦ Drainage Plans ♦ Drainage Profiles Task 5 90% Stormwater Design (added work SC31) 1) Stormwater Design (SC31): This subtask is amended to add work to advance the stormwater design to mitigate for offsite drainage changes as noted in Phase 12, Task 2 of this amendment. Advance the following sheets to reflect the advancement of the design from the 60% to 90% level and develop plans as noted. No plan sheets will be developed for the Safeway property treatment design. All drainage details are assumed to be standard plan details as there will not be any flow control and treatment facilities designed for this added offsite drainage conveyance design work for the rest of the project. ♦ Drainage Plans 1201 Third Ave, Suite 550 • Seattle, WA 98101 • Office 206.739.5454 • Fax 360.352.1509 • scjalliance.com Packet Pg. 13 2.2.a -401- -00- 411110� Highway 99 Stage 3: Scope of Work- Amendment 2 SCJ ALLIANCE April 2, 2025 CONSULTING SERVICES Page 8 of 11 ♦ Drainage Profiles Task 6 95% Stormwater Design (added work SC31) 1) Stormwater Design (SC31): This subtask is amended to add work to advance the stormwater design to mitigate for offsite drainage changes as noted in Phase 12, Task 2 of this amendment. Advance the following sheets to reflect the advancement of the design from the 90% to 95% level and develop plans as noted. No plan sheets will be developed for the Safeway property treatment design. All drainage details are assumed to be standard plan details as there will not be any flow control and treatment facilities designed for this added offsite drainage conveyance design work for the rest of the project. ♦ Drainage Plans ♦ Drainage Profiles Task 7 100% Stormwater Design (added work SC31) 1) Stormwater Design (SC31): This subtask is amended to add work to advance the stormwater design to mitigate for offsite drainage changes as noted in Phase 12, Task 2 of this amendment. Advance the following sheets to reflect the advancement of the design from the 95% to 100% level and develop plans as noted. No plan sheets will be developed for the Safeway property treatment design. All drainage details are assumed to be standard plan details as there will not be any flow control and treatment facilities designed for this added offsite drainage conveyance design work for the rest of the project. ♦ Drainage Plans ♦ Drainage Profiles Assumptions ♦ The new work will be incorporated into the deliverables already identified in the original scope. ♦ This work includes up to three meetings to meet and coordinate with property owners. ♦ One round of updates of design will be performed at each stage of design. Additionally, one round of design calculations/updates will be completed based on comments received from the City. Any additional updates to design are not included in this scope of work except to correct errors or omissions at any stage. Phase 13 Water Design (no change) Phase 14 Sanitary Sewer Design (no change) Phase 15 Utility Undergrounding Design (no change) Phase 16 Art, Landscape, and Irrigation Design (no change) 1201 Third Ave, Suite 550 • Seattle, WA 98101 • Office 206.739.5454 • Fax 360.352.1509 • scjalliance.com Packet Pg. 14 2.2.a -401- -00- 411110� Highway 99 Stage 3: Scope of Work- Amendment 2 SCJ ALLIANCE April 2, 2025 CONSULTING SERVICES Page 9 of 11 Phase 17 Estimate of Probable Cost (SCJ and OCI) (added work SC26 and SC29- SC31) Task 1 30% Estimate of Probable Cost (no change) Task 2 60% Estimate (added work SC26, SC29-SC31) 1) 60% Quantities (SC26 and SC29-SC31): This subtask is amended to include work to prepare quantity take offs for the work associated with the work described in Phases 10 and 12 based on the 60% Plans in BlueBeam and document quantities by sheet. 2) 60% Unit Costs (SC26 and SC29-SC31): This subtask is amended to include work researching similar, recent projects and determine unit costs to be used in the estimate for items unique to the work described in Phases 10 and 12. Document the source and calculation of each unit cost. 3) 60% Lump Sum Estimates (SC26 and SC29-SC31): This subtask is amended to include work to prepare rough lump sum estimates for bid items to be paid by LS for items unique to the work described in Phases 10 and 12. 4) 60% Estimate (SC26 and SC29-SC31): This subtask is amended to update the estimate spreadsheet based on the above subtasks. Task 3 90% Estimate (added work SC29-SC31) 1) 90% Quantities (SC26 and SC29-SC31): This subtask is amended to include work to update quantity take offs for the work described in Phases 10 and 12 based on the 90% Plans in BlueBeam and document quantities by sheet. 2) 90% Unit Costs (SC26 and SC29-SC31): This subtask is amended to include work to update similar, recent projects and determine unit costs to be used in the estimate for items unique to the work described in Phases 10 and 12. Document the source and calculation of each unit cost. 3) 90% Lump Sum Estimates (SC26 and SC29-SC31): This subtask is amended to include work to prepare rough lump sum estimates for bid items to be paid by LS for items unique to the work described in Phases 10 and 12. 4) 90% Estimate (SC26 and SC29-SC31): This subtask is amended to update the estimate spreadsheet based on the above subtasks. Task 4 95% Estimate (added work SC29-SC31) 1) 95% Estimate (SC26 and SC29-SC31): This subtask is amended to include work to update the estimate spreadsheet for work the work described in Phases 10 and 12 based on the 95% Plans and 95% Project Manual. Task 5 700% Estimate (added work SC29-SC31) 1201 Third Ave, Suite 550 • Seattle, WA 98101 • Office 206.739.5454 • Fax 360.352.1509 • scjalliance.com Packet Pg. 15 2.2.a -401- -00- 411110� Highway 99 Stage 3: Scope of Work- Amendment 2 SCJ ALLIANCE April 2, 2025 CONSULTING SERVICES Page 10 of 11 1) 100% Estimate (SC26 and SC29-SC31): This subtask is amended to include the work to update the estimate spreadsheet for work the work described in Phases 10 and 12 based on the 100% Plans and 100% Project Manual. Assumptions ♦ The new work will be incorporated into the deliverables already identified in the original scope. Phase 18 Project Manual (no change) Phase 19 Construction Schedule (no change) Phase 20 Quality Assurance and Quality Control (no change) Phase 21 Assistance During Bidding (no change) Phase 22 Public Involvement (no change) Phase 23 NEPA and SEPA Documentation (no change) Phase 24 Permitting (no change) Phase 25 Right of Way Calculations (no change) Phase 26 Right of Way Plans (no change) Phase 27 Right of Way Acquisition Design Support (no change) Phase 28 Right of Way Acquisition (RESGNW) (new work, SC21) Task 1 Right of Way Coordination (no change) Task 2 Project Funding Estimate (no change) Task 3 Preliminary Right of Way Services (new work, SC21) 1) Waiver of Valuations: Following review of the right-of-way plan, instruct the appraiser to prepare Waiver of Valuation for all impacted parcels. The Waiver of Valuation will utilize consistent comparable sales and valuation techniques. Waiver Valuations will be written for those acquisitions valued under $35,000 and uncomplicated, with an option for property owners the option of having the agency appraised the property, and in compliance with 49 DFR 24.102 ©(2)(ii). Should any appraisals be required, consultant will make a recommendation with cost estimates for appraisal consultants to the Prime or the City. 2) Appraisal and Appraisal Review: Handle contracts and make any necessary recommendations to the City. 3) Title Review, Clearing and Closing: Review title reports for affected parcel and provide Title Review Memo identifying all potential encumbrances to project team members. Assist in clearing the necessary encumbrances prior to closing, if feasible. Assist in facilitating in-house 1201 Third Ave, Suite 550 • Seattle, WA 98101 • Office 206.739.5454 • Fax 360.352.1509 • scjalliance.com Packet Pg. 16 2.2.a -401- -00- 411110� Highway 99 Stage 3: Scope of Work- Amendment 2 SCJ ALLIANCE April 2, 2025 CONSULTING SERVICES Page 11 of 11 closing on low impact parcel or manage closing through escrow should those services become necessary. Task 4 Acquisition Services (new work, SC21) 1) Right of Way Documentation, Negotiations, and Closing: Assist the City in developing all right-of- way documents/offer letters in accordance with the City's right-of-way procedures manual for acquisition of impacted properties. Draft the acquisition documents using City approved forms or QC any forms that are created directly by City. All negotiations will start with an in -person presentation of all offers when feasible. We will identify property owner issues, concerns and differences early on and document that information in the individual parcel negotiation diaries. Work with City staff throughout the negotiation process with the property owner until settlement is reached on each parcel. Phase 29 Management Reserve (no change) END of SCOPE OF WORK Edmonds_Hwy99_Stg3_amendment 2 v2.docx 1201 Third Ave, Suite 550 • Seattle, WA 98101 • Office 206.739.5454 • Fax 360.352.1509 • scjalliance.com Packet Pg. 17 2.2.a Consultant Fee Determination Summary - Exhibit D-1 SCJ Alliance i� SCJ ALLIANCE Client: City of Edmonds Project: Highway 99 Gateway - Revitilization Stag Job #: 21-000551 Template version: 2/2/2024 File Name: Stage 3 Amendment 2 update.xlsm Contract Type: LAG Contract Consultant Fee Determination DIRECT SALARY COST Classification Hours Direct Hourly Rate Amount Principal 36.0 $100.98 $3,635.28 PM2 Project Manager 124.0 $70.00 $8,680.00 PM2 Project Manager 16.0 $60.10 $961.60 E3 Engineer 116.0 $44.00 $5,104.00 E3 Engineer 40.0 $45.56 $1,822.40 El Engineer 568.0 $38.11 $21,646.48 Total Direct Salary Cost $41,850 OVERHEAD Overhead Rate: 174.81% Direct Salary Cost: $41,849.76 Overhead Cost $73,158 FIXED FEE Fixed Fee Rate: 33.20% Direct Salary Cost: $41,849.76 Fixed Fee Cost $13,894 TOTAL SALARY COST Total Salary Cost $128,901 SUBCONSULTANTS 1AG PHASE 03 Survey and Basemapping (1AG) (SC32 & SC33) $134,500 DO PHASE 12 Stormwater Design (OCI) (SC26, SC31) $139,235 OCI PHASE 17b Estimate of Probable Cost (OCI) (added work SC26, SC31) $5,495 RESGNW Phase 28 Right of Way Acquistions (RESGNW) (SC21) $375,205 Subconsultant Fee Subtotal: $0 $654,435 Subconsultant Markup: 0% $0 REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES Copies, Printing, etc. 0.0% of the Direct Salary Costs $0.00 Mileage 0 miles at $0.670 per mile $0.00 Expenses Subtotal: $0 Expenses Markup: 0% $0 SUBTOTAL (SALARY, SUBCONSULTANTS AND EXPENSES) Subtotal (Salary, Subconsultants and Expenses) $783,336 MANAGEMENT RESERVE FUND (MRF) Management Reserve: $0 $0.00 Total Estimated Budget: $783,336 4'2'2025 Packet Pg. 18 2.2.a Consultant Labor Hour Estimate SCJ Alliance Client: City of Edmonds Project: Highway 99 Gateway - Revitilization Stage 3 Job #: 21-000551 File Name: Stage 3 Amendment 2 update.xlsm Template Version: 2/2/2024 Contract Type: LAG Contract SCJ C.LLIANCE C_C)N`AJL I INC, `�L IIVICL�, Andrew Susann Andrew Scott Sawyer George Hilen Metternich- Danyal Ali Babaei Armstrong Fields Phase & Phase &Task Title Principal PM2 Project PM2 Project E3 Engineer E3 Engineer E1 Engineer Total Direct Labor Task No. Manager Manager Hours & Cost PHASE 03 Survey and Basemapping (1AG) (SC32 & SC33) PHASE 10 Transportation Design (SCJ) (SC29, SC30) Task 02 60% Transportation Plans (added work, SC29, SC30) 1 Site Preparation Notes, Plans, and Details - 238th St SW and 240th St SW 1.0 2.0 16.0 19.0 2 Right of Way Plans - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Channelization Notes, Plans, and Details- 238th St SW and 240th St SW Illumination Design - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Roadway Typical Sections - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Paving Notes, Plans and Details - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Driveway Profiles and Details - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Site Preparation Notes, Plans, and Details -Site Design Resulting from Complete Streets Paving Notes, Plans and Details - Site Design Resulting from Complete Streets 1.0 2.0 8.0 11.0 11.0 17.0 11.0 113.0 37.0 21.0 113.0 3 1.0 2.0 8.0 4 1.0 8.0 8.0 5 1.0 2.0 8.0 80.0 24.0 16.0 80.0 6 1.0 8.0 24.0 7 1.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 8.0 24.0 8 4.0 8.0 9 Subtotal Hours: 9.0 _T 32.0 8.0 32.0 _F 24.0 T248.0 353.0 N a� E a� E a U U) as E a w m E U M a 1 of 6 Packet Pg. 19 2.2.a Consultant Labor Hour Estimate SO Alliance Client: City of Edmonds Project: Highway 99 Gateway - Revitilization Stage 3 Job #: 21-000551 File Name: Stage 3 Amendment 2 update.xlsm Template Version: 2/2/2024 Contract Type: LAG Contract SCJ C.LLIANCE C_C)N`AJL I INC, `�L IIVICL�, Scott Sawyer Susann Babaei George Hilen Andrew Armstrong Andrew Metternich- Fields Danyal Ali Phase & Phase &Task Title Task No. Principal PM2 Project Manager PM2 Project Manager E3 Engineer E3 Engineer E1 Engineer Total Direct Labor Hours & Cost Task 03 90% Transportation Plans (added work, SC29, SC30) 1 2 3 Site Preparation Notes, Plans, and Details - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Right of Way Plans - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Channelization Notes, Plans, and Details- 238th St SW and 240th St SW Illumination Design - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Roadway Typical Sections - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Paving Notes, Plans and Details - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Driveway Profiles and Details - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Site Preparation Notes, Plans, and Details -Site Design Resulting from Complete Streets Paving Notes, Plans and Details - Site Design Resulting from Complete Streets 1.0 2.0 8.0 11.0 1.0 2.0 4.0 7.0 1.0 2.0 4.0 7.0 4 1.0 4.0 16.0 4.0 4.0 40.0 12.0 9.0 7.0 61.0 25.0 5 1.0 2.0 6 1.0 4.0 7 1.0 4.0 8.0 8 1.0 4.0 8.0 13.0 9 1.0 9.0 4.0 24.0 4.0 24.0 16.0 16.0 40.0 124.0 61.0 201.0 Subtotal Hours: Task 04 95% Transportation Plans (added work, SC29, SC30) 1 2 Site Preparation Notes, Plans, and Details - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Right of Way Plans - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Channelization Notes, Plans, and Details- 238th St SW and 240th St SW 1.0 2.0 4.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 1.0 2.0 4.0 3 1.0 2.0 4.0 N *k C a� E a� E a U N 2 of 6 Packet Pg. 20 2.2.a Consultant Labor Hour Estimate SO Alliance Client: City of Edmonds Project: Highway 99 Gateway - Revitilization Stage 3 Job #: 21-000551 File Name: Stage 3 Amendment 2 update.xlsm Template Version: 2/2/2024 Contract Type: LAG Contract SCJ C.LLIANCE C_C)N`AJL I INC, `�L IIVICL�, Scott Sawyer Susann Babaei George Hilen Andrew Armstrong Andrew Metternich- Fields Danyal Ali Phase & Phase &Task Title Task No. Principal PM2 Project Manager PM2 Project Manager E3 Engineer E3 Engineer E1 Engineer Total Direct Labor Hours & Cost 4 5 Illumination Design - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Roadway Typical Sections - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Paving Notes, Plans and Details - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Driveway Profiles and Details - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Site Preparation Notes, Plans, and Details -Site Design Resulting from Complete Streets Paving Notes, Plans and Details - Site Design Resulting from Complete Streets 1.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 16.0 8.0 7.0 7.0 19.0 11.0 1.0 2.0 6 1.0 2.0 7 1.0 2.0 8 9 1.0 1.0 2.0 4.0 7.0 2.0 8.0 11.0 Subtotal Hours: 9.0 16.0 2.0 56.0 83.0 Task 05 100% Transportation Plans (added work, SC29, SC30) 1 2 3 Site Preparation Notes, Plans, and Details - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Right of Way Plans - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Channelization Notes, Plans, and Details- 238th St SW and 240th St SW Signing Notes, Plans, Schedules, and Details- 238th St SW and 240th St SW Illumination Design - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Paving Notes, Plans and Details - 238th St SW and 240th St SW Driveway Profiles and Details - 238th St SW and 240th St SW 1.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4 1.0 2.0 5 1.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 6 1.0 2.0 7 1.0 2.0 N as E a� E a U U) I 3 of 6 Packet Pg. 21 2.2.a Consultant Labor Hour Estimate SCJ Alliance Client: City of Edmonds Project: Highway 99 Gateway - Revitilization Stage 3 Job #: 21-000551 File Name: Stage 3 Amendment 2 update.xlsm Template Version: 2/2/2024 Contract Type: LAG Contract SCJ C.LLIANCE C_C)N`AJL I INC, `�L IIVICL�, Scott Sawyer Susann Babaei George Hilen Andrew Armstrong Andrew Metternich- Fields Danyal Ali Phase & Phase &Task Title Task No. Principal PM2 Project Manager PM2 Project Manager E3 Engineer E3 Engineer E1 Engineer Total Direct Labor Hours & Cost 8 Staging Plans - 238th St SW and 240th St SW 12 Paving Notes, Plans and Details - Site Design Resulting from Complete Streets 1.0 1.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 7.0 7.0 2.0 Subtotal Hours: 9.0 16.0 2.0 36.0 63.0 Total Phase Hours: 36.0 88.0 16.0 56.0 40.0 464.0 700.0 Total Phase Direct Labor: $3,635.28 $6,160.00 $961.60 $2,464.00 $1,822.40 $17,683.04 $32,726.32 PHASE 12 Stormwater Design (OCI) (SC26, SC31) PHASE 17a Estimate of Probable Cost (SCJ) (added work SC29, SC30) Task 02 60% Estimate (SCJ) (added work SC29, SC30) 1 2 3 4 60% Quantities 60% Unit Costs 60% Lump Sum Estimates 60% Estimate 40.0 40.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 Subtotal Hours: 16.0 32.0 40.0 88.0 N E E a U 4 of 6 Packet Pg. 22 2.2.a Consultant Labor Hour Estimate SO Alliance Client: City of Edmonds Project: Highway 99 Gateway - Revitilization Stage 3 Job #: 21-000551 File Name: Stage 3 Amendment 2 update.xlsm Template Version: 2/2/2024 Contract Type: LAG Contract SCJ C.LLIANCE C_C)N`AJL I INC, `�L IIVICL�, Scott Sawyer Susann Babaei George Hilen Andrew Armstrong Andrew Metternich- Fields Danyal Ali Phase & Phase &Task Title Task No. Principal PM2 Project Manager PM2 Project Manager E3 Engineer E3 Engineer E1 Engineer Total Direct Labor Hours & Cost Task 03 90% Estimate (SCJ) (added work SC29, SC30) 1 2 3 90% Quantities 90% Unit Costs 90% Lump Sum Estimates 90% Estimate Subtotal Hours: 40.0 40.0 8.0 8.0 4.0 4.0 8.0 4 8.0 8.0 16.0 72.0 12.0 20.0 40.0 Task 04 95% Estimate (SCJ) (added work SC29, SC30) 1 95% Estimate (SC29, SC30) 4.0 4.0 16.0 24.0 Subtotal Hours: 4.0 4.0 16.0 24.0 Task 05 100% Estimate (SCJ) (added work SC29, SC30) 1 100% Estimate (SC29, SC30) 4.0 4.0 8.0 16.0 Subtotal Hours: 4.0 4.0 8.0 16.0 Total Phase Hours: 36.0 60.0 104.0 200.0 Total Phase Direct Labor: $2,520.00 $2,640.00 $3,963.44 $9,123.44 5 of 6 Packet Pg. 23 2.2.a Consultant Labor Hour Estimate SO Alliance Client: City of Edmonds Project: Highway 99 Gateway - Revitilization Stage 3 Job #: 21-000551 File Name: Stage 3 Amendment 2 update.xlsm Phase & Phase & Task Title Task No. PHASE 17b Estimate of Probable Cost (OCI) (added work SC26, SC31) PHASE 28 Right of Way Acquistions (RESGNW) (SC21) SCJ C.LLIANCE C_C)N`AJL I INC, `�L IIVICL�, Template Version: 2/2/2024 Contract Type: LAG Contract Susann Andrew Andrew Scott Sawyer Babaei Armstrong George Hilen Metternich- Danyal Ali Fields PM2 Project PM2 Project Total Direct Labor Principal E3 Engineer E3 Engineer E1 Engineer Manager Manager Hours & Cost Total Hours All Phases 36.0 124.0 16.0 116.0 40.0 568.0 900.0 Total Direct Labor Estimate All Phases $3,635.28 $8,680.00 $961.60 $5,104.00 $1,822.40 $21,646.48 $41,849.76 N C d E C d E Q U Cn c d E t v Q w c m E t U fC Q 6 of 6 Packet Pg. 24 2.2.a SCJ Alliance Client: Project Job #: Actuals Not To Exceed Billing Rate Table (ANTE) Effective July 1, 2024 to June 30, 2025 SCJ ALLIANCE CONSULTING SERVICES Direct Labor Rate Ranges NTE Overhead 174.81% NTE Fee 33.20% NTE Total Hourly Billing Rates NTE 1 Principal $136.12 $237.95 $45.19 $419.26 2 Senior Consultant $109.09 $190.71 $36.22 $336.02 3 Senior Engineer $66.86 $116.88 $22.20 $205.94 4 E4 Engineer $63.60 $111.18 $21.12 $195.89 5 E3 Engineer $58.38 $102.05 $19.38 $179.81 6 E2 Engineer $50.95 $89.07 $16.92 $156.93 7 El Engineer $41.47 $72.49 $13.77 $127.72 8 Senior Landscape Architect $64.88 $113.42 $21.54 $199.84 9 L4 Landscape $55.21 $96.51 $18.33 $170.04 10 L3Landscape $47.70 $83.38 $15.84 $146.92 11 L2Landscape $42.79 $74.80 $14.21 $131.79 12 L1Landscape $36.04 $63.00 $11.97 $111.01 13 Senior Planner $75.26 $131.56 $24.99 $231.81 14 P4 Planner $54.26 $94.85 $18.01 $167.13 15 P3 Planner $47.70 $83.38 $15.84 $146.92 16 P2 Planner $41.45 $72.47 $13.76 $127.68 17 P1 Planner $38.48 $67.26 $12.77 $118.52 18 Senior Technician $56.18 $98.21 $18.65 $173.04 19 T4 Technician $50.67 $88.58 $16.82 $156.07 20 T3 Technician $43.05 $75.26 $14.29 $132.61 21 T2 Technician $38.16 $66.71 $12.67 $117.54 22 Tl Technician $35.37 $61.83 $11.74 $108.94 23 Senior Project Manager $97.63 $170.67 $32.41 $300.72 24 PM3 Project Manager $79.31 $138.64 $26.33 $244.28 25 PM2 Project Manager $74.90 $130.93 $24.87 $230.70 26 PMl Project Manager $55.64 $97.26 $18.47 $171.38 30 Cl2 Construction Inspector $44.00 $76.92 $14.61 $135.52 32 CI4 Construction Inspector $76.62 $133.94 $25.44 $236.01 35 Construction Inspector $34.83 $60.88 $11.56 $107.28 38 PC2 Project Coordinator $48.14 $84.16 $15.98 $148.28 39 PC1 Project Coordinator $38.17 $66.72 $12.67 $117.56 40 Project Accountant $67.98 $118.84 $22.57 $209.39 41 IT Specialist $62.75 $109.70 $20.83 $193.29 42 Senior Marketing Coordinator $60.42 $105.62 $20.06 $186.10 43 Marketing Coordinator $42.66 $74.58 $14.16 $131.41 44 Communications Manager $59.85 $104.62 $19.87 $184.34 45 Information Services Manager $75.73 $132.38 $25.14 $233.24 46 Graphic Designer $48.76 $85.24 $16.19 $150.19 Packet Pg. 25 2.2.a Aft Washington State wo Department of Transportation June 13, 2024 Shea Carr & Jewell, Inc dba SO Alliance 8760 Tallon Ln NE, Suite 200 Lacey, WA 98513 Subject: Acceptance FYE 2023 ICR — CPA Report Dear Tammy McDonald: Development Division Contract Services Office PO Box 47408 Olympia, WA 98504-7408 7345 Linderson Way SW Tumwater, WA 98501-6504 TTY:1-800-833-6388 www.wsdot.wa.gov We have accepted your firm's FYE 2023 Indirect Cost Rate (ICR) of 174.81% (rate includes 0.41 % Facilities Capital Cost of Money) based on the "Independent CPA Report" prepared by Stambaugh Ness. This rate will be applicable for WSDOT Agreements and Local Agency Contracts in Washington only. This rate may be subject to additional review if considered necessary by WSDOT. Your ICR must be updated on an annual basis. Costs billed to agreements/contracts will still be subject to audit of actual costs, based on the terms and conditions of the respective agreement/contract. This was not a cognizant review. Any other entity contracting with the firm is responsible for determining the acceptability of the ICR. If you have any questions, feel free to contact our office at (360) 704-6397 or via email consultantratesAwsdot.wa.2ov. Regards, scha�zlqe, 1farvetl Schatzie Harvey (Jun 13, 2024 14:05 PD SCHATZIE HARVEY, CPA Contract Services Manager SH: sms Packet Pg. 26 2.2.a �rkT'C�1'7� Project Number SCJA_17-056 Project Name Highway 99 Gateway Revitalization Client SCJA Owner City of Edmonds Cost + FF (DSC) Pricing Proposal Highway 99 Gateway Revitalization Stage 3 Project 3/4/2025 Safeway Drainage Request Principal Surveyor Project Manager Quality Manager Project Surveyor CADD 5 CADD 4 Tech 5 Tech 3 Assist PM Admin/ Accounting Total Hours Labor Dollars Task DSC Rate $ 111.06 $ 69.07 $ 69.07 $ 60.71 $ 54.91 $ 42.83 $ 48.89 $ 42.50 $ 42.83 $ 59.40 Utility Surveying 4 2 2 8 24 24 1 1 66 $ 3,174.07 Total Dollars $ - $ 276.28 $ 138.14 $ 121.42 $ - $ 342.64 $ 1,173.36 $ 1,020.00 $ 42.83 $ 59.40 $ 3,174.037 Direct Salary Cost $ 3,174 Overhead Cost 133.24% $ 4,229 Fee (*DSC) 33.20% $ 1,054 ODC BREAKDOWN NON -INVOICED INVOICED Total Labor $ 8,457 Mileage 250 0.7 $175.00 3D Laser Scanner (1 Week) ODC's (Other Direct Costs) Non -Invoiced (mileage; repro; etc.) Mile/repro $ 175.000 Invoiced (sub-c; rental; etc.) TBD $ - Materials repro $ - Traffic Control $ - computer $ - UG Utility Locates other, $ - Other $ - SUB TOTAL $ 175.00 Other I $ - I SUB TOTAL $ - Contract Total 1 $ 8J. Packet Pg. 27 2.2.a Cost + FF (DSC) Pricing Proposal Highway 99 Gateway Revitalization Stage 3 Project 4/2/2025 Project Number SCJA_17-056 Project Name Highway 99 Gateway Revitalization Client SCJA Owner City of Edmonds Prepared By: B. Bowie Checked By: D. Peebler Right of Way Acquisitions and Temporary Construction Easements Principal Surveyor Project Manager Quality Manager Project Surveyor CADD 5 CADD 4 Tech 5 Tech 3 Assist PM Admin/ Accounting Total Hours Labor Dollar Task DSC Rate $ 111.06 $ 69.07 $ 69.07 $ 60.71 $ 54.91 $ 42.83 $ 48.89 $ 42.50 $ 42.83 $ 59.40 Right of Way/TCE Calculations 1 6 10 84 8 8 117 $ 6,646., Right of Way/TCE Field Staking 1 6 10 42 168 168 395 $ 19,119.1. TCE Legal Descriptions & Exhibits 1 42 42 252 337 1 $ 21,211.1 Total Dollarsl $ 333.18 1 $ 3,729.78 1 $ 4,282.34 1 $ 17,848.74 1 $ 4,612.44 1 $ $ 8,213.52 1 $ 7,140.00 1 $ 342.64 1 $ 475.20 $ 46,977.1 Direct Salary Cost $ 46,978 Overhead Cost 133.24% $ 62,593 Fee (*DSC) 33.20% $ 15,597 Total Labor 1 $ 125,168 ODC's (Other Direct Costs) Non -Invoiced (mileage; repro; etc.) Mile/repro $ 700.000 Invoiced (sub-c; rental; etc.) TBD $ - Contract Total 1 $ 125,868 ODC BREAKDOWN NON -INVOICED INVOICED Mileage 10001 0.7 $700.00 Materials repro $ - Traffic Control $ computer $ UG Utility Locates $ other $ Other $ SUB TOTAL $ 700.00 Other $ SUBTOTAL $ Packet Pg. 28 2.2.a WSDOT Agreement: Y-XXXXXXX 1 Alliance Geomatics 1261A 120th Ave NE Bellevue, WA 98005 1AG Classifications WSDOT Classifications Direct Labor Hourly Billing Rate NTE Overhead NTE* 133.24% $149.23 Fixed Fee NTE 33.20% $37.18 All Inclusive Hourly Biling Rate NTE $298.41 Principal Surveyor DIRECTOR $112.00 Survey Manager DEPUTY $90.00 $119.92 $29.88 $239.80 Sr. Project Manager & Project Manager LAND SURVEY 3 $82.68 $110.16 $27.45 $220.29 Project Surveyor LAND SURVEY 2 $60.50 $80.61 $20.09 $161.20 Tech 4 & 5 ENGINEERING AIDE 4 $58.65 $78.15 $19.47 $156.27 Tech 1, 2 & 3 ENGINEERING AIDE 2 $58.65 $78.15 $19.47 $156.27 Assist PM & Controller ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 5 $64.06 $85.35 $21.27 $170.68 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 3 ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 3 $35.88 $47.81 $11.91 $95.60 0 U U) r �3 as 0) W a� Q c a� E d a Q. U) 4- 0 0 c m a� L a N r� _ d E _ d E Q U U) Q Packet Pg. 29 2.2.a Aft Washington State wo Department of Transportation August 8, 2024 Atlas Technical Consultants, LLC 13215 Bee Cave Parkway, Building B, Suite 230 Austin, TX 78738 Subject: Acceptance FYE 2023 ICR — CPA Report Dear Andrew Kostas: Development Division Contract Services Office PO Box 47408 Olympia, WA 98504-7408 7345 Linderson Way SW Tumwater, WA 98501-6504 TTY:1-800-833-6388 www.wsdot.wa.gov We have accepted your firm's FYE 2023 Indirect Cost Rate (ICR) based on the "Independent CPA Report" prepared by Carr, Riggs & Ingram, LLC as follows: • Home Office: 133.24% of direct labor (rate includes 0.44% Facilities Capital Cost of Money) • Field Office: 127.85% of direct labor (rate includes 0.28% Facilities Capital Cost of Money) This rate will be applicable for WSDOT Agreements and Local Agency Contracts in Washington only. This rate may be subject to additional review if considered necessary by WSDOT. Your ICR must be updated on an annual basis. Costs billed to agreements/contracts will still be subject to audit of actual costs, based on the terms and conditions of the respective agreement/contract. This was not a cognizant review. Any other entity contracting with the firm is responsible for determining the acceptability of the ICR. If you have any questions, feel free to contact our office at (360) 704-6397 or via email consultantratesAwsdot.wa.aov. Regards, scha�Z,Ite 1fahletl Schatzie Harvey (Aug 8, 2024 15:48 PDT' SCHATZIE HARVEY, CPA Contract Services Manager SH: kb N _ a) E a� E a U U) Packet Pg. 30 2.2.a Edmonds - --------- Its- 0Stor�� 60% . �90%Stormwater Report 60% Drainage Plans 90% Drainage Plans 95% Drainage Plans 100%/Ad-ready Drainage Plans 90% Cost Estimate 95% Cost Estimate 00% Mileage and toll. for Sit. �int In -person meatings - Mileage and Toll (I kick off meeting, 6 comment res meetings) L 0 i U U) t 3 a� E Q 2 a Q. U) 0 0 r Cu m a� L a Total Cost $0.001 $0.00 1 $0.00 1 $0.00 1 $0.00 1 $0.00 1 $0.00 1 I $47,857.50 I $80,984.46 I $15,888.69 I $144,730.65N i d E C d E Q i U U) Q Packet Pg. 31 2.2.a Actuals Not To Exceed Table (ANTE) City of Edmonds: Hwy 99 Stages 3-4 Osborn Consulting, Inc. 1800 112th Avenue NE, Suite 220E Bellevue, WA 98004 Job Classifications 1 Direct Labor Rate NTE Overhead NTE Profit Percent NTE 169.22% 33.20% Principal $106.05 $179.46 $35.21 Senior Engineer II $94.50 $159.91 $31.37 Senior Project Manager / QC $86.10 $145.70 $28.59 Senior Engineer 1 $80.85 $136.81 $26.84 Senior Landscape Architect $77.70 $131.48 $25.80 Project Engineer $68.25 $115.49 $22.66 Senior Project Accountant $63.79 $107.94 $21.18 Civil Tech Manager $66.15 $111.94 $21.96 Senior Civil Designer $65.10 $110.16 $21.61 Engineer IV $60.90 $103.05 $20.22 Project Biologist $57.75 $97.72 $19.17 Project Landscape Architect 11 $63.00 $106.61 $20.92 Technical Editor $54.02 $91.42 $17.94 Engineer 111 $49.35 $83.51 $16.38 Project Landscape Architect 1 $49.35 $83.51 $16.38 Engineer 11 $44.10 $74.63 $14.64 Project Accountant $48.30 $81.73 $16.04 Civil Tech 11 $46.20 $78.18 $15.34 Landscape Designer $38.85 $65.74 $12.90 Administration $36.75 $62.19 $12.20 Engineer 1 $39.90 $67.52 $13.25 Civil Tech 1 $35.70 $60.41 $11.85 Intern Engineer $25.201 $42.64 $8.37 As of 6/1/2024 All Inclusive Hourly Biling Rate NTE $320.72 $285.79 $260.38 $244.51 $234.98 $ 206.40 $192.91 $200.05 $196.88 $184.17 $174.65 $190.52 $163.37 $149.24 $149.24 $133.37 $146.07 $139.72 $117.49 $111.14 $120.67 $107.96 $76.21 N c a� E a� E Q U U) Z a� E M Q w m E M U fC Q Packet Pg. 32 2.2.a Aft Washington State wo Department of Transportation June 28, 2024 Osborn Consulting, Inc. 1800 112th Ave NE, Suite 220-E Bellevue, WA 98004 Subject: Acceptance FYE 2023 ICR — CPA Report Dear Megan Isaacks: Development Division Contract Services Office PO Box 47408 Olympia, WA 98504-7408 7345 Linderson Way SW Tumwater, WA 98501-6504 TTY:1-800-833-6388 www.wsdot.wa.gov We have accepted your firm's FYE 2023 Indirect Cost Rate (ICR) of 169.22% of direct labor (rate includes 0.13% Facilities Capital Cost of Money) based on the "Independent CPA Report" prepared by D.L. Purvine, CPA, PLLC. This rate will be applicable for WSDOT Agreements and Local Agency Contracts in Washington only. This rate may be subject to additional review if considered necessary by WSDOT. Your ICR must be updated on an annual basis. Costs billed to agreements/contracts will still be subject to audit of actual costs, based on the terms and conditions of the respective agreement/contract. This was not a cognizant review. Any other entity contracting with the firm is responsible for determining the acceptability of the ICR. If you have any questions, feel free to contact our office at (360) 704-6397 or via email consultantratesAwsdot.wa.2ov. Regards, schatZ,I,e IfWlletl Schatzie Harvey (Jul 1, 2024 06:41 PD SCHATZIE HARVEY, CPA Contract Services Manager SH: BJO N _ d E a� E a U Cn Packet Pg. 33 2.2.a 4VGroup Northwest Acquisition and Relocation Services March 5, 2025 SCOPE OF WORK AND COST ESTIMATE: SCJ Alliance, Highway 99 Gateway -Revitalization Stage 3 PROJECT OVERVIEW AND SCOPE OF WORK SCJ Alliance the (PRIME) consultant with RES GROUP NW LLC (RESGNW) serving as a sub -consultant on a project for City of Edmonds "Highway 99 Gateway -Revitalization Stage 3". This project extends from 244'1i Street SW to 238'1i Street SW and will include wider replacement sidewalks, bike lanes, new street lighting, raised center medians for access management, attractive and safe crosswalks, better stormwater management, targeted utility replacements, potential underground overhead utilities, landscaping, softscape treatments and other streetscape improvements to speak to the unique character of Edmonds. It is anticipated that the project requires partial acquisitions of Fee, Permanent and Temporary Easements from 20 larger parcels, ranging in zoning (various commercial and mix use). The project is currently funded with state funds. To ensure the City's ability to use this fund for this project, all acquisition activities will follow Federal Highways Administration policies and procedures as well as all applicable federal, state and local laws, including, but not limited to the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Police Act of 1970 and its amendments, 49CFR Part 24, and state Revised Guidelines and by reference the WSDOT Right of Way Manual. Preliminary Right -of -Way Services WAIVER OF VALUATIONS Following review of the right-of-way plan, RESGNW will instruct the appraiser to prepare Waiver of Valuation for all impacted parcels. The Waiver of Valuation will utilize consistent comparable sales and valuation techniques. Waiver Valuations will be written for those acquisitions valued under $35,000 and uncomplicated, with an option for property owners the option of having the agency appraised the property, and in compliance with 49 DFR 24.102 0(2)(ii). Should any appraisals be required, RESGNW will make a recommendation with cost estimates for appraisal consultants to the Prime or the City. APPRAISAL AND APPRAISAL REVIEW Appraisal services/SOVA Consulting and appraisal review services/ National Right of Way Review Appraisal, the contracts shall be handled directly by RESGNW and will make necessary recommendations to the Prime or the City for concurrence. Appraisal /Appraisal Reviewer consultant to be approved by the city. TITLE REVIEW. CLEARING AND CLOSING RESGNW will review Prime supplied title reports for affected parcels and provide Title Review Memo identifying all potential encumbrances to project team members. RESGNW will assist in clearing the necessary encumbrances prior to closing, if feasible. RESGNW will assist in facilitating in-house closing on low impact parcel or manage closing through escrow should those services become necessary. 1913 6th Street, Kirkland, WA 98033 - 624 S Lander Street #202, Seattle, WA 98134 - ■ ph.206-457-5681 ■ www.resgnw.com Packet Pg. 34 2.2.a 4VGroup Northwest Acquisition and Relocation Services Acquisition Services RIGHT-OF-WAY DOCUMENTATION, NEGOTIATIONS AND CLOSING RESGNW will assist the Agency in developing all right-of-way documents/offer letters in accordance with the Agency's right-of-way procedures manual for acquisition of impacted properties. RESGNW will draft the acquisition documents using City approved forms or QC any forms that are created directly by City. REGNW agents will act in good faith at all times and never coerce owners in an attempt to settle the parcels. All negotiations will start with an in -person presentation of all offers when feasible. We will identify property owner issues, concerns and differences early on and document that information in the individual parcel negotiation diaries. RESGNW will work with Agency staff throughout the negotiation process with the property owner until settlement is reached on each parcel. Cost Estimate Payment to RESGNW for its professional services is not dependent upon outcome, the amount or terms of any agreement reached for the property, or on any contractual arrangement between the City and any third party. Prime agrees to compensate RESGNW for actual professional services rendered as follows: Our fees for services are calculated based upon the applicable hourly rates for those professionals who perform the work - at -hand. The billing rate is $145.68 per hour for all tasks performed under this agreement. In addition, necessary travel time and mileage will be billed at the current year's IRS standard mileage reimbursement rate. WAIVER OF VALUATIONS AND APPRAISALS 17 Appraisals 3 Waiver of Valuations/ SOVA consulting) $82,500.00 12 Sign Appraisal/Relocation Estimate @$3,000 ea. $36,000.00 12 Parking Reconfiguration 4,000 — 6,0000 $50,000.00 $168,500.00 Appraisal Review 17 parcels -National ROW Review Appraisal Review $42,500.00 PROJECT MANAGEMENT 50 HOURS NEGOTIATIONS R/W Acquisitions 45 hours per parcel x 20 TITLE REVIEW AND CLEARANCE / CLOSING Senior Acquisition Agents: 8 hours per parcel x 20 50 hours $145.68 per hour = $ 7,284.00 900 hours $145.68 per hour = $131,112 160 hours @ $145.68 per hour = $ 23,308.80 ODC: Estimated Mileage and Postage Reimbursement $2,500.00 TOTAL ESTIMATED COST: $375,204.80 SCJ Alliance RES GROUP NW, LLC 1913 6th Street, Kirkland, WA 98033 - 624 S Lander Street #202, Seattle, WA 98134 - ■ ph.206-457-5681 ■ www.resgnw.com Packet Pg. 35 2.2.a City of Edmonds - Hwy 99/Gateway Revitalization Appraisal Assignments & Cost Estimate w/subconsultant fees Based on mapping of November 1, 2024 Subject Parcels Appraisal Sign Parking ROW APN Owner Name Site Address App Type Fee Appraisal Reconfig 1 00491100000110 SOUTHEAST 888 INVESTMENT LLC/ EASTERN INVESTMENT None App $5,000 $3,000 $6,000 Larger Parcel issues 00491100000107 SOUTHEAST 888 INVESTMENT LLC/ EASTERN INVESTMENT 24111 HIGHWAY 99 - 00491100000105 SOUTHEAST 888 INVESTMENT LLC/ EASTERN INVESTMENT None - 2 00491100000106 SOUTHEAST 888 INVESTMENT LLC/ EASTERN INVESTMENT 24001 HIGHWAY 99 App $3,000 $3,000 Strip Appraisal 3 00451900201504 ARI HOLDINGS LLC 23931 HIGHWAY 99 App $5,000 Building Impact 4 00451900201502 BHOK CORPORATION None App $4,500 $3,000 $4,000 Parking Impact 00451900201601 KNH ENTERPRISES LLC 23921 HIGHWAY 99 - 5 00451900201602 KIM CHU H 23905 HIGHWAY 99 App $4,500 $3,000 $4,000 Parking Impact 6 00451900200501 JOHSE LLC 23825 HIGHWAY 99 App $4,500 $3,000 $4,000 Parking Impact 7 00451900200500 CHO EUNSUN 23805 HIGHWAY 99 App $3,000 $3,000 $4,000 Parking Impact 8 00773110000500 Various Condo Owners 8100 238TH ST SW Units A-E AOS $2,000 AOS 9 00451900101802 G & G REALTY LLC 8101 238TH ST SW App $4,500 $3,000 $4,000 Parking Impact 10 00451900101804 EDMONDS FPH BUILDING LLC 23725 HIGHWAY 99 App $4,500 $3,000 $4,000 Parking Impact 00451900101803 EDMONDS FPH BUILDING LLC 23725 HIGHWAY 99 - 11 00451900100201 234 EDMONDS JCV LLC 23601 HIGHWAY 99 App $4,500 $4,000 Parking Impact 12 00451900100401 FW WA -AURORA MARKETPLACE LLC 23632 HIGHWAY 99 App $4,500 $3,000 $4,000 Parking Impact 13 00451900200700 UNI PROPERTY LLC 23830 HIGHWAY 99 App $6,500 $3,000 $4,000 Parking Impact 14 00451900201200 ACCORD INC 23904 HIGHWAY 99 App $6,500 $3,000 $4,000 D-Thru Impact 15 00451900201300 HSUE & LU CORPORATION 23916 HIGHWAY 99 App $6,500 $3,000 $4,000 Parking Impact 16 00451900201400 PETELLE GLORIA G 23930 HIGHWAY 99 App $3,000 Strip Appraisal 17 00491100000108 CAMNEL PROPERTIES LLC 24015 HIGHWAY 99 App $3,000 Strip Appraisal 00491100000109 CAMNEL PROPERTIES LLC None - 18 00491100000102 WASHINGTON STATE DEPT OF TRANSPORTATION None App $3,000 Strip Appraisal 19 00451900100900 VPSP LLC & DRR KIRKLAND LLC 23625 84TH AVE W AOS $2,000 AOS 20 00934172500100 Various Townhouse owners 23725 84TH AVE W AOS $2,000 AOS 21 00451900200900 KF-SKANDI LLC 23809 84TH AVE W App $3,000 Strip Appraisal $85,000 $36,000 $50,000 Total Appraisal Costs $171,000 * City will obtain driveway permits for all properties as necessary Page 1 of 1 Packet Pg. 36 2.2.a Res Group NW LLC Indirect Cost Rate Schedule For the Year Ended December 31, 2023 Financial Statement Accepted Description Amount Adj. Ref. Amount % Direct Labor Indirect Costs: Fringe Benefits Vacation Pay Sick Pay Holiday Pay Bonus Payroll Taxes Health Insurance Profit Sharing (401-k) Total Fringe Benefits General Overhead Indirect Labor Rent Entertainment - Meals Insurance Telephone Taxes & Licenses Professional Fees Interest Computer Supplies & Miscellaneous Depreciation & Amortization Total General Overhead Total Indirect Costs & Overhead Indirect Cost Rate (Less FCC) Facilities Cost of Capital $ 394,402 $ 18,865 1,736 10,694 22,000 32,190 42,922 (52) 18,272 $146,678 ($52) $ 29,984 16,141 3,335 (387) 6,386 2,100 18,390 (150) 52,268 (1,845) 41 (41) 7,958 2,766 1,715 $ 141,083 $ (2,423) Indirect Cost Rate (Includes FCC) $287,762 ($2,475) 72.96% 72.33% $287,762 ($2,475) $394,402 100.00% $18,865 4.78% 1,736 0.44% 10,694 2.71% 22,000 5.58% 32,190 8.16% (a) 42,870 10.87% 18,272 4.63% $146,627 37.18% $29,984 7.60% 16,141 4.09% (b) 2,948 0.75% 6,386 1.62% 2,100 0.53% (e) 18,240 4.62% (c)/(d) 50,423 12.78% M (0) 0.00% 7,958 2.02% 2,766 0.70% 1,715 0.43% $ 138,660 35.16% Res Group NW LLC "Indirect Cost Rate still subject to WSDOT Audit" References RESGNW LLC Adjustments: $285,287 72.33% 72.33% $0 0.00% $285,287 72.33% (a) - Key Man life insurance ($51.60) is unallowable per 48 CFR 31.205-19 (b) - Meals/Entertainment expenses ($386.99) are unallowable per 48 CFR 31.205-14 (c) - Federal income tax prep fees ($1,800) are unallowable per 48 CFR 31.205-41(b)(1) (d)- Lobbying contributions ($45) unallowable expenses per 48 CFR 31.205-22 (e)- Penalty/Interest ($150) unallowable expenses per 48 CFR 31.205-41 (f)- Interest expense ($41) unallowable expense per 48 CFR 31.205-20 Packet Pg. 37 2.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 04/15/2025 Update on 88th Ave Overlay and Sidewalk Repair Project Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Project Update Narrative The 88th Ave Overlay and Sidewalk Repair project was included in the adopted 2025/26 biennium budget to overlay 88th Ave and reconstruct the existing asphalt sidewalk between 196th St SW to 185th PI SW. The City contracted with CM Design (CM) to complete the preliminary designs for this project and to identify options and cost estimates. During their work, CM identified the need to relocate the existing drainage facilities to accommodate the ultimate roadway section. See the attached typical sections showing the locations of the existing and new facilities (Attachment 1). Adjusting and modifying the existing drainage facilities had not been identified during planning level design. CM estimates that relocating the drainage facilities will add approximately $600K to the project including all soft costs. Attachment 1 shows how the drainage catch basins would be shifted east to align with the new curb and gutter. In addition to the unforeseen drainage work, other costs ended up being higher than the planning level estimate. Most notably, widening the footprint of the sidewalk, upgrading concrete vertical curb to concrete curb and gutter, base preparation above and beyond what the planning level cost estimate had assumed, and construction of residential driveways out of concrete rather than asphalt. The additional costs for drainage modifications and the other items identified increased the estimated project cost to $2.86M. This exceeds the available budget, so City staff investigated a change in scope. The scaled down project would rebuild failing sections of sidewalk and asphalt curb, install new ADA compliant curb ramps and repave the road. The preliminary cost estimate for the revised scope of work is $1.24M and will be funded by REET and utility funds. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Existing and Proposed Typical Sections Attachment 2 - Area Map Packet Pg. 38 I 2.3.a I 1-1.5" SHOULDER SAMill 11\f!1 R/W Z R/W 1.5' WEST 1-1.5 CURB & GUTTER SHOULDER SB LANE EXISTING CROWN NB LANE NEW FLOWLINE SIDEWALK & PROPOSED ASPHALT RESTORATION EXISTING PAVEMENT EDGE EXISTING FOG LINE EXISTING GRADE - ---- -� - 71 =zz- �� NEW PIPE EXTENSION TO CONNECT TO EXISTING PIPE ------------- Il - - - I I I OLD CATCH BASIN �I TO BE REMOVED - - ro c � C I CM DESIGN GROUP Cu Know what's below. 1221 EAST PIKE ST, SUITE 201 SEATTLE, WA 98122 Call before you dig. (206) 659-0612 PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTION A: 88TH AVE W SECTION REV. N0. DATE DESCRIPTION NTS EAST NEW CATCH BASINS TO BE INSTALLED 1'-2.5' EAST OF OLD CATCH BASINS ALONG NEW CURB FACE tiZ1E*A . �r c�F fc DATE 3/19/2025 x DESIGN 15% SUBMITTAL y , CFG NOT FOR CONSTRUCTI0N0 27900 0 DRAFT �SSIOIST KTN CHECK CEM CITY OF EDMONDS 88TH AVE W SIDEWALK 196TH ST SW / SR 524 TO 1857H ST SW TYPICAL SECTIONS PROJECT 240C SCALE AS SHOVt SHEET Packet Pg. 39 City of Edmonds Maabook 2.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 04/15/2025 2025 April Budget Amendment Staff Lead: Richard Gould Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Marissa Cain Background/History Amend the 2025 Ordinance No. 4377 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that Council approve Ordinance No. XXXX amending the 2025 Budget. Q1 Budget Amendment includes: the Tree Fund (143) Parks Construction (332) in anticipation of expenditures that had yet to be appropriated by City Council. The City's past practice of preparing a budget amendment with capital projects "carry forward" has been included. We also accounted for the Mayor's staff cost cuts that was estimated at $1.5m but came in at $1.847m. Attachments: 2025 April Budget Amendment Ordinance 2025 April Decision Packages Exhibits 2025 April Staff Cuts Exhibit Packet Pg. 41 2.4.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4377 AS A RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. WHEREAS, previous actions taken by the City Council require Interfund Transfers and increases in appropriations; and WHEREAS, state law requires an ordinance be adopted whenever money is transferred from one fund to another; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the amended budget appropriations and information which was made available; and approves the appropriation of local, state, and federal funds and the increase or decrease from previously approved programs within the 2025 Budget; and THEREFORE, WHEREAS, the applications of funds have been identified; THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 1. of Ordinance No. 4377 adopting the final budget for the fiscal year 2025 is hereby amended to reflect the changes shown in Exhibits A, B, C, and D adopted herein by reference. 1 Packet Pg. 42 2.4.a Section 2. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. APPROVED: MAYOR, MIKE ROSEN ATTEST/AUTHENTICATE: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: M. JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 43 2.4.a SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the th day of April, 2025, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. XXXX. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 4377 AS A RESULT OF UNANTICIPATED TRANSFERS AND EXPENDITURES OF VARIOUS FUNDS, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2025. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY 3 Packet Pg. 44 EXHIBIT "A": Budget Amendment Summary (April 2025) 2.4.a FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION 2025 UNAUDITED BEGINNING FUND BALANCE REVENUE EXPENDITURES 2025 ADJUSTED BUDGET ENDING FUND BALANCE 001 GENERAL FUND 683,028 59,423,807 58,354,084 1,752,751 009 LEOFF-MEDICAL INS. RESERVE 19,441 275,000 317,500 (23,059) 011 RISK MANAGEMENT RESERVE FUND - - - - 012 CONTINGENCY RESERVE FUND 2,228,672 - 2,228,672 014 HISTORIC PRESERVATION GIFT FUND 4,559 - 5,700 (1,141) 016 BUILDING MAINTENANCE 2,380,534 100,340 780,068 1,700,806 017 MARSH RESTORATION & PRESERVATION FUND 861,616 - 85,720 775,896 018 EDMONDS HOMELESSNESS RESPONSE FUND 200,000 - 188,100 11,900 019 EDMONDS OPIOID RESPONSE FUND 456,556 50,000 400,000 106,556 104 DRUG ENFORCEMENT FUND 46,763 4,790 20,000 31,553 111 STREET FUND 163,301 2,440,000 2,640,460 (37,159) 112 COMBINED STREET CONST/I MPROVE 2,503,257 4,951,682 4,443,502 3,011,437 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS ACQUIS. FUND 654,610 426,821 375,915 705,516 118 MEMORIAL STREETTREE - - - - 120 HOTEL/MOTELTAX REVENUE FUND 160,641 129,500 194,000 96,141 121 EMPLOYEE PARKING PERMIT FUND 36,828 55,340 31,770 60,398 122 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP FUND 20,246 2,410 3,000 19,656 123 TOURISM PROMOTIONAL FUND/ARTS 147,680 49,230 37,500 159,410 125 PARK ACQ/IMPROVEMENT 2,367,363 1,648,620 2,422,739 1,593,244 126 SPECIAL CAPITAL FUND 4,513,859 1,780,420 2,768,964 3,525,315 127 GIFTS CATALOG FUND 2,951,426 345,580 638,936 2,658,070 130 CEMETERY MAI NTENANCE/IMPROV 127,155 473,157 329,009 271,303 136 PARKS TRUST FUND - - - - 137 CEMETERY MAINTENANCE TRUST FD 1,237,640 86,837 286,124 1,038,353 138 SISTER CITY COMMISSION 17,454 11,310 7,400 21,364 140 BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FUND 34,037 79,209 87,445 25,801 141 AFFORDABLE & SUPPORTIVE HOUSING FUND 380,831 65,000 - 445,831 142 EDMONDS RESCUE PLAN FUND 36,123 - - 36,123 143 TREE FUND 131,937 83,502 75,000 140,439 211 LID FUND CONTROL - - - - 231 2012 LTGO DEBT SERVICE FUND - 305,870 305,870 - 332 PARKS CONSTRUCTION 237,318 348,622 100,035 485,905 421 WATER 1 19,611,386 11,863,672 22,788,537 8,686,521 422 STORM' 10,987,172 9,855,668 13,852,512 6,990,328 423 SEWER/TREATMENT PLANT' 15,149,200 19,329,568 20,115,919 14,362,849 424 BOND RESERVE FUND 21,097 1,174,920 1,149,400 46,617 511 EQUIPMENT RENTAL FUND' 5,493,201 2,376,270 2,139,606 5,729,865 512 Technology Rental Fund' 941,751 2,505,723 2,530,572 916,902 617 FIREMEN'S PENSION FUND - - - - Totals 1 74,806,682 1 120,242,868 1 137,475,387 1 57,574,163 1 Fund balance from Preliminary December 2024 Quarterly Report 4 Packet Pg. 45 EXHIBIT "B": Budget Amendments by Revenue (April 2025) 2.4.a FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION Adopted Budget Ord. #4377 1/1/2025 Proposed Amendment Ord. # 2025 Amended Revenue Budget 001 General Fund $ 59,044,690 $ 379,117 $ 59,423,807 009 Leoff-Medical Ins. Reserve 275,000 - 275,000 011 Risk Management Reserve Fund - - 012 Contingency Reserve Fund 014 Historic Preservation Gift Fund - - 016 Building Maintenance Fund 100,340 100,340 017 Marsh Restoration & Preservation Fund - - 018 Edmonds Homelessness Response Fund - - 019 Edmonds Opioid Response Fund 50,000 50,000 104 Drug Enforcement Fund 4,790 4,790 111 Street Fund 2,440,000 - 2,440,000 112 Combined Street Const/I mprove 4,619,540 332,142 4,951,682 117 Municipal Arts Acquis. Fund 297,560 129,261 426,821 120 Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Fund 129,500 - 129,500 121 Employee Parking Permit Fund 55,340 55,340 122 Youth Scholarship Fund 2,410 21410 123 Tourism Promotional Fund/Arts 49,230 49,230 125 ParkAcq/Improvement 1,648,620 1,648,620 126 Special Capital Fund 1,780,420 1,780,420 127 Gifts Catalog Fund 345,580 - 345,580 130 Cemetery Ma i ntena nce/I mprov 197,780 275,377 473,157 137 Cemetery Maintenance Trust I'd 101,090 (14,253) 86,837 138 Sister City Commission 11,310 11,310 140 Business Improvement District Fund 79,209 79,209 141 Affordable and Supportive Housing Fund 65,000 65,000 142 Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund - - 143 Tree Fund 83,502 83,502 211 Lid Fund Control - - 231 2012 LTGO Debt Service fund 305,870 - 305,870 332 Parks Construction 209,450 139,172 348,622 421 Water 11,863,672 - 11,863,672 422 Storm 9,494,779 360,889 9,855,668 423 Sewer/Treatment Plant 19,329,568 - 19,329,568 424 Bond Reserve Fund 1,174,920 1,174,920 511 Equipment Rental Fund 2,421,990 (45,720) 2,376,270 512 Technology Rental Fund 2,505,723 2,505,723 617 Firemen's Pension Fund - - - Totals $ 118,686,883 $ 1,555,985 $ 120,242,868 w C N E C N E Q N 3 m �L Q Q LO N C N d C> C cC C L 0 r C d E C d E Q Q co 7 m •L Q Q u7 N O N C d E s t� ca Q Packet Pg. 46 EXHIBIT "C": Budget Amendment by Expenditure (April 2025) 2.4.a FUND NO. FUND DESCRIPTION Adopted Budget Ord. #4377 1/1/2025 Proposed Amendment Ord. # 2025 Amended Expenditure Budget 001 General Fund $ 58,387,767 $ (33,683) $ 58,354,084 009 Leoff-Medical Ins. Reserve 317,500 - 317,500 011 Risk Management Reserve Fund - - - 012 Contingency Reserve Fund - - - 014 Historic Preservation Gift Fund 5,700 - 5,700 016 Building Maintenance Fund 550,000 230,068 780,068 017 Marsh Restoration & Preservation Fund 29,000 56,720 85,720 018 Edmonds Homelessness Response Fund 188,100 - 188,100 019 Edmonds Opioid Response Fund 400,000 - 400,000 104 Drug Enforcement Fund 20,000 - 20,000 111 Street Fund 2,639,871 589 2,640,460 112 Combined Street Const/I mprove 4,094,740 348,762 4,443,502 117 Municipal Arts Acquis. Fund 245,400 130,515 375,915 120 Hotel/Motel Tax Revenue Fund 194,000 - 194,000 121 Employee Parking Permit Fund 31,770 - 31,770 122 Youth Scholarship Fund 3,000 - 3,000 123 Tourism Promotional Fund/Arts 37,500 - 37,500 125 Park Acq/1 mprovement 1,946,465 476,274 2,422,739 126 Special Capital Fund 2,552,330 216,634 2,768,964 127 Gifts Catalog Fund 638,936 - 638,936 130 Cemetery Maintenance/Improv 329,009 - 329,009 137 Cemetery Maintenance Trust Fd 375,000 (88,876) 286,124 138 Sister City Commission 7,400 - 7,400 140 Business Improvement District Fund 84,445 3,000 87,445 141 Affordable and Supportive Housing Fund - - - 142 Edmonds Rescue Plan Fund - - 143 Tree Fund 75,000 75,000 211 Lid Fund Control - - - 231 2012LTG0 Debt Service Fund 305,870 - 305,870 332 Parks Construction - 100,035 100,035 421 Water 22,315,347 473,190 22,788,537 422 Storm 12,323,172 1,529,340 13,852,512 423 Sewer /Treatment Plant 19,597,163 518,756 20,115,919 424 Bond Reserve Fund 1,149,400 - 1,149,400 511 Equipment Rental Fund 1,907,356 232,250 2,139,606 512 Technology Rental Fund 2,530,572 - 2,530,572 617 Firemen's Pension Fund - - - Totals $ 133,206,813 $ 4,268,574 $ 137,475,387 w C N E C N E Q N 3 m �L Q Q LO N O N d C> C cC C L 0 r C d E C d E Q Q co ZZ 3 m •L Q Q LO N O N C d E s t� ca Q Packet Pg. 47 EXHIBIT "D": Budget Amendment Summary (April 2025) 2.4.a Fund Number Proposed Amendment Change in Revenue Proposed Amendment Change in Expense Proposed Amendment Change in Ending Fund Balance 001 379,117 (33,683) 412,800 016 - 230,068 (230,068) 017 56,720 (56,720) 111 - 589 (589) 112 332,142 348,762 (16,620) 117 129,261 130,515 (1,254) 125 - 476,274 (476,274) 126 - 216,634 (216,634) 130 275,377 - 275,377 137 (14,253) (88,876) 74,623 140 3,000 (3,000) 143 75,000 (75,000) 332 139,172 100,035 39,137 421 - 473,190 (473,190) 422 360,889 1,529,340 (1,168,451) 423 - 518,756 (518,756) 511 1(45,720)1 232,250 1 (277,970) Total Change 1,555,985 1 4,268,574 (2,712,589) w a� E a� E Q m 3 00 �L a Q LO N O d ca =a L O r _ d E _ d E Q Q CD 3 m •L a Q LO N 0 N _ d E t t� R Q Packet Pg. 48 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) During the budget process, WCIA provided the city with an estimate for the 2025 Insurance premium. However, the final premium that was invoiced was $32,788 more than the estimate that had been included in the Adopted Budget. This amendment adjusts the current budget to reflect the actual insurance premium for 2025. Finance Final Premium Allocation Marissa Cain New Item For Council To Consider 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Operating Fund MULTIPLE FUNDS Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.39.518.90.46.00 Insurance $ 8,502 $ $ $ $ 111.000.68.542.90.46.00 Insurance 589 421.000.74.534.80.46.00 Insurance 1,842 422.000.72.531.90.46.00 Insurance 52 423.000.75.535.80.46.00 Insurance 694 423.000.76.535.80.46.00 Insurance 19,859 511.000.77.548.68.46.00 Insurance 1,250 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 32,788 $ $ S $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 S $ $ S Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ $ $ S $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 8,502 $ $ $ $ 111.000.68.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 589 421.000.74.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 1,842 422.000.72.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 52 423.000.75.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 694 423.000.76.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 19,859 511.000.77.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 1,250 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 32,788 $ 1 $ S $ Packet Pg. 49 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) During the 2025 budget process the department made cuts to jail costs. However, jail costs are unique and can be hard to estimate accurately. After the Hirst quarter, the department determined there may not enough budget to cover the annual cost of the jail, and is submitting this budget amendment request to adjust the budget to reflect actual costs. Police Jail Cost Bud Marissa Cain New Item For Council To Consider 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Operating Fund MULTIPLE FUNDS Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.41.523.60.41.50 Intergovernmental Services $ 22,500 $ $ $ $ Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 22,500 1 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 22,500 $ $ $ Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 22,500 $ $ $ $ C Lv E C d E Q w Lv 7 m •L sZ Q try 04 O zs Packet Pg. 50 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Item Description: This is a carryforward requesting spending authority to account for the State of Washington Tourism Grant received in 2024 to support 2024's Pride, and 2025's Lunar New Year community events. Funds for Pride were expended in 2024. Funds for Lunar New Year will be expended in 2025. Department: Community, Culture, and Economic Development Fund Name: 001 GENERAL Division: Economic Development Title: Tourism Grant Carryforward Preparer: Megan Luttrell/Todd Tatum Budget Amendment Type Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? Reimbursed by Grants or Outside Agencies What is the nature of the expenditure? One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Operating Exnenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 Professional Services $ 3,535 $ $ $ S Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 3,535 1 $ $ $ S Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.333.11.307.00 2024 Pride Event/2025 Lunar NY $ 3,535 $ $ $ S Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 3,535 $ $ $ S Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 S $ $ S Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ S $ $ S C d E C d E Q d s� 7 M •L sz Q LO N O N 3 Packet Pg. 51 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Item Description: This is a carryforward for the Gateway Art project at Anway Park. This project is funded through two sources in 2025: a grant from the Washington Arts Commission (ArtsWA) for $60,000 and two grants from the Edmonds Arts Festival Foundation, one for $60,000 to match the grant and one for $5,550 to cover additional expenses expended in 2024. This project is expected to be completed by the end of June 2025 to remain in compliance with the terms of the ArtsWA grant. and Economic Division: I Cultural Services Title: I Public Art Project Carryforwards Preparers lFrances Chapin/Todd Tatum Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Self Funded One -Time Capital Fund 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 117.100.64.594.73.65.00 Professional Services $ 120,000 $ $ $ S Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 120,000 $ $ $ S Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 117.100.367.00.000.00 Private Donaion $ 65.550 S $ - $ S 117.100.334.05.800.01 WA State Arts Commission Capital Grant 60.000 Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 125,550 $ $ $ S Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 117.100.64.508.40.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 5,550 $ $ $ S Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 5,550 $ $ $ $ C d E C d E Q w d 7 M •L sz Q LO (V O N Packet Pg. 52 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: This is a carryforward for the Highway 99 Banner Project. This project is a public art project which procures artist designs for, fabricates, and installs metal banners along 14 poles along Highway 99. The project was allocated a budget of $78,000 in 2024. This project was funded with $38,465 from the Municipal Arts Fund 117 200 and $39,535 remaining funds from the original allocation for banner enhancements in 2014 which is held in the 332 Parks Capital. $29,950 was expended in 2024 from the 117 200 fund. A balance of $48,050 remains to complete the project in 2025. Expected completion date is: July 2025. Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) and Economic Cultural Services Public Art Project Carryfory Frances Chapin/Todd Tatum Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Self Funded One -Time Capital Fund I MULTIPLE FUNDS Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 117.200.64.595.70.65.00 Roadside Development $ 10,515 $ S S $ 332.000.64.595.70.65.00 Roadside Development 39,535 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 50,050 $ $ S S Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 S $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease S S $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 117.200.64.508.40.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 10,515 $ S $ $ 332.000.64.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance (39,535) Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 50,050 $ S S S C d E C d E Q w d 7 M •L SZ Q try 04 O zs Packet Pg. 53 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) and production of materials with a map of downtown and a QR code pointing to edmondsdowntown.org. and Economic Downtown Alliance Hulbert Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Operating Fund I 001 GENERAL Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 140.000.61.558.70.41.00 Professional Services $ 1,500 $ $ $ $ 140.000.61.558.70.31.00 Supplies 1,500 Total Expenditure Increase(Decrease) $ 3,000 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 $ S $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 140.000.61.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 3,000 $ $ $ $ Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 3,000 $ 1 $ 1 $ I$ Packet Pg. 54 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Carry forward from 2024 to 2025 budget for Facilities Capital projects Public Works Facilities Facilities Man: Thom Sullivan Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 2024 budget deliberation 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund 16 BUILDING Name: MAINTENANCI Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 0 16.100.66.594.18.4 1.00 Professional Services $ 10,885 $ $ $ $ 016.100.66.594.18.48.00 Repair and Maintenance 219,183 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 230,068 I $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 S $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ $ $ $ S Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 016.100.66.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 230,068 $ $ S Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 230,068 $ $ $ $ Packet Pg. 55 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Material Bunker - to be funded by REET 126 for the Street's portion of the project. Estimated project cost is $400k of which 33.33% is associated with Street Fund 111. The material bunker is a capital cost and can be funded by REET 126 on behalf of Street Fund 111. The material bunker will be located in the Public Works Yard. Public Works Street Material Bunker - Street Tomala, Tod Moles, Thom Sullivan Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 2023 DP 720-23001, 2025-2026 CIP/CFP 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund 126 REET 1 Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 126.000.66.594.18.65.00 Construction Projects $ 18,750 $ $ $ $ 421.000.74.594.34.62.00 Buildings 18,750 422.000.72.594.31.62.00 Buildings 18,750 423.000.75.594.35.62.00 Buildings 18,750 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 75,000 1 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 S $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ $ $ S $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 126.000.39.508.30.00.00 Ending Balance $ 18,750 $ S S $ 421.000.74.508.89.00.00 Ending Balance 18,750 422.000.72.508.89.00.00 Ending Balance 18,750 423.000.75.508.89.00.00 Ending Balance 18,750 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 75,000 $ $ $ $ C Lv E 73 C d E Q w Lv 7 M •L sz Q try 04 O zs Packet Pg. 56 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Carryfoward the council authorized expenditure allocation to complete a preliminary existing conditions analysis (Phase 1) of the Shell Creek ecosystem in Yost Park. This study will be used to inform Phase 2 of the project to provide improvements increasing environmental health and erosion control of Shell Creek in Yost Park. Phase 2 may include trail, bridge and boardwalk repair or relocation, removal of stream obstructions and trail improvements. Phase 2 was approved in the 2025-26 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Recreation & Human Services Shell Creek Restoration Feser Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 2024 Adopted Budget 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund I 125 REET 2 Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 125.000.64.576.80.41.00 Shell Creek Phase 1 - Ca orward $ 250,000 $ S S $ Total Expenditure Increase Decrease S 250,000 1 $ S $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 125.000.64.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 250,000 $ $ S Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 250,000 $ $ S $ Packet Pg. 57 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Carryfoward the remaining council authorized expenditure allocation to update signage and wayfinding signage through -out the parks system. In 2024, $50,350 was expended towards this project, this request its to carry the balance forward into 2025 to continue upgrading park system signage. Recreation & Human Services ;e&N Feser Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 2024 Adopted Budget 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund I 125 REET 2 Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 125.000.64.594.76.65.00 Signage & Wayfinding S 24,650 $ S S $ Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 24,650 $ S $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 125.000.64.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance S 24,650 $ $ $ $ Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 24,650 $ $ $ 10 Packet Pg. 58 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Requesting authorization to transfer $2,491 from fund 125 to the municipal arts fund 117 to fulfill the 1% for the Arts requirement for the Mathay Ballinger Park improvements. The expenditure is accounted for within the project budget, this amendment is simply authorizing the actual transfer. Recreation & Human Services 1% Arts Transfer An¢ie Feser Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 2024 Adopted Budget 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund I 117 MUNICIPAL ARTS Name: Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 125.000.64.597.73.55.17 1% Transfer to Arts S 2,491 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 2,491 $ S S $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 117.200.397.73.126.00 1% Arts Transfer from Parks Capital Project $ 2,491 $ S S $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 2,491 $ S S $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 117.200.64.508.40.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 2,491 125.000.64.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 2,491 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ $ S $ $ C d E C d E Q d 7 M •L sz Q LO 04 O N 11 Packet Pg. 59 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Item Description: Requesting (1) a onetime $261,124 transfer of funds from Fund 137 to Fund 130; (2) revising the revenue allocation percentages between the funds from 90% Fund 130 and 10% Fund 137 to 100% Fund 130 and 0% Fund 137 to meet Edmonds City Code 10.16.060.A.3 "The goal shall be to actuarially fund the cemetery and maintenance fund with sufficient monies so that it may become and remain a self-sufficient source of funding for all recurring maintenance of the cemetery." These budget amendments were approved by the Cemetery Board on February 20, 2025. This amendment also removes the amount budgeted for capital projects since the Columbarium expansion will no longer happen in the current biennium. Department: Parks, Recreation & Human Services Fund Name: MULTIPLE FUNDS 7 Division: Title: Cemetery Transfer Prenarer: An¢ie Feser Budget Amendment Type Previously Approved Budget By Council 1st Quarter Budget Amendment Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? Feb 20 2025 How is this amendment funded? 100% Ending Fund Balance What is the nature of the expenditure? One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Operating Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 137.000.64.597.36.55.30 Interfund Transfer to Fund 130 $ 261,124 $ S S $ 137.000.64.594.36.65.00 Capital Projects 350,000 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 88,876 $ I S $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 130.000.397.36.137.00 Interfund Transfer In $ 261,124 $ $ $ $ 137.000.341.70.000.00 Resale / Taxable 1,838 137.000.343.60.000.00 Cemetery Grave Sales 6,320 137.000.343.60.200.00 Columbarium Niche Sales 1,750 137.000.343.60.400.00 Cemetery Services 4,345 130.000.341.70.000.00 Resale / Taxable 1,838 130.000.343.60.000.00 Cemetery Grave Sales 6,320 130.000.343.60.200.00 Columbarium Niche Sales 1,750 130.000.343.60.400.00 Cemetery Services 4,345 Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 261,124 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 130.000.64.508.40.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 275,377 $ $ $ $ 137.000.64.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 74,623 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 350,000 1 $ $ S C d E C d E Q d 7 M •L sz Q LC� 04 O N 12 Packet Pg. 60 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Requesting expenditure authority for fund 143, the Tree Fund. Funding will be used to support tree related work throughtout the city as defined in the Edmonds City Code 3.95 related to the collection of fees. Expenditures will not take place if the fund balance from fee collection is not adequate. Recreation & Human Services Park Maintenance Tree Fund Expend An¢ie Feser New Item For Council To Consider 100% Ending Fund Balance On -Going Operating Fund 1 143 TREE FUND Name: Fill out on -going costs & revenues Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 143.000.64.576.80.41.00 Professional Services S 75.000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 143.000.64.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 $ 75,000 C d E C d E Q d 7 M •L s2 Q LO 04 O N 13 Packet Pg. 61 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Carryfoward the remaining council authorized expenditure allocation and anticipated grant reimbursement payments to complete the Mee property acquisition and site preparation project. The purchase was completed in early 2024 as well as most of the site work to provide public access as required by the Snohomish County Conservation Futures grant. Billing for the second grant reimbursement has been submitted and payment will take place in 2025. The balance of the funding will be used to close out and finalize the project. Recreation & Human Services Capital Projects Fund I 332 PARKS CAPITAL Mee Property Name: CONSTRUCTION FUND 11'reparer: JAngie Feser I I i Budget Amendment Type Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? Feb 20 2024 How is this amendment funded? 100% Ending Fund Balance What is the nature of the expenditure? One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? lCapital Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 332.000.64.594.76.61.00 Land Acquisition S 60,500 $ S S $ 126.000.64.594.76.61.00 Land Acquisition 44,000 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 104,500 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 332.000.337.10.000.00 Snohomish County Conservation Futures Grant $ 139,172 $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 139,172 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 332.000.64.508.30.00.00 Land Acquisition $ 78,672 $ $ $ $ 126.000.39.508.30.00.00 Professional Services 44,000 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 34,672 1 $ S S $ C d E C d E Q d t� 7 M •L sz Q LO 04 O N 14 Packet Pg. 62 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Annual water replacement project closeout ongoing. This carryforward amendment will program unpsent 2024 funds to the 2025 budget. Public Works Phase 14 Waterline Gre¢ Malowicld Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund f 421 WATER Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 421.200.74.534.34.41.67 Interfund Services -Bond $ 15,000 $ S $ $ 421.200.74.594.34.65.00 Construction Projects - Bond 5,000 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 20,000 $ S S $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services S 15,000 $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 15,000 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 421.000.74.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 20,000 $ $ $ $ 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 15,000 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 5,000 $ $ $ $ C Lv E C d E Q w Lv 7 m •L sz Q try 04 O zs 15 Packet Pg. 63 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Carryforward for the Phase 15 Waterline Replacement Project design. Moving unspent 2024 funds to 2025. Public Works Phase 15 Waterline Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund f 421 WATER Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 421.200.74.594.34.41.00 Professional Services - Bond $30,200 $ $ $ $ 421.200.74.534.34.41.67 Interfund Services - Bond 28,000 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 58,200 1 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services $ 29,000 $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 28,000 $ S S $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 421.000.74.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 58,200 $ S S $ 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 28,000 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 30,200 $ $ $ $ C d E C d E Q w d 7 M •L sz Q try 04 O zs 16 Packet Pg. 64 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: JYost Seaview Reservoir project design is ongoing. 2024 funds moved to 2025. Public Works oeenng Fund 421 WATER and Seaview Reservoir Rehabilitation Project (E22JB/m160) Name: Malowicld Budget Amendment Type Previously Approved Budget By Council 11 Previous Year Carryforward Amendment Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? 100% Ending Fund Balance What is the nature of the expenditure? One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? lCapital Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 421.200.74.594.34.41.00 Professional Services Ca ital-2024 Bond $307,370 $ $ $ $ 421.200.74.534.34.41.67 Interfund Services - Bond 33,695 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 341,065 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services $ 33,695 $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 33,695 $ S S $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 421.000.74.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 341,065 $ S S $ 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 33,695 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 307,370 $ $ S $ C d E C d E Q w d 7 m •L sz Q try 04 O zs 17 Packet Pg. 65 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Annual storm replacement/rehabilitation project closeout ongoing. This carryforward amendment will program unpsent 2024 funds to the 2025 budget. Public Works Phase 4 Storm Rehabilitation Malowicki Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund f 422 STORM Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.200.72.531.31.41.67 Interfund Services - Bond $ 15,000 $ $ S $ Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 15,000 $ $ S $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services S 15,000 $ $ S $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 15,000 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.000.72.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 15,000 $ $ $ $ 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 15,000 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ $ $ $ $ C Lv E C d E Q w Lv 7 m •L sZ Q try 04 O zs 18 Packet Pg. 66 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: 130% design in progress. Moving unspent 2024 funds for 30% design to 2025. Public Works Engineering Fund f 422 STORM Lower Perrinville Creek Restoration (E22FB/al57) Name: Preparer: Michele (Mike) De Lills Budget Amendment Type Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? 100% Ending Fund Balance What is the nature of the expenditure? One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Capital Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.000.72.531.31.41.67 Interfund Services - Capital $ 45,462 $ $ $ $ 422.000.72.594.31.41.00 Capital Professional Services 230,470 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 275,932 1 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services $ 45,462 $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease S 45,462 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.000.72.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 275,932 $ $ $ $ 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 45,462 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 230,470 $ $ $ $ C d E C d E Q w d 7 M •L sz Q try 04 O zs 19 Packet Pg. 67 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Stormwater Comprehensive Plan Document work in progress. Moving unspent 2024 funds to 2025. Public Works Stormwater Michele (M Plan ike) De Lilla Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund f 422 STORM Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.000.72.531.70.41.67 Interfund Services $ 3,590 $ $ $ $ 422.000.72.531.90.41.20 Professional Services 160,250 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 163,840 1 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services $ 3,590 $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease S 3,590 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.000.72.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance S (163,840) $ $ $ $ 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 3590 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 160,250 $ $ $ $ C d E C d E Q w d 7 M •L sz Q try (V O zs 20 Packet Pg. 68 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Item Description: Perrinville Creek Basin Analysis Update. Moving unspent funds from 2024 to 2025. Public Works Division: Engineering Fund 422 STORM Title: Perrinville Creek Basin Analysis Update (E24FB/c623) Name: Preparer: Michele (Mike) De Lilla Budget Amendment Type Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? 100% Ending Fund Balance What is the nature of the expenditure? One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Capital Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.000.72.531.90.41.20 Professional Services $ 103,055 $ $ $ $ Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 103,055 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.000.334.03.100.01 Perrinville Creek Basin Analysis Watershed DOE Grant 87,804 $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 87,804 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.000.72.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 15,251 $ $ $ $ Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 15,251 $ $ $ $ C d E C d E Q w d 7 M •L s2 Q trl 04 O zs 21 Packet Pg. 69 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Carryforward for the Phase 5 Storm Rehab Project design. Moving unspent 2024 funds to 2025. Public Works Phase 5 Storm Rehab Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund f 422 STORM Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.200.72.594.31.41.00 Professional Services - Bond $41,580 $ S $ $ 422.200.72.531.31.41.67 Interfund Services - Bond 10,000 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 51,580 $ S S $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services S 10,000 $ S S $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease S 10,000 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.000.72.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance S 51,580 $ $ $ $ 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 10,000 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 41,580 $ $ $ $ C d E C d E Q w Lv 7 M •L sz Q try 04 O zs 22 Packet Pg. 70 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) This budget amendment will program stormwater funds to complete a study on the risks and avoidance of PFAS contamination of the Deer Creek CARA to inform its decision on CARA protections. Public Works Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas Rob English Previously Discussed By Council 1st Quarter Budget Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund f 422 STORM Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.000.72.531.90.41.20 Professional Services $ 50,000 $ S $ $ 422.000.72.531.70.41.67 Interfund Services 10,000 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 60,000 $ S S $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services S 10,000 $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 10,000 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.000.72.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 60,000 $ $ $ $ 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 10,000 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 50,000 $ $ $ $ 23 Packet Pg. 71 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) This budget amendment will program unspent funds from the 2024 budget to the 2025 budget and program the transfer of funds from Fund 017 to Fund 422 and grant revenue to off -set project costs. Public Works Edmonds Marsh Russell Lvnch Previously Approved Budget By Council 1st Quarter Budget Amendment Mar 19 2024 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund f 422 STORM Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.000.72.531.90.41.20 Professional Services $46,718 $ $ $ $ 422.000.72.531.70.41.67 Interfund Services $7,720 017.000.64.597.76.55.22 Transfer to Fund 422 Interfund Services $21,720 017.000.64.597.76.55.22 Transfer to Fund 422 Citizen Donations $35,000 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 111,158 1 $ S S Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.000.331.10.683.00 NOAA/NFWF Grant $ 83,240 $ $ S $ 422.000.397.38.017.00 Transfer from Fund 017 $56,720 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services $7,720 Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 147,680 $ S S $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 422.000.72.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 85,522 $ $ S $ 017.000.64.508.40.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 56,720 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 7,720 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 36,522 1 $ $ $ $ 24 Packet Pg. 72 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Carryforward for the Phase 12 Sewer Rehab Project design. Unspent 2024 funds moved to 2025. Public Works Phase 12 Sewer Rehab Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund 1423 SEWER / TREATMENT Name: L PLANT Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 423.000.75.594.35.41.00 Professional Services $30,530 $ S $ $ 423.000.75.535.35.41.67 Interfund Services $10,000 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 40,530 $ S S $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services S 10,000 $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 10,000 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 423.000.75.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 40,530 $ $ $ $ 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 10,000 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 30,530 $ $ $ $ C Lv E C d E Q w Lv 7 m •L sz Q try 04 O zs 25 Packet Pg. 73 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Annual sewer replacement project portion of construction delayed to early 2025. This carryforward amendment will program unpsent 2024 funds to the 2025 budget. Public Works Phase 11 Sewer Gre¢ Malowicld Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund 1423 SEWER / TREATMENT Name: L PLANT Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 423.000.75.535.80.41.67 Interfund Services $ 61,955 $ $ $ $ 423.000.75.594.35.65.30 Construction Projects 309,690 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 371,645 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services S 61,955 $ S $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 61,955 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 423.000.75.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 371,645 $ $ $ $ 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 61,955 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 309,690 $ $ $ $ C Lv E C d E Q w Lv 7 m •L sz Q try 04 O zs 26 Packet Pg. 74 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Annual sewer replacement/rehabilitation project closeout ongoing. This carryforward amendment will program unpsent 2024 funds to the 2025 budget. Public Works Phase 10 Sewer Gre¢ Malowicld Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund 1423 SEWER / TREATMENT Name: L PLANT Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 423.000.75.535.80.41.67 Interfund Services $ 9,900 $ $ $ $ Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 9,900 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services $ 9,900 $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 9,900 1 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 423.000.75.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 9,900 $ $ $ 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 9,900 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ $ $ $ $ C d E C d E Q w d 7 m •L sz Q try 04 O zs 27 Packet Pg. 75 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) This carryforward amendment will program unspent 2024 funds to provide funding in 2025 to hire a consultant to assess existing records and scan documents that are required per the Washington State Archives records retention schedule. The public works documents are related to project files, permits and as -built drawings. Public Works Records Management & Scanning Services Rob English Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Operating Fund MULTIPLE FUNDS Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 Professional Services $ 33,333 $ $ $ $ 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 Professional Services 33,333 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 Professional Services 33,334 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 100,000 $ $ S $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 $ $ S Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ $ $ S $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 421.000.74.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 33,333 $ $ S $ 422.000.72.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 33,333 423.000.75.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 33,334 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 100,000 $ $ S $ C Lv E C d E Q w Lv 7 m •L sz Q tr) 04 O N 28 Packet Pg. 76 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Completion of MMLOS Traffic Impact Fee Rate Schedule (as part of 2024 Transportation Plan Update). Public Works 2024 Transportation Plan Bertrand Hauss Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund 112 STREET Name: r CONSTRUCTION Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 112.000.68.542.10.41.00 Professional Services $ 5,886 $ $ $ $ Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 5,886 1 $ S S $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 S $ $ S Total Revenue Increase Decrease S $ S S $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 112.000.64.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance S 5,886 $ S $ $ Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease S 5,886 $ $ $ $ C d E C d E Q w tU 7 M •L sz Q trl 04 O N 29 Packet Pg. 77 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) This carryforward amendment will program unspent funds from the 2024 Pedestrian Safety Program to the 2025 budget to install a flashing LED STOP sign on Southeast corner of Main St. @ 5th Ave. and add reflective tape to sign posts in order to increase visibility of Regulatory and Advisory signs throughout the City. Pulic Works 2024 Pedestrian Bertrand Hauss Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund [ 125 REET 2 Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 125.000.68.542.64.48.00 R&M Traffic Control $ 73,823 $ $ $ $ 125.000.68.542.64.41.67 Interfund Services - Traffic Control 3,000 125.000.64.597.73.55.17 Transfer to Fund 117 770 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 77,593 1 $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services $ 3,000 $ $ S $ 117.200.397.73.125.00 hiterfund Transfer 770 Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 3,776 1$ $ S $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 125.000.68.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 77,593 $ $ S $ 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 3,000 117.200.64.508.40.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 770 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 73,823 $ $ S $ C d E C d E Q w d 7 M •L sz Q try 04 O N 30 Packet Pg. 78 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) This carryforward amendment will program unspent funds from the 2024 Traffic Calming Program to install traffic calming devices on the top scoring citizen/petition applications. The street segments that are being funded are 96th Ave. from 220th St. SW to Bowdoin Way, 76th Ave. W from 228th to SR-104, 9th Ave. N from Caspers St. to Main St., and 228th St. SW from 76th Ave. W to Lakeview Dr. Public Works 2024 Traffic Cal Bertrand Hauss Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 126.000.68.542.64.48.00 R&M Traffic Control $ 44,000 $ $ $ $ 126.000.68.542.64.41.67 Interfund Services - Traffic Control 3,000 126.000.68.597.73.55.17 Transfer to Fund 117 450 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 47,450 1 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services $ 3,000 $ $ $ $ 117.200.397.73.126.00 Interfund Transfer from 126 450 Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 3,450 1 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 126.000.64.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 47,450 $ $ $ 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 3,000 117.200.64.508.40.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 450 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 44,000 $ $ $ $ C d E C d E Q w d 7 M •L Q try 04 O N 31 Packet Pg. 79 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) This carryforward amendment will program unspent 2024 overlay funds to use for the 2025 Overlay Program. Public Works Rob Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund Name: MULTIPLE FUNDS Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 125.000.68.542.30.41.67 Interfund Services Roadway $ 10,000 $ $ $ $ 125.000.68.542.30.48.00 Repair & Maintenance Overlays 90,000 126.000.68.542.30.41.67 Interfund Services Roadway 10,000 126.000.68.542.30.48.00 Repair & Maintenance Overlays 90,000 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 200,000 1 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services $ 20,000 $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 20,000 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 125.000.64.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 100,000 $ $ $ $ 126.000.64.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 100,000 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 20,000 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 180,000 $ $ $ $ C d E C d E Q w d 7 M •L sz Q try (V O zs 32 Packet Pg. 80 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) The City secured a $15,000 grant from Snohomish County to install a radar feedback speed limit sign on 84th Ave at 234th St. This budget amendment will program the expernditures and grant revenue to complet the work in 2025. Public Works Engineering Fund r 112 STREET 84th Ave. W Traffic Calming from 238th St. SW to 220th St. SW Name: CONSTRUCTION Bertrand Hauss New Item For Council To Consider 1st Quarter Budget Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 112.000.68.542.64.48.00 R&M Traffic Control $ 15,000 $ $ $ $ Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 15,000 1$ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 112.000.337.10.000.02 Snohohmish County Grant $ 15,000 $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 15,000 1 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 $ $ $ Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease S $ $ $ $ 33 Packet Pg. 81 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Highway 99 Revitalization Project closeout on -going. This 1st Quarter Budget Amendment of a total of $20,000 is being combined with a 2024 Carryforward amount of $23,940. Public Works lighway 99 Revitalization aime Hawkins New Item For Council To Consider 1st Quarter Budget Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund 112 STREET Name: r CONSTRUCTION Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 112.000.68.595.33.41.00 Professional Services Construction S 33,940 $ $ $ $ 112.000.68.542.33.41.67 Interfund Services Construction 10,000 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease S 43,940 1 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 112.000.334.03.600.08 SR 99 Revitalization HLP-CNWA 013 S 43,940 $ $ $ $ 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services 10,000 Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 53,940 $ S S $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 10,000 $ S S $ Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 10,000 1 $ S S $ 34 Packet Pg. 82 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: IIn fall 2024, the City secured a $700k federal grant from WSDOT to add new streetlights at five locations based on nighttime accident data. Additional locations may be added as funding allows. The WSDOT grant does not require local matching funds. Public Works Fund 112 STREET Name: r CONSTRUCTION �Preparer: Bertrand Hauss Budget Amendment Type Previously Approved Budget By Council 1st Quarter Budget Amendment Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? Jan 28 2025 How is this amendment funded? 100% Ending Fund Balance What is the nature of the expenditure? One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Capital Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 112.000.68.542.33.41.67 Interfund Services Roadway $ 25,000 $ 55,000 $ $ $ 112.000.68.542.30.41.00 Professional Services Roadway 95,000 25,000 112.000.68.595.33.65.00 Construction Project Roadway $500,000 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 120,000 $ 580,000 $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 112.000.333.20.614.00 Federal HSIP Grant $ 120,000 $ 580,000 $ $ $ 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services 25,000 55,000 Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 145,000 $ 635,000 $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 25,000 $ 55,000 $ $ $ Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 25,000 1 $ 55,000 S S $ C d E C d E Q w d 7 m •L sz Q try 04 O zs 35 Packet Pg. 83 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: The City Council awarded a construction contract to complete the Main St. Overlay (6th Ave - 8th Ave) Project in September 2024. The remaining work in 2025 includes stormwater improvements, pedestrian curb ramps at 7th Ave, pavement overlay and striping. This budget amendment programs the 2024 carry forward amount, stormwater funds and remaining grant revenue from the State Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) Grants. Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Public Works Main St. Overlay (6th Ave - 8th Rob English Previously Approved Budget By Council 1st Quarter Budget Amendment Sep 10 2024 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund MULTIPLE FUNDS Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 112.000.68.542.30.41.00 Professional Services Roadway $ 35,980 $ $ $ $ 112.000.68.542.30.48.00 Repair & Maintenance Roadway 135,705 112.000.68.542.33.41.67 Interfund Services Roadaway 17,500 125.000.68.542.30.41.00 Professional Services Roadway 14,250 125.000.68.542.30.41.67 Interfund Services Roadaway 855 422.200.72.531.31.41.00 Professional Services -2024 Bond 22,585 422.200.72.531.31.48.00 Repair & Maintenance Roadway -2024 Bond 694,800 422.200.72.531.31.41.67 Interfund Services - 2024 Bond 35,975 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease S 885,690 $ $ S $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services $ 54,330 $ $ S $ 112.000.334.03.800.08 Main St. TIB Complete Streets Grant 106,491 422.000.334.03.800.01 Main St. TIB Complete Streets Grant 133,125 Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 293,946 1 $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 112.000.64.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 10,734 $ $ $ $ 125.000.64.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 15,105 422.000.72.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 133,125 422.200.72.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 753,360 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 54,330 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 591,744 $ $ 1 $ $ C d E C d E Q w d 7 M •L sz Q try 04 O zs 36 Packet Pg. 84 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: The City secured a Washington State Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) grant for $379,600 to replace the existing pedestrian curb ramps on 7th Ave from Bell St to SR-524 and improve the crosswalk at 7th Ave at Sprague St. The new pedestrian curb ramps will be upgraded to meet ADA standards. After the new curb ramps are installed, the City will complete a pavement overlay on 7th Ave since the existing pavement is in poor condition. A local match of $104,580 will be provided from the Annual Pavement Overlay Program which is funded equally between the REET 125 and 126 Funds. Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Public Works 7th Ave N Pedestrian Previously Approved Budget By Council ASK- Ist Quarter Budget Amendment Jan 28 2025 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Capital Fund MULTIPLE FUNDS Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 112.000.68.542.61.41.00 Professional Services -Sidewalks & Curbs $ 38,926 $ 42,924 $ $ $ 112.000.68.542.61.41.67 Interfund Services -Sidewalks 7,785 3,802 112.000.68.595.61.65.00 Construction - Sidewalks 286,162 125.000.68.542.61.41.00 Professional Services -Sidewalks 5,362 5,913 125.000.68.542.61.41.67 Interfund Services -Sidewalks 1,073 524 125.000.68.595.61.65.00 Construction - Sidewalks 39,419 126.000.68.595.61.41.00 Professional Services -Sidewalks 5,362 5,913 126.000.68.542.61.41.67 Interfund Services -Sidewalks 1,072 524 126.000.68.595.61.65.00 Construction - Sidewalks 39,419 Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 59,580 $ 424,600 $ S $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 112.000.334.03.800.09 7th Ave Pedestrian Improvements - TIB Grant $ 46,711 $ 332,888 $ S $ 001.000.349.18.000.00 Contract Services 9,930 4,850 Total Revenue Increase Decrease S 56,641 $ 337,738 $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 125.000.64.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 6,435 45,856 126.000.64.508.30.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 6,434 45,856 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 9,930 4,850 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease S 2,939 $ 86,862 $ $ $ C d E 73 C d E Q w d 23 7 m •L sz Q try 04 O zs 37 Packet Pg. 85 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Item Description: As part of the City's 2025 budget, we implemented furloughs for non -represented employees as a citywide cost -saving measure. This initially included all departments, including the Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) non -represented staff (2 managers). However, in early 2025, the WWTP Manager and the Public Works Director requested an exemption from furloughs for the two non -represented employees at the WWTP. They noted that the unique operational demands of the facility —such as the need for constant oversight, the limited staffing flexibility, and the importance of maintaining consistent managerial presence —make furloughing particularly disruptive. Additionally, the Sewer Fund is financially stable and not experiencing the same budgetary pressures as the General Fund. The ongoing complexity of the Carbon Project, a critical and technically demanding initiative, further underscores the need for continuous management at the WWTP. For these reasons, this budget amendment supports the exclusion of the two non -represented WWTP employees from furlough requirements in 2025 and reverses the salary and benefit reduction made during the 2025 budget process. Department: Treatment Plant Fund Name: EATMENT ��PLAN Division: Title: WWTP Carbon Proiect Furloueh JPreparer: I Finance Budget Amendment Type New Item For Council To Consider Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? 100% Ending Fund Balance What is the nature of the expenditure? One -Time Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Operating Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 423.000.76.535.80.11.00 Salaries $ 24,044 $ $ S $ Total Expenditure Increase(Decrease) $ 24,044 $ S $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 $ $ S S $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ $ S S $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 423.000.76.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 24,044 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 24,0441 $ S S $ C d E C d E Q w Lv 7 M •L SZ Q u7 N 0 N N r.+ t x w to N i31 10 Y 0 M a 0 N �L IZ Q u7 N O N _ d E s �a Q 38 Packet Pg. 86 2.4.b 2025 April Budget Amendment Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: The 2024 Fleet B-Fund budget for new vehicle additions and scheduled vehicle replacements was approved for $1,718,000 to purchase a total of 36 vehicles. Production delays and longer than average lead times on vehicle and equipment deliveries ordered in 2024 continue to prohibit project completion in a timely manner. There are 11 projects, 4 scheduled replacements and 7 new vehicle additions, that have not been finalized. Fleet requires the remaining approved B-Fund balance to carry forward into 2025 to complete these remaining projects. Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) Public Works Fleet Fleet Manage Carl Rugg Previously Approved Budget By Council Previous Year Carryforward Amendment 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Operating Fund 1511 EQUIPMENT RENTAL Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 Equipment B-Fund $ 231,000 $ $ $ $ Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 231,000 1 $ $ $ $ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 S $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ $ $ $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 511.100.77.508.89.00.00 Equipment B-Fund $ 231,000 $ $ $ $ Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ 231,000 $ $ $ $ 39 Packet Pg. 87 2025 April Budget Amendment 2.4.b Budget Amendment for: April 15, 2025 Description: Budget Amendment Type Date of Discussion or Budget Approval? How is this amendment funded? What is the nature of the expenditure? Is the Expenditure Operating or Capital? Expenditure Increase (Decrease) There was an error in the equipment rental reports generated for the 2025-2026 budget. One of the charges was included three times. The below budget request reduces the facilities rental rate by $45,720 for budget year 2025. Finance Finance Correct Facilites ERR Rental Rate Previously Approved Budget By Council 2025-2026 Adopted Budget 100% Ending Fund Balance One -Time Operating Fund MULTIPLE FUNDS Name: Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 00 1.000.66.518.30.45. 10 Facilities Equipment Rental Rate $ 45,720 $ $ $ $ Total Expenditure Increase Decrease $ 45,720 $ i $ i $ i$ Revenue Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 511.000.348.00.500.00 Equipment Rental Revenue $ 45,720 $ $ $ $ Total Revenue Increase Decrease $ 45,720 $ 1 $ 1 $ $ Ending Fund Balance Increase (Decrease) Account Number Description 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 001.000.39.508.00.00.00 Ending Fund Balance $ 45,720 $ $ $ 511.000.77.508.89.00.00 Ending Fund Balance 45,720 Total Ending Fund Balance Increase Decrease $ $ $ $ $ C d E C d E Q w d 7 m •L sz Q try 04 O zs 40 Packet Pg. 88 2.4.c INCREASE OR FUND# SUBJECT DEPTTITLE REV /EXP DECREASE 2025AMOUNT General Fund 001 Mayor Exec Assistant Retiring Mayor's Office Expense Decrease (14,867.00) 001 Mayor Donation Mayor's Office Expense Decrease (7,397.00) 001 HR Assistant reduction in hours Human Resources Expense Decrease (22,227.00) 001 HR Director Salary Reduction due to PFML Human Resources Expense Decrease (7,700.00) 001 HR Director Additional Furlough Days Human Resources Expense Decrease (2,117.00) 001 HR Neogov Allocation Human Resources Expense Decrease (4,322.00) 001 Public Records Assistant (workforce reduction Administrative Services Expense Decrease (81,460.00) 001 Corporal Retirement- will be a Police Officer reduction Police Expense Decrease (133,983.00) 001 Corporal Resignation -will be a Police Officer reduction Police Expense Decrease (161,268.00) 001 Police Officer 1st Class Resignation Police Expense Decrease (157,816.00) 001 Police Officer 1st Class Resignation Police Expense Decrease (130,914.00) 001 Police Services Assistant (workforce reduction) Police Expense Decrease (86,171.00) 001 Police Services Assistant (workforce reduction) Police Expense Decrease (89,616.00) 001 Safety & Disaster Coordinator (vacant) Police Expense Decrease (125,434.00) 001 Cultural Arts Program Specialist Community Services Expense Decrease (40,000.00) 001 Planner (workforce reduction) Planning Expense Decrease (107,861.00) 001 Associate Planner (1003/001 two -month vacancy) Planning Expense Decrease (19,200.00) 001 Professional Services Planning Expense Decrease (18,000.00) 001 Director chargeto capital projectswhen applicable Parks Expense Decrease (10,000.00) 001 Lead Building Maintenance Operator (retirement leavevacant) Facilities Expense Decrease (112,999.00) 001 Facility Manager charge Capital Projects Facilities Expense Decrease (84,000.00) 001 Custodial workto the WWTP Facilities Expense Decrease (40,000.00) 001 Utility savings from energy conservation (8K initial input) Facilities Expense Decrease (32,000.00) 001 Commute Trip Reduction Elimination Engineering Expense Decrease (17,000.00) 001 Misc Reduction Engineering Expense Decrease (5,000.00) 001 Communications Engineering Expense Decrease (4,000.00) 001 Overtime Engineering Expense Decrease (3,000.00) 001 Uniforms Engineering Expense Decrease (1,000.00) 001 Small Equipment Engineering Expense Decrease (5,000.00) 001 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month Council Expense Decrease (1,792.00) 001 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month Mayors Office Expense Decrease (824.00) 001 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month Human Resouces Expense Decrease (2,811.00) 001 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month Courts Expense Decrease (4,489.00) 001 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month Finance Expense Decrease (3,323.00) 001 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month Clerks Office Expense Decrease (941.00) 001 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month Police Department Expense Decrease (61,073.00) 001 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month Community Services Expense Decrease (1,530.00) 001 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month Development Sery Expense Decrease (1,405.00) 001 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month Building Dept Expense Decrease (2,786.00) 001 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month Planning Expense Decrease (3,183.00) 001 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month Parks Expense Decrease (5,259.00) 001 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month Public Works Expense Decrease (3,181.00) 001 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month Engineering Expense Decrease (5,020.00) 001 Blake decision and corresponding reimbursements - Grant NA Revenue Increase (60,000.00) 001 Delay in red light cameras NA Revenue Increase (60,104.00) 001 City Adminstrator Community Services Expense Increase 10,000.00 (1,732,073.00) 001 Staff Cost Cut Allocation out of Non -Dept (2025 Budget) Non -Departmental Expense Decrease 1,500,000.00 Net change to Expenditures (232,073.00) Building Maintenance Fund 016 Facility Manager charge Capital Projects Facilities Expense Increase 84,000.00 Net change to Expenditures 84,000.00 Municipal Arts Fund 117 Cultural Arts Program Specialist Parks Expense Increase 40,000.00 Net change to Expenditures 40,000.00 Parks Capital Fund 332 Director charge to capital projects when applicable Parks Expense Increase 10,000.00 Net change to Expenditures 10,000.00 Water Fund 421 Custodial workto the WWiP Water Expense Increase 10,000.00 421 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month 421 Water Expense Decrease (891.00) Net change to Expenditures 9,109.00 Packet Pg. 89 Storm Fund 422 Custodialworkto the WWTP Storm Expense Increase 10,000.00 422 B-Fund Reduction @ $10kper month 422 Storm Expense Decrease (255.00) Net change to Expenditures 9,745.00 Sewer Fund 423 Custodial work to theWWTP Sewer Expense Increase 10,000.00 423 Custodial work to theWWTP Treatment Plant Expense Increase 10,000.00 423 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month 423 Sewer Expense Decrease (382.00) 423 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month Waste Water Expense Decrease (2,996.00) Net change to Expenditures 16,622.00 Technology Rental Fund 512 B-Fund Reduction @ $10k per month NA Revenue Decrease 1.00 512 B-Fund Reduction @ $10kper month NA Revenue Decrease 102,140.00 512 Web System Analyst (workforce reduction) Administrative Services - IT Expense Decrease (112,500.00) Net change to Expenditures (10,359.00) Packet Pg. 90 2.5 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 04/15/2025 Update on STEP Housing Permanent Code Language Staff Lead: Mike Clugston Department: Planning & Development Preparer: Heather Lakefish Background/History In 2021, Washington state passed House Bill 1220 (HB 1220), which amended the Growth Management Act (GMA) and municipal code requirements for housing. The law requires local governments like Edmonds to plan for and accommodate housing affordable to all income levels, which includes demonstrating sufficient land capacity for housing at all income levels to meet future housing needs, including permanent supportive housing and emergency housing. Local governments must also identify local barriers to production of affordable housing and take actions to remove those barriers. Furthermore, RCW 36.130.020 provides that local governments may not adopt, impose, or enforce requirements on an affordable housing development that are different than the requirements proposed on housing developments generally. (Note: Permanent supportive housing is considered a type of affordable housing.) Edmonds, like similar jurisdictions, must update its development codes to comply with HB 1220. To that end, the STEP housing code update was introduced to City Council on January 7, 2025, including draft interim code language. The initial draft was prepared to meet the requirements of HB 1220 using guidance from the Department of Commerce as the baseline (Attachment 4). Some refinements were made to the original draft by Council, who approved the interim ordinance on January 28 (Attachment 1). Council held the required public hearing on the interim STEP code on February 11 and no public comments were received. The Planning Board reviewed the draft interim ordinance on January 22 and discussed possible revisions for a permanent ordinance on February 12 and March 12. The Board discussed a draft recommendation to Council on March 26 and approved their final recommendation on April 9 (Attachment 2). The draft permanent code recommended by the Planning Board is included as Attachment 3. Staff Recommendation No action is required. Consider the information and ask any questions. Narrative HB 1220 requires changes to the City's development regulations to allow four specific housing types: emergency shelter, transitional housing, emergency housing, and permanent supportive housing (STEP housing): "Emergency housing" means temporary indoor accommodations for individuals or families who are homeless or at imminent risk of becoming homeless that is intended to address the basic health, food, clothing and personal hygiene needs of individuals or Packet Pg. 91 2.5 families. Emergency housing may or may not require occupants to enter into a lease or an occupancy agreement. "Transitional housing" means a project that provides housing and supportive services to homeless persons or families and that has as its purpose facilitating the movement of homeless persons and families into independent living, generally in less than two years. "Emergency shelter" means a facility that provides a temporary shelter for individuals or families who are currently homeless. Emergency shelter may not require occupants to enter into a lease or an occupancy agreement. Emergency shelter facilities may include day and warming centers that do not provide overnight accommodations. "Permanent supportive housing" is subsidized, leased housing with no limit on length of stay that prioritizes people who need comprehensive support services to retain tenancy and utilizes admissions practices designed to use lower barriers to entry than would be typical for other subsidized or unsubsidized rental housing, especially related to rental history, criminal history and personal behaviors. Permanent supportive housing is paired with on -site or off -site voluntary services designed to support a person living with a complex and disabling behavioral health or physical health condition who was experiencing homelessness or was at imminent risk of homelessness prior to moving into housing to retain their housing and be a successful tenant in a housing arrangement, improve the resident's health status, and connect the resident of the housing with community -based health care, treatment or employment services. Permanent supportive housing is subject to all of the rights and responsibilities defined in chapter 59.18 RCW. Next steps This development code update is exempt from a SEPA threshold determination consistent with RCW 43.21C.450. A public hearing on the proposed permanent STEP code is scheduled for April 21. Council adoption of the final ordinance is tentatively scheduled for May 6. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Interim STEP Housing Ordinance 4384 Attachment 3 - Draft PB recommended permanent STEP Housing Code Attachment 4 - STEP Housing Model Ordinance and User Guide Approved PB STEP Housing Recommendation Packet Pg. 92 2.5.a ORDINANCE NO.4384 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING INTERIM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR EMERGENCY SHELTERS, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, EMERGENCY HOUSING, AND PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING ("STEP" HOUSING). WHEREAS, the Washington state legislature passed House Bill 1220 (HB 1220) in 2021, which amended the Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements for housing; and WHEREAS, the law requires local governments like Edmonds to plan for and accommodate housing affordable to all income levels, which includes demonstrating sufficient land capacity for housing at all income levels to meet future housing needs, including permanent supportive housing and emergency housing; and WHEREAS, local governments must also identify local barriers to production of affordable housing and take actions to remove those barriers; and WHEREAS, housing targets were established for Edmonds as part of the recent periodic Comprehensive Plan update; and WHEREAS, Edmonds, as a high -cost community, must plan for 6,814 units of permanent supportive and low-income housing (0-80% of Area Median Income) over the next 20 years; and WHEREAS, these targets informed the development of the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies regarding supportive housing; and WHEREAS, this ordinance addresses the supportive housing goal and policies H-9.2, H- 9.5, H-9.6, and H-9.7 by allowing: • Indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing as permitted uses in all zones where hotels are currently allowed in Edmonds: Commercial Waterfront (CW) Community Business (BD), Downtown Business (BD), and General Commercial (CG); • Permanent supportive housing and transitional housing as permitted in all zones where residential dwelling units or hotels are allowed; and Packet Pg. 93 2.5.a WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 36.70A.390, this interim ordinance may be adopted without first holding a public hearing; and WHEREAS, the city council intends to follow this ordinance with a permanent set of regulations that implement HB 1220; and WHEREAS, the forthcoming permanent regulations and related public participation processes will give the city council an opportunity to consider additional housing options for tiny houses and shelters, temporary pallet shelters, tent encampments, and safe parking areas, which are not included in these interim regulations; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. A new chapter 17.125, entitled "Emergency Shelter, Transitional Housing, Emergency Housing, and Permanent Supportive Housing (STEP Housing)," is hereby added to read as shown in Exhibit A, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as if set forth in full. Section 2. Sunset. This interim ordinance shall remain in effect for 180 days from the effective date or until it is replaced with another ordinance adopting permanent regulations, after which point it shall have no further effect. Section 3. Public Hearing on Interim Standards. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.390 and RCW 35A.63.220, the city council shall hold a public hearing on this interim ordinance within sixty (60) days of its adoption. In this case, the hearing shall be held on January 28, 2025 unless the city council, by subsequently adopted resolution, provides for a different hearing date. Section 4. Adoption of Findings. The city council hereby adopts the "whereas" clauses, above, as the findings of fact justifying this action, as required by RCW 36.70A.390. Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance being an exercise of a power specifically delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum and shall take effect five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the title. 2 Packet Pg. 94 2.5.a APPROVED: MAYOR MIKE ROSEN ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: tay CLERK, SC PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: BY JEFF TARADA FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: January 23, 2025 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: January 28, 2025 PUBLISHED: January 31, 2025 EFFECTIVE DATE: February 5, 2025 ORDINANCE NO. 4384 Packet Pg. 95 2.5.a SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO.4384 of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the 281h day of January, 2025, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. 4384. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING INTERIM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR EMERGENCY SHELTERS, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, EMERGENCY HOUSING, AND PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING ("STEP" HOUSING). The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this 281h day of January, 2025. 6�7 CITY CLERK, S-e&TT PASSEY E Packet Pg. 96 2.5.a ECDC Chapter 17.125, STEP Housing Chapter 17.125 Page 1 of 2 Emergency Shelter, Transitional Housing, Emergency Housing, and Permanent Supportive Housing (STEP Housing) Sections: 17.125.000 Purpose. 17.125.010 Applicability. 17.125.020 Definitions. 17.125.030 Regulations. 17.125.000 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to: A. Ensure compliance with the State of Washington's Growth Management Act and other laws. B. Support the implementation of Edmonds's comprehensive plan. C. Encourage the development of emergency housing, emergency shelters, permanent supportive housing and transitional housing consistent with best practices for these development types to help address local housing needs. D. Direct STEP development to areas with existing amenities, like jobs, services and transit, to ensure occupants have access to opportunities. E. Protect the health, safety and welfare of the individuals served by these development types and the broader community. 17.125.010 Applicability. A. Where this chapter conflicts with any other, this chapter prevails. 17.125.020 Definitions. The following definitions apply to this chapter: A. "Emergency housing" means temporary indoor accommodations for individuals or families who are homeless or at imminent risk of becoming homeless that is intended to address the basic health, food, clothing and personal hygiene needs of individuals or families. Emergency housing may or may not require occupants to enter into a lease or an occupancy agreement. [RCW 36.70A.030(14)] Packet Pg. 97 2.5.a ECDC Chapter 17.125, STEP Housing Page 2 of 2 B. "Emergency shelter" means a facility that provides a temporary shelter for individuals or families who are currently homeless. Emergency shelter may not require occupants to enter into a lease or an occupancy agreement. Emergency shelter facilities may include day and warming centers that do not provide overnight accommodations. [RCW 36.70A.030(15)] C. "Permanent supportive housing" is subsidized, leased housing with no limit on length of stay that prioritizes people who need comprehensive support services to retain tenancy and utilizes admissions practices designed to use lower barriers to entry than would be typical for other subsidized or unsubsidized rental housing, especially related to rental history, criminal history and personal behaviors. Permanent supportive housing is paired with on - site or off -site voluntary services designed to support a person living with a complex and disabling behavioral health or physical health condition who was experiencing homelessness or was at imminent risk of homelessness prior to moving into housing to retain their housing and be a successful tenant in a housing arrangement, improve the resident's health status, and connect the resident of the housing with community -based health care, treatment or employment services. Permanent supportive housing is subject to all of the rights and responsibilities defined in chapter 59.18 RCW. [RCW 36.70A.030(31)] D. "Religious organization" means the federally protected practice of a recognized religious assembly, school or institution that owns or controls real property. [RCW 36.01.290(6)(c)] E. "Temporary", as applied in this chapter, applies to the person and how long they reside in STEP housing, not the structure or length of time for the land use. F. "Transitional housing" means a project that provides housing and supportive services to homeless persons or families and that has as its purpose facilitating the movement of homeless persons and families into independent living, generally in less than two years. [RCW 84.36.043(3)(c)] 17.125.030 Regulations. A. Permitted zones for STEP Housing. 1. Indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing are permitted in all zones in which hotels are allowed. 2. Permanent supportive housing and transitional housing are permitted in all zones where residential dwelling units or hotels are allowed. B. Expectations 1. Nuisances and criminal behavior are subject to enforcement to the full extent of the city's code and state law. 2. Evictions of residents for unsafe actions are not precluded by city codes. Packet Pg. 98 2.5.a Everett Daily Herald Affidavit of Publication State of Washington } County of Snohomish } ss Michael Gates being fast duly sworn, upon oath deposes and says: that he/she is the legal representative of the Everett Daily Herald a daily newspaper. The said newspaper is a legal newspaper by order of the superior court in the county in which it is published and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of the first publication of the Notice hereinafter referred to, published in the English language continually as a daily newspaper in Snohomish County, Washington and is and always has been printed in whole or part in the Everett Daily Herald and is of general circulation in said County, and is a legal newspaper, in accordance with the Chapter 99 of the Laws of 1921, as amended by Chapter 213, Laws of 1941, and approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of Snohomish County, State of Washington, by order dated June 16, 1941, and that the annexed is a true copy of EDH1008568 ORD SUMMARY 4383-5 as it was published in the regular and entire issue of said paper and not as a supplement form thereof for a period of 1 issue(s), such publication commencing on 01/31/2025 and ending on 01/31/2025 and that said newspaper was regularly distributed to its subscribers during all of said period. The amount the fee fear s h publication is $41.28. Subscribed and sworn before me on this 1 S•!- day of i Notary Public in and for the State of Washington. City of Edmonds - LEGAL ADS I t4101416 SCO TPASSEY RECEIVED F_? 112 RECD EDMONDS CITY CLERK Packet Pg. 99 2.5.a Classified Proof Q IDINANCE SUMMARY et the r o dm'S,"L'Ca13WCgton On the 28th Day of January, 2025, the Ctry Council of the City of Edmonds, passetl me Ibllowing Ordinances, the summary of said ordinancos eonsls8ng of titles are provided as follows. ORDINANCE No — AN AN ORDINANCE F T E Clr OF EDMONDS. WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE CITY CODE PROVISIONS RELATED TO THE MUNICIPAL COURT JUDGE AND JUDGES PRO TEM. ORDINAN E O. g384 AN ORDINANCE F THE NCITY OF EDMONDS. WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING INTERIM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR EMERGENCY SHELTERS, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, EMERGENCY HOUSING, AND PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING ('STEP- HOUS114% ORDINANCE NO A385 AN ORDINANC H t OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE CITY CODE PROVISIONS FOR COUNCIL MEETINGS AND COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS. DATED this 28th Day of January, 2025. CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Published: January 31, 2025. EDH1008558 Proofed by Pospical, Randie, 01/31/2025 08:44:14 am Page: 2 Packet Pg. 100 2.5.b ECDC Chapter 17.125, STEP Housing (Draft Permanent, Rev. 1) Page 1 of 3 Chapter 17.125 Emergency Shelter, Transitional Housing, Emergency Housing, and Permanent Supportive Housing (STEP Housing) Sections: 17.125.000 Purpose. 17.125.010 Applicability. 17.125.020 Definitions. 17.125.030 Regulations. 17.125.000 Purpose. The purpose of this chapter is to: A. Ensure compliance with the State of Washington's Growth Management Act and other laws B. Support the implementation of Edmonds's comprehensive plan. C. Encourage the development of emergency housing, emergency shelters, permanent supportive housing and transitional housing consistent with best practices for these development types to help address local housing needs. D. Direct STEP development to areas with existing amenities, like jobs, services and transit, to ensure occupants have access to opportunities. E. Protect the health, safety and welfare of the individuals served by these development types and the broader community. 17.125.010 Applicability. A. Where this chapter conflicts with any other, this chapter prevails. 17.125.020 Definitions. The following definitions apply to this chapter: A. "Emergency housing" means temporary indoor accommodations for individuals or families who are homeless or at imminent risk of becoming homeless that is intended to address the basic health, food, clothing and personal hygiene needs of individuals or families. Emergency housing may or may not require occupants to enter into a lease or an occupancy agreement. [RCW 36.70A.030(14)] Packet Pg. 101 2.5.b ECDC Chapter 17.125, STEP Housing (Draft Permanent, Rev. 1) Page 2 of 3 B. "Emergency shelter" means a facility that provides a temporary shelter for individuals or families who are currently homeless. Emergency shelter may not require occupants to enter into a lease or an occupancy agreement. Emergency shelter facilities may include day and warming centers that do not provide overnight accommodations. [RCW 36.70A.030(15)] C. "Permanent supportive housing" is subsidized, leased housing with no limit on length of stay that prioritizes people who need comprehensive support services to retain tenancy and utilizes admissions practices designed to use lower barriers to entry than would be typical for other subsidized or unsubsidized rental housing, especially related to rental history, criminal history and personal behaviors. Permanent supportive housing is paired with on - site or off -site voluntary services designed to support a person living with a complex and disabling behavioral health or physical health condition who was experiencing homelessness or was at imminent risk of homelessness prior to moving into housing to retain their housing and be a successful tenant in a housing arrangement, improve the resident's health status, and connect the resident of the housing with community -based health care, treatment or employment services. Permanent supportive housing is subject to all of the rights and responsibilities defined in chapter 59.18 RCW. [RCW 36.70A.030(31)] D. "Religious organization" means the federally protected practice of a recognized religious assembly, school or institution that owns or controls real property. [RCW 36.01.290(6)(c)] E. "Temporary", as applied in this chapter, applies to the person and how long they reside in STEP housing, not the structure or length of time for the land use. F. "Transitional housing" means a project that provides housing and supportive services to homeless persons or families and that has as its purpose facilitating the movement of homeless persons and families into independent living, generally in less than two years. [RCW 84.36.043(3)(c)] 17.125.030 Regulations. A. Permitted zones for STEP Housing. 1. Indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing are permitted in all zones in which hotels are allowed. a. Indoor emergency shelters operated by a religious organization or located in a local public facility are subject to the requirements of ECDC 17.105, not ECDC 17.125. 2. Permanent supportive housing and transitional housing are permitted in all zones where residential dwelling units or hotels are allowed. Packet Pg. 102 2.5.b ECDC Chapter 17.125, STEP Housing (Draft Permanent, Rev. 1) Page 3 of 3 Packet Pg. 103 MODEL ORDINANCE AND COMMUNICATIONS TOOLKIT FOR STEP Q v3.5 Packet Pg. 104 2.5.c Acknowledgments Washington State Department of Commerce Laura Hodgson, Housing Planning and Data Manager, Growth Management Services Unit (GMS), Local Government Division (LGD) Anne Fritzel, AICP, Housing Section Manager, GMS, LGD Kirsten Jewell, Housing Policy Manager, Housing Division (HD) Melodie Pazolt, Managing Director, Apple Health and Homes Permanent Supportive Housing Unit, HD Kathy Kinard, Managing Director, Homelessness Assistance Unit, HD Abt Global Lindsey Elam, AICP, Senior Analyst Jill Khadduri, PhD, Principal Associate Katie Kitchin, Director, State and Local Housing and Asset Building Candace Baker, Associate Nam Ha, Associate Analyst Georgia Rawhouser-Mylet, Associate Analyst Frances Walker, Research Assistant The Corporation for Supportive Housing Theresa Tanoury, MSW, Seattle -based Senior Program Manager Lori Gutierrez, MSW, Senior Program Manager Debbie Thiele, Western Region Managing Director Sharon Rapport, California State Policy Director Angela Brooks, FAICP, Illinois Program Director 1011 Plum St. SE P.O. Box 42525 Olympia, WA 98504-2525 www.commerce.wa.gov For people with disabilities, this report is available on request in other formats. To submit a request, please call 360-725-4000 (TTY 360-586-0772). STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 Advisory Committee: Alliance for Housing Affordability at Housing Authority of Snohomish County Association of Washington Cities (AWC) City of Bellingham City of Port Townsend City of Spokane City of Vancouver City of Wenatchee Dee Caputo, FAICP, Washington State Department of Commerce, Growth Management Services (Retired) Downtown Emergency Services Center (DESC) Futurewise GS Consulting King County, Health through Housing Mercy Housing Northwest Washington State Association of Counties (WSAC) Local jurisdictions and organizations that participated in the interviews that informed this report: City of Federal Way City of Kenmore City of Kent City of Langley City of Olympia City of Spokane City of Vancouver City of Wenatchee GS Consulting King County Lewis County Plymouth Affordable Housing Development Snohomish County Washington State Department of Health c .y 0 x a w Cn 0 a� 0_ Packet Pg. 105 2.5.c Table of Contents Chapter1: Introduction........................................................................................................................................................................................4 Background............................................................................................................ Emerging Best Practices....................................................................................... 5 6 Chapter2: Background........................................................................................................................................................................................7 2021 Updates to the Growth Management Act......................................................................................................................................................................7 RelevantState and Federal Laws............................................................................................................................................................................................8 State of the Practice in Washi .............................................................................................................10 Chapter3: Planning for STEP 101......................................................................................................................................................................13 STEP Definitions ..................................... STEP Financing and Development Process ................ Supporting STEP Projects and Operations .................. 13 15 17 Chapter4: Comprehensive Planning for STEP....................................................................................................................................................18 Chapter5: Permitting STEP...............................................................................................................................................................................19 Chapter6: Model Ordinance...............................................................................................................................................................................22 Chapter7: Accommodating Enough STEP..........................................................................................................................................................31 Demonstrating Sufficient Land Capacity 31 ReducingDevelopment Barriers............................................................................................................................................................................................32 Addressing Potential Community Concerns........................................................................................................................................................................35 Chapter8: Adoption and Implementation...........................................................................................................................................................39 Appendix...........................................................................................................................................................................................................40 Methodology...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................40 a� c 0 x a w Cn 0 m M M Q. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 3 Packet Pg. 106 2.5.c Chapter 1: Introduction The Washington State Department of Commerce created the STEP User Guide and Best Practices Report to assist planning staff, elected and appointed officials, and other representatives of Washington's jurisdictions as they develop local ordinances and regulations pertaining to the siting and development of Emergency shelter, Transitional housing, Emergency housing and Permanent supportive housing (STEP) Definitions for these types of housing and shelter are in the Growth Management Act and other statutes. Emergency shelter means a facility that provides a temporary' shelter for individuals or families who are currently homeless. Emergency shelter may not require occupants to enter into a lease or an occupancy agreement. Emergency shelter facilities may include day and warming centers that do not provide overnight accommodations. RCW 36.70A.030(15) Transitional housing means a project that provides housing and supportive services to homeless persons or families for up to two years' and that has as its purpose facilitating the movement of homeless persons and families into independent living. RCW 84.36.043(3)(c) Emergency housing is temporary indoor accommodations for individuals or families who are homeless or at imminent risk of becoming homeless and is intended to address basic health, food, clothing, and personal hygiene needs of individuals or families. Emergency housing may or may not require occupants to enter into a lease or an occupancy agreement.3 RCW 36.70A.030(14) • Permanent supportive housing is subsidized, leased housing with no limit on length of stay that prioritizes people who need comprehensive support services to retain tenancy. It utilizes admissions practices designed to use lower barriers to The HUB on Third in Walla Walla (co -located emergency shelter, health care and childcare services), Source: Blue Mountain Action Council (BMAC) The PAD House in Whatcom County (emergency housing), Source: Northwest Youth Services Gonzaga Family Haven in Spokane (permanent supportive housing), Source: Catholic Charities of Eastern Washington 1 For STEP, temporary applies to the person and how long they reside there, not the structure or length of time for the land use. However, when planning for STEP, it is best for communities not to limit lengths of stay because it could be inconsistent with a project's funding requirements. 2 Although transitional housing is designed to move people into permanent housing in less than two years, some transitional housing programs do not limit the stay to two years. 3 Any STEP project that requires a lease or occupancy agreement is subject to all of the rights and responsibilities defined in chapter 59.18 RCW (Landlord Tenant Law). c 3 0 x a w Cn c 0 m co Q STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 4 Packet Pg. 107 2.5.c entry than typical for other subsidized or unsubsldlzed rental housing, especially related to rental history, criminal history, and personal behaviors. Permanent supportive housing is paired with on -site or off -site voluntary services designed to support a person living with a complex and disabling behavioral health or physical health condition who was experiencing homelessness or was at imminent risk of homelessness prior to moving into housing to retain their housing and be a successful tenant in a housing arrangement, improve the resident's health status, and connect the resident of the housing with community -based health care, treatment, or employment services. RCW 36.70A.030(31) Background Washington experienced a significant 19.9% increase in homelessness from 2007 to 2023 a one of the main reasons for this is the state's lack of affordable housing, resulting in housing prices rising faster than the lowest incomes .5, 6 To address this crisis, state and local governments must encourage a variety of shelter and housing options, including STEP, to meet the unique needs of individuals, families, unaccompanied youth, seniors, veterans, people with disabilities and other subpopulations who are at the greatest risk of losing their housing in these market conditions. Fully planning local governments are required to identify sufficient land capacity for future housing needs of all economic segments and must address barriers such as zoning and other rules that affect housing production (RCW 36.70A.070(2)). Cities are also required to allow STEP housing in certain zones (RCW 35.21.683 and RCW 35A.21.430). This report provides an overview of information local governments may need to plan for their local STEP housing needs, including: • Emerging best practices for planning for STEP, • Relevant state and federal laws for regulating STEP, • Information on STEP housing types, development processes, planning steps, and permitting processes for STEP, • A model ordinance for jurisdictions to use in developing their local STEP regulations, • Guidance for local governments as they develop their regulations for STEP, and • Strategies local governments can employ to encourage STEP development. Commerce contracted with Abt Global and the Corporation for Supportive Housing to create this report that localities can use throughout Washington. To ensure the effectiveness of these efforts, an advisory committee consisting of local government representatives, developers and non-profit organizations provided guidance and feedback. The development of the report's contents also considered public input and emerging best practices from communities in Washington and other parts of the country. 4 de Sousa, et al. The Annual Homeless Assessment (AHAR) Report. 2023. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. www.huduser.gov/portal/datasets/ahar.html 5 TVW. Governor's Results Washington Initiative. Homelessness and Housing Crisis, March 2024. https://tvw.org/video/governors-results-washington-initiative- 2024031242/?eventlD=2024031242 6 Washington State Department of Commerce. Homelessness in Washington. March 2024. https://app.leg.wa.gov/ReportsToTheLegislature/Home/GetPDF?fileName=CommerceReports2023_H D_Homelessness_in_Washington_24def55e-7087-43fc-adOc- 7894a56106ab.pdf STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 5 Packet Pg. 108 2.5.c Emerging Best Practices Communities can use the following strategies to accommodate local housing needs, prevent perpetuating discriminatory practices that make it difficult to site and develop STEP, encourage affordable housing production, and support STEP developers, residents and staff. Additionally, these strategies can benefit some of Washington's most vulnerable populations, increase housing stability, promote community integration and c contribute to larger initiatives to tackle homelessness and housing insecurity in the state. _ a w • Allow STEP developments outright as a permitted use in designated zones c n r_ 0 • Encourage STEP development in locations close to healthcare services, transportation, jobs and other amenities to promote economic mobility cc and access to services a • Reduce and clarify requirements to streamline permitting steps and reduce barriers for STEP development • Provide land use and financial incentives to encourage more STEP production • Expedite permitting processes for STEP projects, thereby providing quicker, more predictable timelines that help prevent cost increases caused by project delays • Encourage developers to have pre -development application meetings with local planning staff to ensure they are aware of all the local regulations and processes that apply to a project • Understand the development process and funding requirements for STEP • Partner with local service providers to create STEP regulations that are responsive to their needs and remove barriers to STEP development • Facilitate communication between developers, providers and community members • Use consistent definitions for STEP • Partner with neighboring jurisdictions to create consistent regulations for STEP STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 6 Packet Pg. 109 2.5.c Chapter 2: Background The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires cities and counties to develop comprehensive plans and development regulations for their communities. This chapter provides an overview of recent changes to the GMA for STEP, relevant state and federal laws for STEP, and the state of the practice for regulating STEP in Washington as of 2024. 2021 Updates to the Growth Management Act In 2021, Washington state passed House Bill 1220 (HB 1220), which amended the Growth Management Act (GMA) and municipal code requirements (RCW 36.70A.070(2). and RCW 35A.21.430 and RCW 35.21.683, respectively).' The law requires fully planning local governments$ to plan for and accommodate housing affordable to all income levels, which includes demonstrating sufficient land capacity for housing at all income levels to meet n .olm 0 2024 DW Dec«nber 31- M 2025 Due December 31» 2026Due Juno 3o" M 2027 Dua June 30 * Started counties ate perbnity planning ur4w the Growth Manapen»nt Act future housing needs, including permanent supportive housing and emergency housing.' Local governments must also identify local barriers to production of affordable housing and take actions to remove those barriers. They must complete these plans and associated updates to zoning and development regulations based on the periodic update schedule identified by the state legislature (see above right). In addition, municipal code changes in 2021 required changes to specific zoning and development regulations in cities for four different housing types: emergency shelter, transitional housing, emergency housing and permanent supportive housing (STEP). These updates were required by September 2021.10 However, some cities were unable to address the requirement to permit STEP by the required deadline and others were waiting for their comprehensive plan periodic update to complete the work. Some lacked the necessary resources to implement the state laws, some were ' For more information on the Growth Management Act and other relevant state and federal laws pertaining to STEP, see the STEP State of the Practice Report. 8 Fully planning communities are all those jurisdictions in dark blue, light blue and green on the GMS Regional Variations map. 9 Emergency shelters are grouped with emergency housing needs in Commerce's projected housing needs and land capacity guidance. 10 Defer to local jurisdictions' ordinances to determine if your community has updated its regulations for STEP. a� c .y 0 x (L w rn 0 a) CL STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 Packet Pg. 110 2.5.c waiting for Commerce to project housing needs for each county, and some implemented policies that created additional barriers to increasing in Washington. In addition to the requirements about where STEP must be allowed in cities, state law was updated to state that any local restrictions on spacing, occupancy and intensity of use for these developments must be linked specifically to public health and safety reasons (e.g., reference emergency response times, building code, etc.) in their ordinance's findings section. Any such requirements on occupancy, spacing and intensity of use may not prevent the siting of a sufficient number of permanent supportive housing, transitional housing, indoor emergency housing, or indoor emergency shelters necessary to accommodate each city's projected need for such housing and shelter under RCW 36.70A.070(2)(a)(ii). Additional state laws and guidance for occupancy, spacing and intensity are as follows. Occupancy: Cities and counties may not regulate or limit the number of unrelated persons who may occupy a dwelling unit except as provided for in state law for short-term rentals or by occupant load per square foot, RCW 35.21.682, RCW 35A.21.314 and RCW 36.01.227. Spacing: Spacing can refer to the distance between similar uses or the proximity to services (e.g., transportation). Any spacing requirements should not exceed the spacing required by RCWs 9.94A.030, 9.94A.703 and 9.94A.8445, which create community protection zones of 880 feet to prevent sex offenders from living near schools. Intensity: With respect to STEP, intensity can refer to the density of people, transportation, and/or services needed by the participants who live in a single location or facility. Relevant State and Federal Laws In addition to the Growth Management Act, other state and federal laws apply to STEP; Table 1 provides law summaries and links. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 a� c .y 0 x a w Cn 0 a� 0 M 0_ a Packet Pg. 111 2.5.c Table 1 - STEP Types and Applicable Laws STEP Types and Applicable Laws Emergency Transitional Emergency Permanent Shelters Housing Housing Supportive Housing housing affordable to all income levels. a RCW 35.21.683 and RCW 35A.21.430 requires cities to not prohibit indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing in Y Y Y LU Y ~ rn zones where hotels are allowed. Cities must allow permanent supportive and transitional housing in zones where residential = dwelling units or hotels are allowed. These regulations may limit occupancy, spacing and intensity of use requirements to protect O public health and safety so long as such limits allow the siting of a sufficient number of units/beds to accommodate each city's a; projected housing needs. M a RCW 35.21.689 and RCW 35A.21.305 require cities to allow permanent supportive housing in areas where multifamily housing is Y permitted. Y* Y* d Y RCW 36.130.020 prohibits any local government from having requirements on an affordable housing development that are different from those imposed on housing developments generally. Y Y (9 L L Y (n RCW 35.21.682. RCW 35A.21.314 and RCW 36.01.227 prohibit any local government from having requirements related to unrelated Y persons that may occupy a unit. Y RCW 36.70A.545 requires fully planning cities and counties to allow increased density bonuses for any affordable housing on real Y* Y* property owned or controlled by a religious organization. W RCW 35.21.915, RCW 35A.21.360. and RCW 36.01.290 prohibit any local government from regulatory limits on encampments, safe Y Y M parking, overnight shelters, and temporary small houses on property owned or controlled by a religious organization. c RCW 36.70A.540 gives authority to local governments to offer incentives in exchange for providing development for low-income Y* Y* Y housing units. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c) requires fully planning local governments to document how they have sufficient land use capacity for all Y** Y Y future housing needs by income level. RCW 36.70A.210(3)(e) requires fully planning counties to have countywide planning policies that consider the need for housing for Y Y Y Y all economic segments and the parameters for its distribution. RCW 9.94A.030(6) regulates where level two and three sex offenders may not live. RCW 36.70A.390 states public hearing requirements for moratoria and interim zoning control are not applicable to regulations that prohibit building permit applications for transitional housing or permanent supportive housing in any zones in which residential dwellings or hotels are allowed or prohibit indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing in any zones in which hotels are allowed. Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Y Washington Law Against Discrimination prohibits requirements imposed on STEP that violate civil rights protections. Y Y Y Y Washington State Residential -Landlord Tenant Act includes laws landlords must follow. Y* Y* Y Y Washington State Environmental Policy Act requires all branches of government in the state to examine their laws' environmental Y Y Y impacts. At the local level, this requires an assessment of comprehensive plans, development regulations, and project permits unless specifically exempted by the act. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 9 Packet Pg. 112 Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilities and provides enforceable standards to address discrimination. Fair Housing Act prohibits "neutral" policy that has a disproportionately adverse effect on a protected class. Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act prevents the implementation of land use regulations that impose a substantial burden on the religious exercise of a person. Y Y Y *Only applicable when the housing has a rental agreement, occupancy agreement or lease. A "rental agreement," "occupancy agreement" or "lease" establishes or modifies the terms, conditions, rules, regulations and other provisions concerning the use and occupancy of a dwelling unit. **Emergency shelters are grouped with emergency housing needs in Commerce's projected housing needs. State of the Practice in Washington Commerce spoke with a number of communities to learn how they developed and regulated STEP. This section reflects these findings. In Washington, many communities use local land use policies to influence the development of STEP. It is appropriate for local governments to apply land use and development regulations to these housing types, as with all other developments, by law. While some recently adopted STEP regulations are consistent with state and federal laws and encourage the production of STEP to meet their local housing needs, some existing local regulations and processes conflict with state and federal laws. In general, local regulations in Washington state could align better with state requirements, provide more flexibility and greater opportunities for establishing STEP, and remove barriers to this affordable housing need." The following are examples of observed regulatory and process barriers for STEP development in the state of Washington: Permit processes: Generally, local authorities permit STEP development in areas that already have access to services such as transit, which is a best practice. However, some jurisdictions still require a conditional use permit for all STEP, which is inconsistent with state laws for permanent supportive housing and STEP housing with leases (RCW 36.130.020), but also creates a barrier to siting any STEP project. Under this permitting process, these projects must meet certain criteria and go through a special approval process that can delay the project's timeline and increase the likelihood that a hearing examiner or the city council will not approve the project following public opposition. These additional conditions and delays result in significant costs to the project sponsors and public funders and may discourage a STEP developer from pursuing projects in their jurisdiction. • Occupancy, spacing and intensity requirements: Local regulations for STEP often include rules related to occupancy, spacing, intensity or density, parking, environmental standards and other development and operational requirements that could create barriers for STEP production >> All fully planning local governments are directed by RCW 36.70A.070(2)(d) to "make adequate provisions for existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community," STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 Packet Pg. 113 2.5.c Typical restrictions on the occupancy, spacing and intensity of use of STEP in local jurisdictions include limits on the number of clients a pro�ec can serve, the number of staff and the distance between STEP projects. Most jurisdictions also do not have special provisions regarding density bonuses for STEP sponsored by religious organizations (RCW 36.70A.545). Some communities have distance restrictions that prohibit the construction of emergency shelters or emergency housing within one-half mile of another existing or proposed shelter or emergency housing y projects. Variations of this requirement are common in Washington's jurisdictions. c In most cases, jurisdictions have not shown in their ordinances' findings how their spacing, occupancy and intensity of use regulations are linked to public health and safety (e.g., referencing local building and fire code), therefore they are not in compliance with state laws that require this demonstration and possibly in violation of federal fair housing laws. Their spacing requirements are also not consistent with the Department of Commerce's recommendations that any spacing requirements should not exceed the spacing already required by RCWs 9.94A.0301 9.94A.703 and 9.94A.8445, which create community protection zones of 880 feet to prevent sex offenders from living near schools. Jurisdictions with spacing and intensity requirements have also not identified how they will have sufficient capacity for their future housing needs at each income level in their 20-year comprehensive plans and development regulations, which is inconsistent with state law requiring this demonstration if communities adopt these types of regulations.12 A combination of density and spacing requirements for STEP can easily result in a community not having enough sites available with the capacity to meet local housing need allocations, impacting the jurisdiction's ability to make adequate provision for this type of housing and adhere to state law. Furthermore, RCW 36.70A.070(2)(d)(ii) states that jurisdictions must assess barriers, such as development regulations, gaps in local funding and other limitations, as part of documenting programs and actions needed to achieve housing availability in their comprehensive plans. Barrier assessment should consider factors that may negatively affect production for each type of housing allowed in the jurisdiction.13 Parking minimums: STEP projects are commonly required to meet similar parking minimums as other housing, mixed -use or other development types. Because STEP residents or clients may be less likely to own a car, especially in urban environments near transit, these requirements may limit or create barriers for STEP development. In some Washington communities, the planning director and/or city engineer determines STEP projects' parking requirements or approves a parking study for required parking; this process may support flexibility and reduce barriers for STEP projects.14 Other communities have parking minimums specific to STEP (e.g., one parking space for every two employees and every four beds). 12 RCW 35.21.683 and RCW 35A.21.430 note these restrictions shall not prevent the siting of a sufficient number of permanent supportive housing, transitional housing, indoor emergency housing, or indoor emergency shelters necessary to accommodate each [code] city's projected need for such housing and shelter. Additionally, fully planning cities and counties are required with their periodic update to show sufficient land capacity for housing needs at all income levels. (RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c)) 13 Strategies that jurisdictions can consider implementing to help STEP overcome development barriers are discussed staring on page 32. 14 Planning director and/or city engineer approval may also create ambiguity if there are not clear standards or examples that developers can reference. a w Cn c 0 a� w 0 M a M STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 11 Packet Pg. 114 2.5.c Operations plans: Many communities also require STEP or certain STEP types, such as emergency shelters or emergency housing, to submi operations plans or agreements before they can be permitted. The required information for operations plans varies by jurisdiction. However, common documentation requirements include: a, c • Contact information for key staff and their roles and responsibilities c • A facility management plan, including security policies and an emergency management plan = • Site and facility maintenance policies LU • Occupancy policies N c • A staffing plan C a� • A community engagement plan co • Documentation of record -keeping processes • A description of transportation either provided or accessible to residents These requirements can create barriers to STEP production and are inconsistent with state law generally when required of permanent supportive housing, as well as transitional and emergency housing with leases, unless they are required of other housing generally because the state considers these affordable housing (RCW 36.130.020). To encourage STEP, local developers said jurisdictions can be more flexible regarding their specific requirements, such as reducing or waiving parking minimums when projects anticipate a high ratio of tenants who use public transportation or have alternate modes of transportation and do not need onsite parking. Jurisdictions can also help by only requesting STEP projects provide operations plans when there is sufficient local government capacity and expertise to review the plans and only asking for necessary information that can be important for local government to have on file (e.g., emergency contact number and a safety plan). If a local government requires any of these additional plans or information, Commerce recommends that local governments require only basic information and that they provide examples of the plans for local developers to reference and understand what is required. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 12 Packet Pg. 115 2.5.c Chapter 3: Planning for STEP 101 Jurisdictions should use Washington state's definitions for STEP to ensure consistency across the state and encourage STEP development by making definitions and policies more straightforward for developers. When planning for STEP, it is also helpful to consider the various processes y involved in planning, siting, funding, permitting, building, licensing and operating STEP projects. c x a STEP Definitions Cn Washington state uses specific terms and definitions for STEP that are used throughout this report; see Chapter 1: Introduction. For the purposes of c the state's model ordinance and this report, STEP refers to developments that meet the Washington State Residential Building Code based on the 0 2021 International Residential Code, which includes rules for a permanent foundation, safe plumbing and electrical practices, insulation, weather a tightness, energy efficiency and safety (smoke alarms and egress). M With regard to emergency housing and emergency shelter, RCW 35.21.683 and RCW 35A.21.430 state that jurisdictions must not prohibit indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing in all zones in which hotels are allowed. "Indoor," as used in the definition of indoor emergency housing (RCW 36.70A.030), and "indoor" with respect to indoor emergency housing and indoor emergency shelter in RCW 35.21.683 and RCW 35A.21.430, is interpreted in this report and the state's model ordinance as a subset of all of the possible building forms in which shelter can be provided. Indoor implies buildings that are affixed to the ground and have indoor plumbing, and therefore would exclude forms on wheels (e.g., recreational vehicles) or that lack internal sanitation and/or cooking facilities, such as tiny shelters or pallet shelters.15 Non-standard types: Local jurisdictions have observed many organizations proposing non -building code compliant structures or structures that may not have indoor plumbing, such as temporary pallet shelters, tent encampments and safe parking areas. This sometimes presents challenges for jurisdictions because their local codes may limit these types of structures. An additional challenge observed is that there are no adopted statewide standards for safe human habitation of these structures, but building codes for some temporary emergency shelters should be available by July 2026.16 Tiny homes and park model homes" may also face barriers because their size and dimensions may not conform to standard building codes, or local governments may limit where these homes are allowed as primary dwellings. Non-standard STEP types cannot be counted towards a jurisdiction's local housing need allocations, because they are more like sanctioned encampments than emergency shelters. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Washington State Department of Commerce's Homeless Assistance Unit currently do not fund these projects as "emergency shelters." Furthermore, depending on the shelter and 15 Therefore, cities are not required to allow non -building code compliant structures as STEP, but the Department of Commerce encourages local governments to allow non-standard types of STEP as an alternative to sleeping outside to provide safer places for people experiencing homelessness. 16 The Washington Legislature adopted Senate Bill 5553 in 2023, which directs the state building code council to adopt standards for temporary emergency shelters and make them available for local adoption. Adopting these state building code standards may assist local governments with their building code questions for unique shelter accommodations. 17 Park model homes are recreational vehicles intended for permanent or semi -permanent installation. They are used as a primary residence (RCW 59.20.030). STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 13 Packet Pg. 116 2.5.c services offered, occupants may still be considered "unsheltered" under federal definitions. For example, HUD considers someone living in their car as experiencing unsheltered homelessness.'$ However, the Department of Commerce encourages local governments to allow non-standard types of STEP as an alternative to sleeping outside to provide safer places for people experiencing homelessness. These non-standard housing types could include, for example, safe parking and other non-standard projects that offer occupants sanitation services, connections to community services and support in finding permanent housing.19 Local governments may consider making land available for non-traditional projects, taking into consideration other potential uses of public land.20 While there are currently no state or federal standards for non-standard shelter types, some existing federal, state and local laws apply to this issue, for example: • In 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the City of Boise's petition regarding its Camping and Disorderly Conduct Ordinances, which upheld the law that people experiencing homelessness cannot be punished for sleeping outside on public property if adequate alternatives are not provided. The ruling in Martin v. Boise encouraged local governments to plan for alternatives to homelessness. However, on June 28, 2024, in the case of Grant Pass v. Johnson, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that jurisdictions could criminalize camping and sleeping in public, overturning the Grant Pass case's previous decision and the Martin v. Boise ruling.21 • RCW 36.70A.540 states that local governments may use their development regulations and other means to expand opportunities for low- income housing units, including tiny home communities. • Some local jurisdictions have implemented regulations for these non-standard housing types. Thurston County recently finalized its interim homeless encampment facility regulations, and the City of Bellingham has regulated temporary shelters, including encampments, safe parking areas and tiny house shelters, since 2018. The City of Port Townsend created new regulations to support STEP, including wooden tent villages. Before adopting these code changes, Community Build, a nonprofit, built "wooden tents" (one -room structures serving as effective shelters that do not meet the legal definition of a dwelling unit) in Port Townsend. Permitting these tent encampments kept people sheltered and safer than the alternatives (e.g., sleeping outside). Port Townsend staff reported fewer conflicts than expected between wooden tent encampments and neighboring uses. However, the project did face several challenges. It needed to be approved through a temporary conditional use process, 18 HUD defines unsheltered homelessness as an individual or family with a primary nighttime residence that is a public or private place not designed for or ordinarily used as a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings, including a car, park, abandoned building, bus or train station, airport or camping ground. For more information, see Unsheltered Homelessness on the HUD Exchanoe. 19 Currently, there are no state or federal guidelines in place for the use of safe parking areas as permitted emergency shelter options. This absence leaves jurisdictions to determine their own policies for integrating safe parking into STEP planning. At least ten jurisdictions in Washington have established safe parking programs; for more information, see the National Vehicle Residency Collective's National Parking Program List. 20 The Portland State University's Homelessness Research & Action Collaborative for the Joint Office of Homeless Services found that tiny home villages only cost less to develop when land is free, compared to more traditional forms of STEP (motels and congregate shelter). It also found that operating costs for villages vary because of their staffing needs. Operating expenses for tiny home villages are higher than congregate shelters. However, this study found that alternative shelter types, like these villages, are more successful in transitioning people out of homelessness and meeting their needs than congregate shelters. The most appropriate shelter type for a community varies and can be based on a number of factors (e.g., client needs and preferences, land suitability, properties available for acquisition, and a project's lifespan). 21 For information on combating the criminalization of homelessness, see the Washington Low Income Housing Alliance's toolkit. co c .y 3 O 2 a w c O m co M a STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 14 Packet Pg. 117 2.5.c which required the project's managing agencies to extend the permit or move to a new location every six months. The city reported this was costly and inefficient. Housing vs. facilities: Some residential types are sometimes confused with STEP, particularly permanent supportive housing. Residents residing in permanent supportive housing are subject to all the rights and responsibilities defined in chapter 59.18 RCW, also known as the Washington State Residential Landlord -Tenant Act. A person residing in permanent supportive housing has full rights of tenancy through a lease with their landlord, x° but this is not the case in licensed residential facilities, such as licensed adult family homes, group living homes for persons with intellectual or w developmental disabilities, or assisted living facilities for seniors where residents must pay towards the cost of their care.22 c~n c 0 Disaster Relief / Recovery Shelter: While STEP may be used in the event of a disaster (e.g., floods, wildfires, landslides, and earthquakes) to meet immediate needs, disaster relief and recovery shelters established by FEMA, local governments or others in response to a disaster (before or after) a is not considered STEP. Disaster relief/recovery shelters have different funding sources, managers, and operators and can trigger different regulations and local processes. Local governments can consult their emergency preparedness plans and FEMA's Planning Considerations: Disaster Housing for more information on disaster shelter and housing planning. fn STEP Financing and Development Process STEP projects often face significant financial barriers and have complicated funding sources, each with its own requirements. When considering development regulations, jurisdictions should take these funding sources and their requirements into consideration and try to avoid creating potentially duplicative or overly burdensome standards that may overlap with the other requirements projects need to meet to obtain funding and be viable.23 Some common funding sources for STEP include: • Washington State's Apple Health and Homes Initiative, Housing Trust Fund and Consolidated Homeless Grant • Support from county and local governments, financial institutions and philanthropic organizations (e.g., tax -increment financing, grants, loans, reduced impact fees and system development charge waivers, free or reduced price land, cash and materials donations) • Low -Income Housing Tax Credits, Historic Tax Credits and New Markets Tax Credits • The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (e.g., Home Investment Partnership Program and Community Development Block Grants) and Rental income, Housing Choice Vouchers and Medicaid (for leased units)24, 25 22 For more information on STEP and other housing types, seethe Department of Commerce's STEP Housing Definitions Factsheet. 21 Small cities and counties who need assistance with STEP planning or regulations can reach out to the Department of Commerce or their Regional Planner as a resource. 24 The Urban Institute, in partnership with the National Housing Conference, developed an interactive tool that helps illustrate how affordable housing developments "pencil out" and discusses how these types of projects typically need some form of government support. 21 For more information on funding sources, see the Department of Commerce's STEP State of the Practice Report and STEP Operations Guide. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 15 Packet Pg. 118 STEP project sponsor or another partner identifies STEP project partners create a detailed development plan STEP project partners make any necessary revisions to community needs (e.g., reviewing existing community plans, studies and date and engaging (e.g., architectural drawings, engineering plans, and other the development plan after it is reviewed by local relevant documentation) and apply for a building permit. government departments, such as building, zoning and the local Continuum of Care lead agency and fire safety, to ensure compliance with all relevant public housing authority) and develops a design concept to help address those needs. regulations to receive permit approval. STEP project sponsor or another partner Identifies additional key partners (e.g., architect, attorney, development consultant, funders, tax credit syndicator if using Low Income Housing Tax Credits, general contractor and management company) and begins securing financial com mit mec" tw Maie" COO'MWAion STEP project partners identify an appropriate Location (e.g., where the project complies with zoning code, development regulations and funding requirements) and obtain site control. A project's funding can drive its site selection; for example, some funders' scoring criteria look at neighborhood demographics, amenities, transit options and other location characteristics. STEP project partners secure funding commitments. Developing and operating STEP projects requires some form of financial assistance from the public sector, financial institutions, private investors or non-profit organizations. Often, a combination of these funding sources is needed, each with its own unique requirements. STEP project partners conduct a site assessment, financial feasibility analysis and other predevelopment activities, like community engagement. In some jurisdictions, neighborhood responses to affordable housing can drive local siting and permitting decisions. Some developers may need to conduct early public outreach and engagement to foster community support for their project. •■I F!N STEP project obtains a certificate of occupancy and opens for operation. In Washington state, most STEP accomodations do not have licensing and operating requirements under state law. However, once STEP opens, operation involves numerous activities, such as developing operating procedures and policies, ordering furniture and supplies, hiring and training staff, marketing services, planning for move -ins, property management, service delivery and responding to fundersllenders reporting requirements. 2.5.c Supporting STEP Projects and Operations Consistent with state funding guidelines for a variety of funding sources,26 Commerce recommends that local governments support low -barrier projects consistent with the "Housing First" model. Low -barrier projects require minimal eligibility requirements and documentation.21 Households experiencing homelessness are not screened out based on the following criteria: having little or no income, poor credit or financial history, poor or lack of rental history, involvement with the criminal justice system, active or history of substance use, disability -related services support, lacking ID or proof of US residency or behaviors perceived as indicating a lack of "housing readiness," including resistance to receiving services. Low -barrier projects have realistic and clear expectations. Rules and policies are narrowly focused on maintaining a safe environment and avoiding exiting people back into homelessness. Low -barrier projects do not have work or service requirements. If the project requires households to pay a share of rent, they allow reasonable flexibility in payment. Emergency shelters may not require occupants to enter into a lease or an occupancy agreement. Households in low -barrier programs are not terminated because they will not participate in supportive service programs. In addition, alcohol and/or substance use in and of itself is not considered a reason for termination. If a household is terminated from a low -barrier project due to violating rules focused on maintaining a safe environment, there must be a process in place for the household to be considered for re -enrollment if the household demonstrates unsafe behavior is unlikely to re -occur (i.e., engaged in new treatment plan, mental health services, medical care, etc.). Housing First is a philosophy and approach to housing and services that is often associated with permanent supportive housing, but it is applicable to all STEP types. Housing First revolves around several core tenets including entry that is not conditioned on sobriety, previous service participation, credit or evictions; housing is provided as quickly as possible; and the participant has a choice in housing selection within the bounds of available options. Housing First provides voluntary, tenant -driven supportive services to residents to help them comply with lease terms and to address behaviors that impact housing stability.28 Housing First is a trauma -informed practice that recognizes that an individual's life events or circumstances that they experience as physically or emotionally harmful have lasting adverse effects on that individual, mentally, physically, socially or emotionally.29 The design and operations of STEP projects should be trauma -informed, which includes an emphasis on safety in the physical environment, promoting self -efficacy and control over one's belongings and daily activities, and ongoing education of staff on trauma -related behaviors and trauma -informed practices. 26 For example, according to Guidelines for the Consolidated Homeless Grant (CHG). Updated March 2024, "By July 1, 2025, no less than 80% of a county's CHG funded projects (programs and facilities) must be low barrier." 27 The description of low -barrier projects in this paragraph come from Commerce's Guidelines for the Consolidated Homeless Grant (CHG). Updated March 2024, pages 9 and 10. 28 This "Introduction to Housing First" contains more of the basics of the "Housing First" principles. Additional resources on Housing First can be found on Commerce's Housing Division Grantee Training webpaae under "Housing First." 29 Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. SAMHSA's Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a Trauma -Informed Approach. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2014. https://store.samhsa.gov/sites/default/files/smal4-4884.pdf. c 0 x a w W c 0 a� co M a STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 17 Packet Pg. 120 2.5.c Chapter 4: Comprehensive Planning for STEP Homelessness and housing affordability is a challenge that affects an entire county and requires solutions that often go beyond the resources of one city or town government. Therefore, many planning and implementation efforts start or take place at the county level in Washington.10 Revisions to RCW 36.70A.070(2) in 2021 updated requirements for how jurisdictions should plan for housing in their comprehensive plans. To implement the new law, the Department of Commerce provides projections of housing needs for each county, including emergency housing and permanent supportive housing .31 Each county must decide how to allocate these projections among its local jurisdictions. Each jurisdiction must then document its share of countywide housing needs by income level and plan for and accommodate that share of housing needs in its comprehensive plan.32 Each county that is fully planning under the Growth Management Act must have countywide planning policies and processes for allocating their countywide housing needs to local jurisdictions (RCW 36.70A.210(3)(e)).33 Many communities are still in the process of allocating countywide projections of need to local governments. Countywide collaboration in this process is vital to ensure a coordinated approach to planning for housing for all income levels. As counties decide where overall population and housing should be directed, most communities use data on employment locations, transportation accessibility, service availability, infrastructure and land capacity to determine the appropriate percentage of housing growth to plan for in each area. Local governments then use this information and the Department of Commerce's Housing for All Planning Tool to determine a distribution of housing needs by income level to each jurisdiction or to inform a local -designed method of allocating housing needs. Counties may use their countywide planning policies about where overall growth should be directed within the county to assist with this work or local data such as information about where existing support services are located or likely to locate, where existing affordable housing and STEP housing are located, and other local factors to inform their decisions. 30 In addition to comprehensive planning for housing of all income levels under the Growth Management Act, Washington state law (RCW 43.185C.050) requires that each county local homeless housing task force develop and recommend to its local government legislative authority a five-year homeless housing plan for its jurisdictional area. Each county's 5- year plan can be found on Commerce's website. 31 Emergency shelters are grouped with emergency housing needs in Commerce's projected housing needs. 32 Resources for projected housing needs are in Book 1 of Commerce's Housing Element Guidance. Projecting housing needs by income level begins on page 34. Information on how to allocate the countywide housing needs from the countywide projections to individual jurisdictions begins on page 60. 33 RCW 36.70A.210(3): A countywide planning policy shall, at a minimum, address policies that consider the need for affordable housing, such as housing for all economic segments of the population and parameters for its distribution. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 Packet Pg. 121 2.5.c Chapter 5: Permitting STEP The local permitting process for STEP can vary depending on the jurisdiction and their permitting procedures. The approval process for a land use co E- permit typically depends on whether the permit is classified as Type I, II, III or other permit. While the number of permit types and their terminology c may vary by jurisdiction, in general, the more complex the project, the greater the level of public notice and review is needed. sa. ss, sb For example, _ simple building permits are administratively approved under a Type I permit, while permitting for projects requiring a higher level of review such as LU conditional use permits, commonly fall under Type III and higher. N 0 Project permit decisions can involve different decision makers and levels of public input. Projects permits approved by local planning staff without cc public hearings are considered administrative decisions. More complex projects may involve review by a hearings examiner, public hearings and a may include discretion in permitting decisions. These permit types are called quasi-judicial because additional procedures are factored into the permitting decision. Generally speaking, quasi-judicial permitting proceedings provide for public notice, public testimony and decisions based on adopted criteria. Conditional use permits and variances heard and decided by a hearings examiner are common examples of quasi-judicial permits. Table 2 provides recommendations for permitting processes related to STEP, including information on whether the level of permitting might be considered a permitted or conditional use in land use tables. 34 For more examples of local permit procedures, read MRSC's Streamlining Local Permit Review Procedures (2024). 35 For resources on local planning, project review, and permitting, read the Department of Commerce's A Short Course On Local Planning Resource Guide Version 5.3 (2017). 36 The Local Project Review Act (RCW 36.70B) codified into state law a series of best practices for the local land use permit process to better enable citizens and developers to know what to expect and to provide for more timely and efficient permit issuance. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 19 Packet Pg. 122 2.5.c Table 2 - Example of Local Permit Processes by Project Types Approval Process Recommended review process for STEP Type Permitting Table Administrative Emergency shelter and emergency housing that meet local development standards in areas zoned for hotels Transitional housing and permanent supportive housing that meet local development standards in areas zoned for other housing types and hotels Outdoor encampments, safe parking, indoor overnight shelters, and temporary small houses on property owned or controlled by a religious organization Permitted Administrative Discretionary Emergency shelter, transitional housing, emergency housing and permanent supportive housing that require an exemption to local development regulations Affordable housing developments on property owned or controlled by a religious organization seeking an increased density bonus consistent with the community's housing needs allocation Permitted, sometimes with footnotes, OR Administrative Conditional Use (emergency housing and emergency shelter ONLY, not PSH or transitional housing)37 Quasi -Judicial Projects that do not meet the requirements for a Type 1 or Type II Permit. Conditional Use* * Commerce recommends allowing emergency housing and emergency shelter as permitted uses whenever possible, instead of conditional uses 0 x a w Cl) c 0 m co a The permit type for STEP facilities is mainly determined when a jurisdiction amends its zoning regulations and determines whether STEP facilities are a permitted use, administratively approved use or a conditional use in particular zoning districts. Jurisdictions should give particular attention tc the code development process and make concerted efforts to notice and involve the public so that the public has been engaged on decisions on where STEP facilities may be located and their applicable permit process. To reduce barriers to siting STEP facilities, Commerce recommends local governments adopt development regulations as follows: 37 PSH and transitional housing should not be an administrative conditional use unless other housing generally is permitted as an administrative conditional use (RCW 36.130.020) STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 20 Packet Pg. 123 2.5.c • Allow permanent supportive housing and transitional housing to be permitted using the same process as housing development genera y (RCW 36.130.020). • Use the lowest level permitting type for STEP (e.g. Type I permit process is preferred to Type III). • When a conditional use permit process is required for STEP, clearly specify the required standards STEP facilities must meet to address y compatibility and impacts. This will facilitate a STEP project's ability to meet the criteria for approving the permit. When permitting projects, it is important for jurisdictions to effectively communicate to the public when they do and do not have influence over the permit decision -making process. For example, communities can consider including this information in the messaging for public notices. If a N jurisdiction plans to organize an informational meeting about a STEP project, jurisdictions should be careful with the wording of notices to explain o that these are informational community meetings to present the facts of a project and local feedback cannot affect the permitting decision.co a STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 21 Packet Pg. 124 2.5.c Chapter 6: Model Ordinance The model ordinance presented here supports jurisdictions in developing ordinances that are consistent with state and federal laws, implement their comprehensive plan, help address their county's allocations of housing needs and encourage STEP. The model ordinance provides sample regulatory language. The primary components of the ordinance are: • Section 1 General: Ordinance number and title, recitals or whereas clauses, enactment clause and statement of purpose. • Section 11 Definitions: Definitions of the terms used in the ordinance. • Section III Substantive Provisions: More detailed guidance on zoning and development regulations and a zoning matrix. • Section IV Concluding Sections: Effective date, corrections/repeals, savings and severability clauses. Table 3 outlines each section and its sub -sections. Jurisdictions can use the relevant language, fill in information specific to their community in the red text, and edit the ordinance further to fit local needs if necessary. Table 3 also includes additional information for jurisdictions to consider as they develop their regulations, including legal considerations, instructions on how to tailor the language to fit a variety of contexts across the state, and a discussion of strategies that help reduce regulatory barriers for STEP. Table 3 - Model Ordinance and Additional Considerations and Options L General i. Ordinance Number and Title AN ORDINANCE REGULATING THE SITING AND DEVELOPMENT OF EMERGENCY SHELTERS, TRANSITIONAL HOUSING, EMERGENCY HOUSING AND PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING. Nil AN ORDINANCE amending [chapter number amended] of the municipal code. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 Ordinance Number and Title: The model ordinance provides sample language that local jurisdictions can use to develop their own ordinances for regulating STEP. For general guidance on developing local ordinances, including the Ordinance Number and Title section, jurisdictions can read MRSC's Local Ordinances for Washington Cities and Counties (2015) In general, the model ordinance and its guidance are written with both counties and cities in mind. The model ordinance highlights areas in red where communities can customize the language. In most cases, guidance that applies to cities also applies to counties. _7 c .y 0 x a w Cn _ 0 a� 0_ a Packet Pg. 125 ii. Recitals or Whereas Clauses Whereas, A) The Washington Growth Management Act requires fully planning local governments to plan for and accommodate housing affordable to all income levels. All cities and counties planning under the Growth Management Act must update their comprehensive plans and development regulations according to the schedule in RCW 36.70A.130. B) RCW 35.21.683 and RCW 35A.21.430 require that cities shall not prohibit transitional housing or permanent supportive housing in any zones in which residential dwelling units or hotels are allowed. Cities also shall not prohibit indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing in any zones in which hotels are allowed, except in such cities that have adopted an ordinance authorizing indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing in a majority of zones within a one -mile proximity to transit. Reasonable occupancy, spacing, and intensity of use requirements may be imposed by ordinance on permanent supportive housing, transitional housing, indoor emergency housing and indoor emergency shelters to protect public health and safety. Any such requirements on occupancy, spacing and intensity of use may not prevent the siting of a sufficient number of permanent supportive housing, transitional housing, indoor emergency housing or indoor emergency shelters necessary to accommodate each city's projected need for such housing and shelter. These regulations were effective September 30, 2021. C) Cities must allow permanent supportive housing in areas where multifamily housing is permitted. (RCW 35.21.689, RCW 35A.21.305) D) All fully planning jurisdictions must document sufficient land capacity for emergency housing, emergency shelters, and permanent supportive housing. (RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c)) E) Public hearing requirements for moratoria and interim zoning control are not applicable to ordinances or development regulations adopted by a city that prohibit building permit applications for or the construction of transitional housing or permanent supportive housing in any zones in which residential dwelling units or hotels are allowed or prohibit building permit applications for or the construction of indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing in any zones in which hotels are allowed. (RCW 36.70A.390) F) City and county regulations may not limit the number of unrelated persons that may occupy a household or dwelling unit except for lawful limits on occupant load per square foot or building code limits. (RCW 35.21.682, RCW 35A.21.314 and RCW 36.01.227) G) Any restrictions and requirements imposed on the siting and operations of emergency housing, emergency shelters, permanent supportive housing and transitional housing must not violate civil rights protections provided by the Washington Law Against Discrimination, the federal Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 Recitals or Whereas Clauses: Local recitals or whereas clauses in Washington state often include relevant state requirements, facts justifying the ordinance, references to the comprehensive plan and information on the process of developing the ordinance and regulations. The model ordinance provides excerpts from relevant state and federal laws. Jurisdictions could also cite relevant local data on housing needs regarding STEP (e.g., housing needs allocations from their county or the county's overall housing needs allocations), or housing policies from their comprehensive plan. Jurisdictions could also include statements summarizing the process of developing and approving the regulations, such as what information was considered when the ordinance was drafted, what the planning commission recommendations were, whether there was a public hearing(s), and when Washington State Environmental Policy Act requirements were considered if applicable. 23 Packet Pg. 126 H) A city or county is prohibited from imposing different requirements on affordable housing developments (e.g., permanent supportive housing, transitional housing or emergency housing with a lease) than those imposed on housing developments generally. However, exceptions are allowed for preferential treatment towards affordable housing developments aimed at specific groups such as individuals experiencing homelessness, farmworkers, persons with disabilities, seniors or low-income households. Preferential treatment may include fee reductions or waivers, adjustments to architectural or site development requirements, or other measures aimed at reducing development or operating costs. (RCW 36.130.020) 1) If a city, county or other local government entity is a funder of the project, the city can put regulations or restrictions on operators of affordable housing. J) Any city or county must allow an increased density bonus consistent with local needs for any affordable housing development of any single-family or multifamily residence located on real property owned or controlled by a religious organization. (RCW 36.70A.545) K) Regulatory limits on outdoor encampments, safe parking efforts, indoor overnight shelters, and temporary small houses on property owned or controlled by a religious organization must be consistent with RCW 35.21.915 and RCW 36.01.290. iii. Enactment Clause Therefore, the [approving entity, for example, City Council or Board of County Commissioners, and community name] does ordain as follows: iv. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this ordinance is to: A) Ensure compliance with the State of Washington's Growth Management Act and other laws. B) Support the implementation of [community name]'s comprehensive plan. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 Enactment Clause: The enactment cause includes who adopted the ordinance. Statement of Purpose: A statement of purpose typically discusses the ordinance's goals, such as ensuring compliance with state and federal laws and the comprehensive plan. Goals might incorporate specific excerpts from laws and the comprehensive plan that the ordinance addresses. Specific goals will vary by jurisdiction but might include a goal related to ensuring STEP tenants and clients have access to 24 c 3 0 x a w H N c 0 m co M a M Packet Pg. 127 C) Encourage the development of emergency housing, emergency shelters, permanent supportive housing and transitional housing consistent with best practices for these development types to help address local housing needs. D) Direct STEP development to areas with existing amenities, like jobs, services and transit, to ensure occupants have access to opportunities. E) Protect the health, safety and welfare of the individuals served by these development types and the broader community. ll. Definitions The following definitions shall be applied. Words in the singular number shall include the plural, and the plural shall include the singular. Statutory required definitions: 1) Emergency housing means temporary indoor accommodations for individuals or families who are homeless or at imminent risk of becoming homeless that is intended to address the basic health, food, clothing and personal hygiene needs of individuals or families. Emergency housing may or may not require occupants to enter into a lease or an occupancy agreement. (RCW 36.70A.030(14)) 2) Emergency shelter means a facility that provides a temporary shelter for individuals or families who are currently homeless. Emergency shelter may not require occupants to enter into a lease or an occupancy agreement. Emergency shelter facilities may include day and warming centers that do not provide overnight accommodations. (RCW 36.70A.030(15)) 3) Permanent supportive housing is subsidized, leased housing with no limit on length of stay that prioritizes people who need comprehensive support services to retain tenancy and utilizes admissions practices designed to use lower barriers to entry than would be typical for other subsidized or unsubsidized rental housing, especially related to rental history, criminal history and personal behaviors. Permanent supportive housing is paired with on -site or off -site voluntary services designed to support a person living transportation, jobs and other services, and a goal related to supporting the broader community with the code. Definitions: Commerce intends for this model ordinance to support jurisdictions in following requirements established by the Growth Management Act and the state's definitions of STEP To ensure consistency across the state, jurisdictions should use Washington state's definitions included here under statutory required definitions; while the other definitions are optional.38 Jurisdictions may define housing and shelter types not defined by the state, so long as they are not inconsistent with state law. If there are questions, consult with your jurisdiction's attorney or with Commerce staff. For example, one county and city in Washington state made conscious efforts to align their language and processes to help reduce development barriers like unclear or inconsistent regulation language. Other jurisdictions worked with local housing providers to develop language for additional terms and definitions for temporary shelter and accommodations that the providers intended to develop. Jurisdictions should also avoid vagueness in their definitions and throughout their ordinance. 38 Cities and counties are not required to use the exact same terms as the state statutes. However, using different definitions than those in the state statutes may result in inconsistencies and noncompliance with the law. Therefore, Commerce recommends following the definitions included in the state statutes as this poses the least risk. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 c 0 x a w Cn c 0 m w co M a 25 Packet Pg. 128 with a complex and disabling behavioral health or physical health condition who was experiencing homelessness or was at imminent risk of homelessness prior to moving into housing to retain their housing and be a successful tenant in a housing arrangement, improve the resident's health status, and connect the resident of the housing with community -based health care, treatment or employment services. Permanent supportive housing is subject to all of the rights and responsibilities defined in chapter 59.18 RCW. (RCW 36.70A.030(31�) 4) Religious organization means the federally protected practice of a recognized religious assembly, school or institution that owns or controls real property. (RCW 36.01.290(6)(c)) 5) Tiny houses, including tiny houses on wheels, are defined as dwellings to be used as permanent housing with permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation built in accordance with the state building code. (RCW 35.21.686) 6) Transitional housing means a project that provides housing and supportive services to homeless persons or families and that has as its purpose facilitating the movement of homeless persons and families into independent living, generally in less than two years. (RCW 84.36.043(3)(c), updated by Commerce) Statutory optional definitions: 7) Affordable housing means, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, residential housing whose monthly costs, including utilities other than telephone, do not exceed thirty percent of the monthly income of a household whose income is: For rental housing, 60 percent of the median household income adjusted for household size, for the county where the household is located, as reported by the United States department of housing and urban development; or For owner -occupied housing, 80 percent of the median household income adjusted for household size, for the county where the household is located, as reported by the United States department of housing and urban development. (RCW 36.70A.030(5)) STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 Religious organization: The definition provided in the model ordinance applies to counties and "hosting the homeless." It is likely that a local government may need to use a broader definition than just one that owns or controls property in other contexts. This definition is just for the purpose of RCW 36.01.290 and RCW 36.70A.545. It is not required to be used more broadly. Temporary: The definition included in the model ordinance applies to the person and how long they reside there, not the structure or length of time for the land use. Affordable housing development, with respect to RCW 36.130.020, means a housing development in which at least twenty-five percent of the dwelling units within the development are set aside for or are occupied by low-income households at a sales price or rent amount that is considered affordable by a federal, state or local government housing program. (RCW 36.130.010) Indoor emergency housing or transitional housing that is administered through a lease or occupancy agreement and permanent supportive housing are determined to be affordable housing under RCW 36.130.020. (Draft WAC Changes - 365-196-Part 4 - March 2024) Tiny shelters: Because communities are seeing non-standard types of STEP being purposed, some may consider adding a definition for tiny shelters. Tiny shelters are temporary shelters that do not have the amenities of a single dwelling unit and rely on shared facilities for dining, laundry and bathrooms. The structure may or may not be on a foundation. 26 Packet Pg. 129 III. Substantive Provisions Locations for STEP: Indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing are permitted in any zone in which hotels are allowed [relevant code section numbers]. [OR] Indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing are permitted in [XX, XX, and XX zones], representing more than 50% of zones within one -mile proximity to transit [relevant code section numbers]. Permanent supportive housing and transitional housing are permitted in any zones where residential dwelling units or hotels are allowed [relevant code section numbers]. Zoning Matrix: Jurisdictions can use the zoning matrix to update their land use tables. Emergency Shelter P* Transitional housing P Emergency housing P* Permanent P supportive housing P = Permitted *Unless an ordinance has been adopted authorizing indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing in over 50 percent of zones within one mile of transit. Same treatment: Transitional housing and emergency housing with a lease and permanent supportive housing should be treated the same as other housing types in local regulations. RCW 36.130.020 states a city, county or other local governmental entity or agency may not adopt, impose or enforce requirements on an affordable housing development that are different from the requirements imposed on housing developments generally. Therefore, the substantive provisions section may be most applicable to emergency shelter and emergency housing regulations. Preferential treatment: However, this law does not prohibit local governments from extending preferential treatment to affordable housing developments, including, but not limited to a reduction or waiver of fees, changes in applicable requirements, or other treatment that reduces or is likely to reduce the development or operating costs of a development. If a local government provides preferential treatment to affordable housing developments of any kind, they must also provide the same benefits and conditions to permanent supportive housing and transitional housing and emergency housing with leases. If a jurisdiction provides a benefit for these development types, it may include requirements proportional to that benefit. For example, if a project receives a Multi -Family Tax Exemption, it will need to meet the requirements of that program.39 If a project receives a parking waiver, a jurisdiction may request the project submit a parking management plan. These requirements must apply to all projects that receive the benefit (not just a subset). By right zoning and conditional use processes: To support STEP projects, jurisdictions can clearly outline the permitting process in their ordinances, including what approvals are required, who makes the decision and what the decision criteria and expected timeline are. Conditional use processes and public hearings for STEP permit applications can create uncertainty for applicants and add extra time and costs to projects. Therefore, if an application meets all the requirements, it is recommended it be subject to administrative review without a public hearing to avoid misleading community members. An emerging best practice is to designate STEP as a permitted use outright in the zones highlighted in the zoning matrix on the left. To support classifying STEP as a permitted use outright with an administrative review, a jurisdiction can adopt clear criteria for review to aid judgment in making decisions. Recognizing that communities may still utilize conditional use processes to address community concerns in some zones, the Department of Commerce recommends jurisdictions limit STEP permit applications to administrative review whenever possible. Additionally, jurisdictions' ordinances and regulations should be consistent with and implement local comprehensive plans, which must document sufficient land use capacity for STEP. (RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c)) Occupancy, spacing and intensity of use requirements: Communities may only impose reasonable occupancy, spacing and intensity of use limits on STEP to protect public health and safety, and any such limits must allow the siting of a sufficient number of permanent supportive housing units and emergency housing beds necessary to accommodate se For more information, see the Department of Commerce's Multi -Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Program webpage. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 27 Packet Pg. 130 Additional Regulations: Indoor emergency shelters, transitional housing, indoor emergency housing and permanent supportive housing must meet the same development and operating regulations as permitted residential dwellings, including adhering to building and fire codes and American Disability Act requirements [relevant code section numbers], to ensure consistency in health and safety for all residents. Minimum parking requirements are waived for all indoor emergency shelters, transitional housing, indoor emergency housing and permanent supportive housing [relevant code section numbers]. Exemptions: Exemptions to development regulations [relevant code section numbers], including but not limited to setback requirements, density limits, restrictions on support spaces inside buildings (e.g., office space for tenants) and public noticing requirements, for indoor emergency shelters, transitional housing, emergency housing and permanent supportive housing may be permitted with administrative approval by [approving administrative entity, e.g., the planning director or city engineer] to address [community name]'s housing needs allocation through shelter and housing forms that do not meet building codes or other requirements. These types may include, but are not limited to, pallet shelters and tiny shelters. Regardless of the form, the housing or shelter must be indoors and allow access to bathrooms and showers. Special Provision for Religious Organizations: Any affordable housing development [relevant code section numbers], including permanent supportive housing and transitional housing with a lease, of any single-family or multifamily residence located on real property owned or controlled by a religious organization is allowed an increased density bonus consistent with local housing needs allocation with administrative approval by [approving administrative entity, e.g., the planning director or city engineer]. projected needs. These requirements to protect public health and safety must be justified, for example, by including a reference to the local building and fire codes in the ordinance's findings section, to be consistent with state law and reduce litigation risk. Reasonable for the purposes of RCW 35A.21.430 and RCW 35.21.683 and this report, includes only those requirements imposed to protect public health and safety. Requirements that prevent the siting of a sufficient number of permanent supportive housing, transitional housing, indoor emergency housing or indoor emergency shelters are not reasonable. In addition, reasonable requirements must comply with any applicable civil rights protections provided by the Washington Law Against Discrimination, the Fair Housing Act, and the American with Disabilities Act. Reasonable requirements can vary with geographic size and population of the jurisdiction and the current siting of these housing types. Any occupancy, spacing, and intensity of use requirements should be justified by reference to building code, fire code or other citations within an ordinance Occupancy: Commerce recommends occupancy for emergency shelters and emergency housing be established as required by the jurisdiction's adopted building, fire and safety codes for other similar uses. For example, if a jurisdiction does not have police and fire limitations for hotels, then it is not appropriate to require it of STEP types where residents stay for short periods. Also, RCW 35.21.682, RCW 35A.21.314 and RCW 36.01.227 state cities and counties may not regulate or limit the number of unrelated persons that may occupy a dwelling unit except as provided for in state law. Spacing: Any spacing requirements must be directly tied to public health and safety and documented in the ordinance's findings. Any spacing requirements should not exceed the spacing requirements in RCW 9.94A.030 and RCW 9.94A.7031 which create community protection zones of 880 feet to prevent sex offenders from living near schools. Intensity: With respect to STEP, intensity refers to the total number or density of people, transportation and/or services in a single location or facility. Commerce does not recommend any blanket intensity regulations for these use types. Standards adopted to encourage a scattered approach to the siting of these services to ensure they are not located in only one area of the jurisdiction should consider the accessibility of services for residents, be accompanied by documentation of sufficient land capacity and be consistent with state and local policies. Parking requirements: These requirements should be less extensive for STEP than typical housing, as most residents do not have vehicles. Parking should be considered for employees based on context (e.g., the development's proximity to transit). STEP near a transit stop would require very few off-street parking spaces. If parking is required in the municipal code, Commerce recommends that the jurisdiction accept parking studies from the applicant documenting the number of parking spaces that are needed by the land use. Jurisdictions should look at comparable STEP developments in similar contexts to determine projected parking needs. Required documentation and plans: These types of regulations are only acceptable for emergency shelter, emergency housing and transitional housing without leases under state law (RCW 36.130.020). Unless documentation and plans are required for other similar facilities and housing types (e.g., adult family homes, nursing homes, or multfiamily housing generally), Commerce discourages jurisdictions from adding these additional requirements for STEP and encourages them to defer to the project's funder and insurance requirements rather than asking for them in local code. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 CID c 3 0 2 a w H N c 0 m co a M W. Packet Pg. 131 Outdoor encampments, safe parking efforts, indoor overnight shelter and temporary small houses [relevant code section numbers] are permitted on property owned or controlled by a religious organization and must adhere to state regulations in RCW 35.21.915 and RCW 36.01.290. If jurisdictions require specific documentation, like operations, safety, training plans or something else, Commerce recommends that they provide a sample document to further support those applying to develop STEP. It should be c clear to the applicant what is needed and who will review these documents. The reviewer should be someone with N sufficient capacity and qualifications to understand the needs and challenges of STEP, and they should use objective 3 0 approval criteria.LU x a Jurisdictions should also limit what they require in these plans to help streamline the permitting of STEP projects. For N example, an operations agreement may provide the following: W 0 • One phone number for emergencies co • Operating funding information to inform local governments of existing requirements and support a project may a have M • Services plan (i.e., a description of on -site services, identification of service providers, and staff -to -client ratios) m Requirements to receive services: Because STEP funders already have project requirements for requirements to = receive services, Commerce recommends jurisdictions do not add additional requirements STEP participants need to CL comply with to receive services or to access a project (e.g., IDs, documentation, income verification, etc.). U) Exemptions/exclusions: Jurisdictions can review their existing regulations and any other STEP requirements to consider types of projects that might be suitable for an exemption. For example, some jurisdictions require public noticing requirements, but waive those for projects with confidential locations to prevent adverse effects on clients served by domestic violence shelters and housing. Special provision for religious organizations: Jurisdictions must allow an increased density bonus consistent with local housing needs for any affordable housing development on property owned or controlled by a religious organization. State law also limits jurisdictions' ability to regulate outdoor encampments, safe parking efforts, indoor overnight shelters and temporary tiny shelters on property owned or controlled by a religious organization. To be consistent with state law and allow more STEP to meet local housing needs, jurisdictions can ensure provisions are included for religious organizations and permitting processes are outlined in local ordinances. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 29 Packet Pg. 132 IV. Concluding Sections i. Effective Date [Insert code section number]. Effective date. This ordinance shall take effect [insert month, date, year]. ii. Repeals [Insert code section number]. Repealer. The following are hereby repealed: [Insert a list of any ordinances being corrected/repealed] ill. Savings Clause [Insert code section number]. Savings Clause. [insert ordinance number being repealed], which is repealed by this ordinance, shall remain in force and effect until the effective date of this ordinance. iv. Severability If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this ordinance. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 Concluding sections: These generic sections of the model ordinance can be used if applicable. Otherwise, they can be left out of a local ordinance. For general guidance on developing this section of local ordinances, jurisdictions can read MRSC's Local Ordinances for Washington Cities and Counties (2015). 30 .y 0 a w rn 0 0 a 7 Packet Pg. 133 2.5.c Chapter 7: Accommodating Enough STEP To accommodate enough STEP units to address local housing needs, jurisdictions must demonstrate they have sufficient land capacity and reduce '3 development barriers to STEP. It is also recommended jurisdictions resist addressing all community concerns and potential project impacts with x° their ordinances and regulations, and defer to funder requirements and clear communication processes with housing and service providers. w Demonstrating Sufficient Land Capacity r- One of the first steps for jurisdictions to accommodate enough STEP after permitting the uses is to review if they have sufficient land zoned forco these development types, as required by state law. Local comprehensive plans must identify "sufficient land for housing, including, but not limited $ to, manufactured housing, multifamily housing, group homes, foster care facilities, emergency housing, emergency shelters, [and] permanent supportive housing," RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c). Therefore, all fully planning jurisdictions must do a land capacity analysis to show land capacity for permanent supportive housing and emergency housing/shelters, not just those jurisdictions that have occupancy, spacing and intensity of use requirements.40 The land capacity for emergency housing can overlap with the land capacity information for other housing types .41 This assessment is also an opportunity for communities to examine the gap between their housing needs and existing inventory and consider if land suitable for STEP is in areas with sufficient infrastructure and amenities, such as transit and other services. To determine whether jurisdictions have the land capacity for STEP, local governments can refer to Guidance for Updating your Housing Element Book 2 for specific steps, starting on page 41 for emergency housing and emergency shelters, grouped together in emergency housing steps, and starting on approximately page 31 for permanent supportive housing. Approaches to determine land capacity for siting STEP can vary, but, in general, include reviewing existing housing supply; reviewing vacant and redevelopable land in areas with access to infrastructure, transportation, jobs and other services; and identifying if based on both intensity of STEP likely to be developed and restrictions, such as spacing or occupancy requirements, there is sufficient capacity for STEP. Examples of land capacity analyses are also available on Commerce's EZView website. 40 This updated standard for when a land capacity analysis is required for emergency housing will be updated in Guidance for Updating your Housing Element (Housing Element Book 2) by August 2024. 41 For example, if a jurisdiction has 2.5 acres of vacant land in the zones that allow emergency housing and emergency shelter, they can use that area in the land capacity analysis for permanent housing needs and the land capacity analysis for emergency housing. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - DRAFT (MAY 2024) 31 Packet Pg. 134 2.5.c Jurisdictions can also engage their local Continuum of Care (CoC)42 to understand specific STEP demands, constraints and opportunities within their communities. These groups can share where they think STEP is more likely to be developed and at what densities.43 co Jurisdictions must document their findings of sufficient land capacity for emergency housing, which includes emergency shelters, and permanent S U) supportive housing in their housing element, supported by more detailed analysis in supporting appendices. If jurisdictions have any occupancy, c spacing or intensity of use requirements, they must demonstrate with a quantitative and spatial analysis that there is sufficient capacity for their = a housing needs allocation. w Cn r_ Reducing Development Barriers 4) Many barriers exist for developing STEP and affordable housing in general, including but not limited to: co • Rising costs of land, labor, materials and insurance • High permit fees, impact fees and utility connection fees • Burdensome or unclear zoning and development regulations • Slow local permitting and approval processes • Lack of clear and accessible information on processes • Limited capacity at local jurisdictions to process applications quickly • Limited developer and workforce capacity • NIMBY (Not -In -My -Backyard) attitudes • Neighborhood covenants and restrictions • Limited subsidized funding sources • Requirements to fund new infrastructure While local jurisdictions do not set property prices, the number of construction hours needed to complete a development or the cost of building materials and insurance, they do control several aspects to development. Jurisdictions set permit costs, control internal approval processes that can add to development timelines, grant fee waivers, control publicly owned land and can provide public funding for affordable housing and STEP." 42 A CoC is a regional or local planning body that coordinates housing and services for people experiencing homelessness. It consists of representatives from service providers, local governments and other organizations, and it is responsible for planning and allocating resources to address homelessness. (National Alliance to End Homelessness. What is a Continuum of Care?. 2010. https://endhomelessness.ora/resource/what-is-a-continuum-of-care/) 43 Visit HUD's Grantee Contact Information or the Department of Commerce's Continuum of Care webpage to find the right CoC contact. Commerce is the Collaborative Applicant for the Washington Balance of State Continuum of Care, consisting of 34 small and medium-sized counties. 44 The Homelessness & Housing Toolkit for Cities, produced by the Association of Washington Cities and Municipal Research and Services Center (2022), provides resources and case studies on various strategies to help communities address homelessness and affordable housing issues. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 32 Packet Pg. 135 2.5.c One of the most important powers of local governing bodies that can be used to lower barriers for STEP production is their ability to control loca zoning and development rules. To encourage more STEP development, jurisdictions can consider including regulatory or permitting incentives for STEP, such as reduced or waived parking minimums, impact fees, linkage fees45 and system development charges (i.e., tap fees). They can provide density bonuses, streamline and expedite permitting processes and help fund STEP (e.g., passing an affordable housing sales tax or property tax levy). They can also pay for site improvements and utility connections and donate land for STEP projects." Even more important than positive incentives is avoiding local requirements that hinder rather than promote STEP development. Table 4 provides examples of local regulations and requirements that can create barriers for STEP development and recommendations for what to do instead. Table 4 - Local Regulatory Barriers and Alternatives Unclear rules and requirements that are inconsistent with state and federal laws Regulations different from those for general housing development Spacing requirements (e.g., minimum distances from parks, schools or other facilities) Make it very clear where STEP uses are allowed and what process needs to be followed for permitting. Review the state's minimum requirements for STEP regulations to ensure they are incorporated into local ordinances. Jurisdictions are encouraged to use STEP definitions that are consistent with the state's definitions to make regulations more straightforward for STEP developers operating across the state. If specific requirements are adopted for STEP, avoid vagueness that may lead to arbitrary action or is too difficult for the average citizen to understand. Treat transitional housing and emergency housing with leases and permanent supportive housing the same as other affordable housing types, as required by law (RCW 36.130.020). Also, ensure any additional regulations for emergency shelter and emergency housing are limited to restrictions or requirements that are consistent with state and federal laws and have a legitimate purpose of protecting public health and safety. Do not include spacing requirements or minimum distances from public uses; instead, encourage STEP development in areas with access to these types of amenities, especially public transit when it is available Encouraging STEP development in locations near schools, healthcare services, transportation, job prospects and other amenities helps promote economic mobility and access to services. If jurisdictions 45 Impact fees and linkage fees are costs developers are required to pay to support shared infrastructure and services. Jurisdictions can reduce development costs for STEP and other affordable development projects by reducing or waiving these fees. RCW 82.02.060(3) authorizes cities, counties and towns to grant impact fee exemptions for affordable housing. RCW 35.92.380 authorizes a city or town to waive or delay collection of tap -in charges, connection fees or hookup fees for low-income persons connecting to water, sanitary or storm sewer service, electricity, gas and other means of power and heat, and RCW 36.70A.540 authorizes affordable housing incentive programs, including fee waivers or exemptions. 46 Jurisdictions offering these benefits should always consider tax loss information and possible repercussions on city taxes for the year. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 33 c .y 3 O 2 a w W c O m co M a Packet Pg. 136 2.5.c have any restrictions on occupancy, spacing or intensity of use, they must demonstrate with a quantitative Limiting maximum densities or minimum and spatial analysis that there is sufficient capacity for their housing needs allocation and include reasoning for how these requirements protect public health and safety in the findings of their ordinance. _ Do not place restrictions on STEP that are not placed on other housing or shelter types, unless it is w square footage specifically tied to public health and safety. For STEP projects owned and/or operated by religious Cn organizations, allow density bonuses that are consistent with local housing needs allocations and waive floor area ratio requirements for STEP projects with administrative approval from the local planning o d director, city engineer or another local decisionmaker with sufficient capacity and expertise. Waive or significantly reduce parking minimums for STEP projects because they serve individuals who often L High off-street parking requirements and ground -floor retail requirements lack a vehicle. Waive ground -floor retail requirements for STEP projects in mixed -use zones to help make � projects easier to develop and allow them to serve more people. 2 Limits on occupancy Do not limit the number of unrelated persons that may occupy a household or dwelling unit except for lawful limits on occupant load per square foot or building code limits. Jurisdictions looking for assistance should consult their building official/applicable building codes. If jurisdictions choose to have overall occupancy requirements, they must demonstrate with a quantitative and spatial analysis that there is sufficient capacity for their housing needs allocation and include reasoning for how these requirements protect public health and safety in the findings of their ordinance. Restrictions on support spaces, such as Waive restrictions on support spaces, which may be considered a non-residential use, within permanent office space, within a permanent supportive supportive housing properties in residential zones to provide its tenants with greater access to services and housing building in a residential zone amenities that can help them become self-sufficient and stably housed long term. Facility operating and reporting requirements Requirements for coordination with local police and fire departments Arbitrary limits on operation times or occupants (e.g., total occupants allowed or requirements for client background checks or sobriety) and/or requirements for additional Defer to projects' funding requirements and do not set requirements for STEP operations and reporting. Often, jurisdictions do not have the expertise on staff to thoughtfully review and evaluate whether plans for operating these types of housing and shelter are appropriate. Instead, it is recommended to defer to the projects' funders' requirements, which often include standards for client -staff ratios, staff training and certifications, services provided, progress reporting and more. Do not require new coordination plans with local police and fire departments; instead, defer to the preferred coordination plans of local police and fire departments. If such plans do not exist or STEP operators already have existing preferred operations regarding coordination with local police and fire departments, defer to these rather than requiring new plans developed specifically for each project to prevent adding a potentially duplicative, burdensome requirement for STEP. It is best to defer to projects' funding requirements instead of requiring operations plans or additional specific plans of the STEP project. Do not set arbitrary limits on STEP projects' operation times or occupants or include requirements for additional plans or agreements. Often, jurisdictions do not have the expertise on staff to thoughtfully determine operations requirements or plan details for these types of STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 34 Packet Pg. 137 2.5.c plans or agreements (e.g., operations plans or good neighbor agreements) Conditional use permits, design review requirements47 and discretionary review processes48 housing and shelter, so it is best to defer to the projects' funders' requirements, which often include client eligibility requirements and standards for these projects' operations and services. Allow STEP outright as a permitted use ("by -right" zoning) in designated zones, do not include requirements and permitting steps different from those for other affordable housing types, and expedite permitting processes for STEP projects when possible.49 To support classifying STEP as a permitted use outright with an administrative review, a jurisdiction can adopt clear criteria for review to aid judgment in making decisions. Addressing Potential Community Concerns As jurisdictions develop and implement their ordinances, community concerns related to perceived challenges of STEP may arise. To encourage STEP development, jurisdictions can use strategies outside of their local zoning and development regulations to address many of these concerns. Informational community meetings can be one way to identify community concerns in advance, connect housing providers and residents and raise public awareness about the benefits of STEP. Some community concerns are already addressed or can be without creating additional local regulatory or permitting requirements for STEP. For example: • A lack of outside oversight for STEP (e.g., requirements for financing, staff behaviors, client or resident codes of conduct, training and services): In Washington, most STEP projects do not have any state licensing or operating requirements, which has led to community concerns about the quality of their services, the behavior of their clients and a lack of oversight. However, STEP projects require some form of public subsidy or funding from sources that comes with specific eligibility requirements (e.g., requirements for client -staff ratios, staff training or 47 RCW 36.70A and RCW 36.70B were updated in 2023 to streamline local design review processes, requiring "clear and objective" standards that do not reduce development capacity otherwise allowed. Any design review process must be conducted concurrently, or otherwise logically integrated, with the consolidated review and decision process for project permits set forth in RCW 36.7013.120(3). No design review process may include more than one public meeting. A county or city must comply with these requirements beginning six months after its next periodic update required under RCW 36.70A.130. Local governments are encouraged to expedite permits that include affordable housing, as defined in HB 1293 (2023), which provides additional flexibility in defining affordability. The provisions do not apply to regulations specific to designated landmarks or historic districts established under a local preservation ordinance. 48 For a list of uses that require a public hearing, see Appendix C, page 31, of Local Ordinances For Washington Cities and Counties. 49 The City of Port Townsend and Jefferson County worked closely together to expedite the permitting for a specific project that incorporates safe parking, a tiny house village and permanent supportive housing on the same piece of county -owned property. Seattle also has implemented an expedited permitting process to encourage STEP production, including exempting permanent supportive housing projects from design review. For more information on how jurisdictions in Washington are helping reduce development barriers for STEP, see the Department of Commerce's STEP Case Studies. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 35 Packet Pg. 138 2.5.c certifications, documentation and reporting). The funders who make STEP projects possible often have their own service, client and staff standards, so additional local requirements can be duplicative and become burdensome for STEP projects. In most cases, it is not possible to build STEP projects without some form of public funding (e.g., a combination of state and LIHTC funding), and all public sources of funding have regulatory requirements developers must meet.so Making support services optional: Some community members may be concerned about making support services optional for STEP clients.LU 0 a However, support services should not be mandatory so that STEP projects do not unintentionally discriminate against clients for religious reasons or because they are hesitant to receive outside assistance. When these services are optional, tenants can drive the type, duration and r_ initiation of services. Studies also show voluntary services are more effective at engaging people to participate in services than mandatory 0 services.51 Additionally, while services are optional for the participant in permanent supportive housing, they are a core component of it and thus not optional for the operator. M • Unfair evictions: Washington residents are concerned about unfair evictions for renters in leased STEP projects. However, any rental requiring leases must adhere to laws established by Washington State's Residential -Landlord Tenant Act, so tenants are already protected under law." • Lack of behavioral health support: The shortage of healthcare professionals, such as clinicians, long-term care support and social workers, is not only affecting the homeless population in Washington but also everyone else. Instead of imposing difficult staffing or service requirements for STEP, defer to the requirements of the entity funding the project for specific requirements for providers and staffing because they understand the needs of residents, best practices and support and staff availability. • Unaddressed health and safety concerns of shelter and housing (e.g., unmaintained buildings and littered properties): All residential development projects, including STEP, should prioritize the safety and maintenance of their properties for the benefit of their clients, tenants and staff. To ensure that all Washington residents are equally protected, local code enforcement should enforce the same occupancy requirements (e.g., max persons per room) and minimum health and safety standards for all residential projects. • NIMBYism (i.e., Not -In -My -Backyard mentality): In Washington communities, some residents may be opposed to the development of affordable housing in their neighborhood, which can be a major obstacle for STEP in jurisdictions where public input has the power to influence or prevent a project from being built. To overcome this, local governments can reduce discretionary review processes53 for STEP permitting and allow STEP to be permitted administratively, and they can help educate the public about the importance of affordable housing and STEP. The so See "Requirements Associated with State and Federal Funding" in Chapter 3 of the STEP State of the Practice Report for more details on these requirements and links to specific program requirements. 51 For studies on the Housing First model that show voluntary services work, see Data Visualization: The Evidence on Housing First from the National Alliance to End Homelessness. 52 For more information, see the Benton -Franklin Rental Owners Association's Summary of the Residential Landlord -Tenant Act of 1973. 53 These processes leave permit approval up to a local decision -maker's discretion and may require a public hearing. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 36 Packet Pg. 139 2.5.c Department of Commerce's Housing Division developed the Permanent Supportive Housing Communications Toolkit, which includes the following helpful materials: • Permanent Supportive Housing 101 Factsheet • Benefits of Permanent Supportive Housing Factsheet c • Building a Community of Support guidance = • Common Community Concerns FAQ: Understand and Respond • Considerations for Rural and Urban Communities N • Amplifying the Voices of People in Need of Permanent Supportive Housing Factsheet C a� • Lessons Learned Factsheet co • The Importance of Messaging Factsheet M • Understanding how Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) Operates Factsheet Local authorities can help residents become open to unfamiliar housing types and encourage STEP developers and operators to become actively involved in the community by inviting them to attend local meetings and events. Regularly convening residents and STEP partners to discuss community needs and concerns can be an effective strategy to help address NIMBYism. It is important to control how large these meetings between residents and STEP partners are (e.g., max 15 people), who is invited (e.g., neighborhood leadership, local service providers and advisory groups) and what the format is (e.g., local planning staff serve as conveners and facilitate the meeting, serving as a mediator, if necessary, between residents and STEP partners). Lack of control over neighborhood character: In Washington, some residents may feel that they have no control over the development that takes place in their neighborhood. To address this concern, local jurisdictions can involve community members and STEP partners in discussions about local policies and regulations that guide future development. Jurisdictions should already include robust public engagement opportunities as part of their comprehensive planning processes to ensure that residents have a say in the future of their community. Local ordinances should align with jurisdictions' comprehensive plans and development of local ordinances usually includes an opportunity for community input, so these opportunities are a way residents can influence neighborhood regulations and character as well. It is important to note that local ordinances that mandate public outreach and engagement for affordable housing projects but not for other residential projects may violate fair housing laws and other state and federal regulations. The Department of Commerce encourages jurisdictions to plan for and raise awareness about the benefits of STEP in their housing planning processes. By taking this proactive approach, jurisdictions can reduce the need for engagement related to specific projects and streamline permitting processes for STEP. Assuming that a STEP project is to be administratively approved, local planning staff can also host a community meeting to help inform residents about a specific project in their neighborhood. A community meeting differs from an open record hearing/public hearing because community members cannot influence whether the STEP project moves forward, and the meeting is only for informational purposes. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 37 Packet Pg. 140 2.5.c When STEP providers do not comply with funders' requirements: In situations where STEP service providers/property owners do not comp y with funder requirements or standards, a local government should first notify the property owner of the concerns to determine whether the issues could be rectified. If the owner's response is not sufficient, the local government may consult with the relevant state agency/funder to co understand whether state oversight or resources could be used to address the concerns. Lastly, if providers/property owners remain out of y compliance, a local government may utilize its code enforcement tools, as it would with any other nuisance property or landlord. Sex offenders near children: Some local regulations in Washington currently impose potentially discriminatory distancing requirements for a STEP related to parks, schools and daycare centers. Community protection zones for STEP projects are not needed because Washington state c law already establishes an 880-foot community protection zone around public and private schools to regulate the residency of level two and a°, three sex offenders (RCW9.94A.030(6)). Furthermore, policies that prevent STEP from being built near parks, schools or other public uses can co unintentionally affect other populations experiencing homelessness such as children that need access to these services. Crime and substance abuse: STEP that is well managed can be a neighborhood asset that creates the conditions necessary for everyone to thrive and have access to support services. Many STEP developments also provide resources to the community regarding any concerns that may require immediate intervention. These developments employ staff with expertise in supporting people in transition from homelessness, including crisis intervention and security. Staff work with STEP clients and residents to comply with shelter and housing rules and are trained to de-escalate difficult situations before they become emergencies through onsite or mobile support. Staff serve as a point of contact for community members to discuss and address concerns as they emerge.54 Several studies on permanent supportive housing found no evidence that the development of these facilities leads to increased rates of crime." While sobriety is an important goal for many individuals, many studies56 have found that imposing strict sobriety requirements as a condition of housing can be counterproductive and exacerbate homelessness. By providing stable housing and other services, STEP projects can help individuals take the steps to improve their health and well-being, address the root causes of their substance use, and connect with counseling and other supportive services. Additionally, fair housing laws and the Americans with Disabilities Act protect people with criminal histories related to past substance abuse.57 54 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Permanent Supportive Housing: Evaluating the Evidence for Improving Health Outcomes Among People Experiencing Chronic Homelessness. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. 2018. https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/25133/permanent-supportive-housing-evaluating-the- evidence-for-improving-health-outcomes 55 San Mateo County Health System, Behavioral Health and Recovery Services. The Impact of Supportive Housing on Neighborhood Crime and Property Values. www.smchealth.ora/sites/main/files/file-attachments/impact_of_supportive_housing_on_neighborhood_crime_and_propery_v2.pdf?1468431099 56 The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Housing First: A Review of the Evidence. 2023. www.huduser.00v/portal/periodicals/em/spring-summer- 23/highlight2.html 57 For more information, see The Americans With Disabilities Act. Addiction, and Recovery for State and Local Governments. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 38 Packet Pg. 141 2.5.c Chapter 8: Adoption and Implementation To encourage the development of STEP in the state of Washington, the adoption of Commerce's model ordinance and other recommendations in this guide is highly encouraged. While the use of the model ordinance is voluntary, state laws require cities and counties planning under the Growth N Management Act to ensure their local regulations adhere to the minimum state requirements. c x a General tips for adoption and implementation of STEP regulations include: w Cn • Plan for adoption at the beginning: Preparing for adoption should begin with establishing how this work will fit into your jurisdiction's upcoming o annual work plan or periodic update work plan. Establish a critical path and work backward from desired legislative action dates with the cityco council, board of county commissioners or other approving entity. Allow for some cushion in case more time is needed to respond to public and decision -maker comments, as well as provide time to consider land capacity if spacing, occupancy or intensity of use restrictions are considered. Engage decision makers along the way: Addressing critical housing needs and defining regulations for STEP can raise concerns from a range of stakeholders, including elected and appointed officials. Engaging with decision -makers early and continuously will create a smoother path for the adoption process. Work with attorneys: Jurisdictions should work with an attorney or the Department of Commerce to ensure their local ordinances are consistent with state and federal law before adoption. After adoption, jurisdictions may still need to work with attorneys to deal with compliance issues in administering the ordinance. For example, an issue may arise requiring legal support to articulate a policy or procedure within the ordinance. Jurisdictions can ensure their permit requirements for STEP are as objective as possible to ensure their decisions are legally defensible. Raise awareness about the benefits of STEP: To further support jurisdictions in the adoption and implementation of their ordinances related to STEP, the Department of Commerce is developing the STEP Communications Toolkit, including a sample staff report and other materials to help local planning staff, appointed and elected officials and others communicate the benefits, challenges and best practices associated with planning for STEP. These tools will be coordinated and consistent with the Department of Commerce Housing Division's Permanent Supportive Housing Communications Toolkit. Commerce's STEP Communications Toolkit is available on the Updating GMA Housing Elements webpage. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 39 Packet Pg. 142 2.5.c Appendix Methodology y From February 2024 through July 2024, Commerce is working with Abt Global and the Corporation for Supportive Housing (the project team) to create a STEP Model Ordinance, User Guide and Best Practices Report and Communications Toolkit. The following includes the project team's w methodology for drafting the STEP Model Ordinance, User Guide and Best Practices Report. N Establish an Advisory Committee r_ w To inform the model ordinance and its supplemental materials, the project team established an advisory committee including representatives from co a individual jurisdictions who have regulated types of STEP in their communities, STEP developers, and stakeholders who were involved in the M development of HB 1220 or overall housing policy development in Washington. The project team convened this committee three times throughout M the process to gather information and guidance. CD Members include: 1. Adrian Smith, City of Port Townsend 2. Ali Brast, City of Spokane 3. Blake Lyon, City of Bellingham 4. Bryan Snodgrass, City of Vancouver 5. Bryce Yadon, Futurewise 6. Carl Schroeder, Association of Washington Cities 7. Chris Collier, Alliance for Housing Affordability at Housing Authority of Snohomish County 8. Colin Morgan -Cross, Mercy Housing 9. Curtis Steinhauer, Washington State Association of Counties 10. Dee Caputo, FAICP, Washington State Department of Commerce, Growth Management Services (Retired) 11. Glen DeVries, City of Wenatchee 12. Lauren Fay, Downtown Emergency Services Center (DESC) 13. Mario Williams -Sweet, King County 14. Mary May, GS Consulting Analyze the Existing State of the Practice To better understand the current environment and best practices regarding STEP, the project team cataloged relevant state and federal laws, reviewed other communities' model ordinances and analyzed local jurisdictions' existing regulations from February to April 2024. The project STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 40 Packet Pg. 143 2.5.c team's research included conducting virtual interviews and small groups with representatives from local planning departments and other STE stakeholders, including: • City of Federal Way • City of Kenmore • City of Kent • City of Langley • City of Olympia • GS Consulting, Affordable Housing Consultant • King County • Lewis County • Snohomish County • Plymouth Housing • Washington State Department of Health c .y 0 x (L w U) 0 a) 0_ 7 AM documented and synthesized the results of these information -gathering activities in a State of the Practice Report identifying best practices and local needs to guide the design of the model ordinance and its supplemental materials. Study Local Implementation Successes In March and April 2024, the project team studied the successful implementation of STEP ordinances and development in four different jurisdictions in Washington state, including the City of Spokane, the City of Vancouver, the City of Wenatchee and King County. The team selected localities of varying sizes and locations throughout the state to conduct interviews and gather information for case studies. The lessons learned from these studies informed the model ordinance and its supplemental materials and are compiled in the STEP Case Studies Report. Facilitate a 30-day Public Comment Period and Targeted Engagement The project team facilitated a 30-day public comment period before finalizing the STEP Model Ordinance, User Guide and Best Practices Report. To gather feedback during this time, Commerce broadly distributed the draft model ordinance to Washington's local governments, behavioral health providers and other interested parties to give them the opportunity to provide comments. The team also conducted an online webinar on May 14, 2024, and presented at existing meetings with targeted groups. The project team analyzed all the comments collected over the public comment period and used that feedback to inform the final model ordinance and its supplemental materials. STEP MODEL ORDINANCE, USER GUIDE AND BEST PRACTICES REPORT - JULY 2024 41 Packet Pg. 144 2.5.d March 31, 2025 Memo To: Mayor Rosen and Edmonds City Council Members From: Edmonds Planning Board Members (PB) Subject: STEP HOUSING EDC RECOMMENDATION 1. Edmonds PB began work on implementing the Comprehensive Plan in January of 2025. The first topic presented for our consideration was STEP Housing. The following source documents and information was considered; Washington State HB 1220 (STEP Housing requirements), Washington State Department of Commerce STEP Model Ordinance, User Guide and Best Practices Report, proposed/enacted STEP Housing legislation from other nearby jurisdictions, and ECDC Chapter 17.125 (Draft Permanent, Rev 1), Emergency Shelter, Transitional Housing, Emergency Housing, and Permanent Supportive Housing (STEP Housing). 2. The consensus of the PB is that the proposed EDC (Draft Permanent, Rev 1) for STEP Housing meets the requirements of HB 1220 and the Growth Management Act (GMA). However, we do recommend removing Section 17.125.030 Para B from the Draft. 3. PB is aware that some nearby jurisdictions have added specific code to address potential neighborhood health, safety and security issues. We also recommend that City Council review existing statutes to consider how these potential issues are addressed for our city. Lee Hankins Planning Board Chair Packet Pg. 145 2.5.d Q Packet Pg. 146 2.6 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 04/15/2025 Update on Neighborhood Centers and Hubs Permanent Code Work Staff Lead: Shane Hope Department: Planning & Development Preparer: Heather Lakefish Background/History Edmonds updated its Comprehensive Plan in December 2024 and adopted a growth strategy that focuses on additional growth and infrastructure improvements in locations with existing concentrations of commercial and multifamily development. These existing areas, redefined as Neighborhood Centers and Hubs (NCH), will accommodate additional multifamily housing as well as provide for commercial and mixed -use spaces. There are four Neighborhood Centers (Five Corners, Westgate, Firdale, and Medical District Expansion and five Neighborhood Hubs (North Bowl, Maplewood, East Sea View, West Edmonds Way, and South Ballinger) as illustrated in Figure 2.5 of the Comprehensive Plan. While meeting housing needs is a priority, the broader goal for these areas is to encourage livability and the availability of services, amenities, open spaces within pedestrian friendly areas that enhance a sense of community and reduces the need to drive to obtain services. To direct appropriate development in these centers and hubs, the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) needs to be updated in accordance with the relevant land use and housing goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Per the GMA, the City's development codes needed to implement this approach were intended to be updated and adopted in parallel with the Comprehensive Plan process. Unfortunately, due to limited staffing and other resources, that was not achievable. As a result, an interim ordinance for neighborhood centers and hubs was adopted by City Council on January 14, 2025. An interim ordinance is a temporary way to adopt regulations to meet a time -sensitive goal such as this. This temporary code may be in effect no more than six months (July 14, 2025) unless the City Council adopts an extension. Staff Recommendation No action is required. Consider the information and ask any questions. Narrative Since the adoption of the interim ordinance, and the required public hearing on February 4, 2025, staff have been busy working with stakeholders on outreach and to develop the draft permanent code for the neighborhood centers and hubs that City Council will eventually need to adopt to replace the interim ordinance prior to its July 14, 2025 expiration. Community Engagement Packet Pg. 147 2.6 A new webpage was created on the City's website as a clearinghouse for center and hub information. (View this by looking under the Planning and Development Department/Plannng Division/2025 Code Updates/Neigbhrodhood Centers and Hubs.) The material includes: Overview information Interim ordinance summary Interactive Map showing the extent of each center and hub Map comparing 2020 zoning and upcoming zoning changes per 2024 future land use FAQs Comment form for public to provide input Option to send pictures to share their thoughts Tentative schedule Two outreach opportunities also occurred recently: 1) An online open house on March 13. Thirty-six people attended and heard a presentation on the centers and hubs followed by a Q/A with staff. 2) Walking tours of each of the nine centers and hubs on March 27, 28 and 31. Community members, city officials and staff walked through the areas and discussed challenges and potential opportunities. These sessions offered valuable insights on safety, accessibility, and comfort for pedestrians, as well as possible impacts of the code on the neighborhoods. This information will be summarized and provided to decision -makers as the permanent center and hub code is developed. An in -person open house is anticipated for the first half of May, the location and date have yet to be determined. Planning Board On March 11, the Planning Board received its first briefing on the centers and hubs code work. They discussed the interim code and some general options for the permanent ordinance. Much work remains to be done and their tentative schedule to review the permanent draft code and make a recommendation to City Council looks like this: April 9 - Debrief on the Center and Hub walking tours April 23 - Review of the first draft permanent code May 14 - Hold public hearing on the draft permanent code May 28 - Review/revise the draft permanent code June 11 - Board recommendation to Council City Council On March 12, Council received an update about the new webpage, online open house, and walking tours. In addition to this update on April 15, Council's tentative schedule to evaluate and adopt a permanent center and hub code looks like this: May 20 - Check in Packet Pg. 148 2.6 June 17 - Review draft code review June 24 - Public hearing July 1- Review/revise draft code July 8 - Potential adoption of permanent center and hub code This timeline would achieve adoption of the permanent ordinance by the time the interim ordinance expires on July 14. However, Council can extend the interim for additional time if more work is needed on the permanent code. Packet Pg. 149 2.7 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 04/15/2025 Update on Middle Housing Code Work Staff Lead: Shane Hope Department: Planning & Development Preparer: Heather Lakefish Background/History In 2023, the legislature passed House Bill 1110 (HB 1110), which amended the Growth Management Act (GMA) and municipal code requirements for middle housing. Middle housing includes a range of housing types between single-family dwellings and small -sized apartment buildings, including: duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes, townhouses, stacked flats, courtyard apartments, and cottage housing. The law requires local governments like Edmonds (a Tier II city) to plan for and accommodate different middle housing types in existing single-family zones by no later than June 30, 2025. The Department of Commerce provided some grant funding to help with the process and hosts a range of background materials on their website. Middle housing requires Edmonds to allow at least two units per lot on all lots zoned predominantly for residential use. In addition, cities must allow at least four units per lot when either: The lot is within 1/4 mile walking distance of a major transit stop, or At least one of the units meets certain 50-years affordability requirements. City regulations must allow for at least six of the nine housing types mentioned above. Middle housing must be allowed to be sold separately, for example, through a unit lot subdivision process or a condominium process. This means that the City's subdivision code will need to be updated to allow the City's existing unit lot subdivision process to apply in all zones. Consistent with HB 1293 (2023), design review cannot be applied to middle housing unless it is based on "clear and objective standards", handled administratively, and is not more restrictive than for single- family housing. Under the law, development standards (such as setbacks) can be less restrictive but not more restrictive than for single-family housing. Additional requirements relate to parking, criteria for determining and monitoring housing affordability, etc. HB 1110 also directed the Department of Commerce to publish a model ordinance for implementing middle housing requirements. If a city does not adopt regulations to provide for middle housing in compliance with state laws by the due date (June 30), the following takes effect: "...the model ordinance supersedes, preempts and invalidates local development regulations until the city takes all actions necessary to implement... this act." Commerce's model ordinance has many useful provisions, but it also has provisions that would require: Greater maximum building height (35 feet, compared to Edmonds' current 25 feet in single- family zones) Greater maximum lot coverage (45% compared to 35% in Edmonds current single-family zones) Packet Pg. 150 2.7 Smaller front yard setbacks (10-15 feet, compared to 20-25 feet in some of Edmonds current single-family zones) To restate - if Edmonds does not adopt regulations in compliance with state requirements by June 30, 2025, the state's model ordinance would automatically take effect, superseding city regulations. Staff Recommendation No action is required. Consider the information and ask any questions. Narrative Since the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan in December 2024, staff have been busy working with stakeholders on outreach and to develop draft middle housing code that City Council will eventually need to adopt to comply with HB 1110 and the related bills. Community Engagement An introductory webinar Middle Housing was held on June 27, 2024. A new webpage was created in March 2025 as a clearinghouse for center and hub information on the City's website for code updates.. It includes: Overview State requirements Map showing where middle housing applies State's model ordinance Comparison of State's Model Ordinance to current City Code FAQs Link to Comment form for public input Another outreach opportunity occurred recently: An online open house on March 13. Thirty-six people attended and heard a presentation on the middle housing followed by a Q/A with staff. An in -person open house is anticipated for the first half of May, the location and date have yet to be determined. Planning Board On December 11, 2024, the Planning Board received its first briefing on middle housing. They heard a presentation and had Q/A with staff at that time. On February 26, 2025, the topic was briefly reintroduced, but the discussion had to be cut short due to time. On March 26, the Board took a deep dive into middle housing, looking at the key issues, engaging in Q/A, and providing direction to staff for developing the draft code. Much work remains to be done and the Board's tentative schedule to review the draft code and make a recommendation to City Council looks like this: April 16 (special) - First draft code review April 23 - Public hearing Packet Pg. 151 2.7 May 7 (special) - Review/revise the draft code May 14 - Board recommendation to Council City Council On March 11, Council received an update about the new webpage and online open house. In addition to this update on April 15, Council's tentative schedule to evaluate and adopt middle housing code looks like this: May 27 - Introduction June 3 - Review draft code June 10 - Public hearing June 17 - Review/revise draft code June 24 - Adoption of permanent center and hub code This timeline would achieve adoption of the middle housing ordinance in time to send that to the Department of Commerce on June 25. While the middle housing code doesn't need to take effect until June 30 to beat state pre-emption, hitting the June 25 deadline will allow the City to close out the grant received to help fund the work. Packet Pg. 152 2.8 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 04/15/2025 Planning Department Position Reclassifications Staff Lead: Shane Hope Department: Planning & Development Preparer: Heather Lakefish Background/History The Planning & Development Department has reviewed the existing position of Planner, and based on an evaluation of current and future department needs, recommends a reclassification of one (1) Planner (NR-32) to Associate Planner (NR-33). Staff Recommendation Forward to the Council consent agenda for approval by Council at the 4/21/2025 meeting. Narrative The difference in pay grades from this reclassification will result in an approximate $400.14 per month, $3,201.12 increase for this position for the remainder of this year. This increase will be offset by the salary savings that has resulted from the current vacancy of the Associate Planner position and will not result in an increase to the budget. Additionally, the department anticipates a reduced need for administrative support and may reduce the Administrative Assistant by .10. This would result in additional salary savings of approximately $4,979.10 that would offset the increased salary. The reclassification will allow for this position to take on more complex tasks and to provide increased value to the Planning & Development Department. The increased level of responsibility for this position will include additional duties such as: reviewing more complex land use applications, conducting SEPA reviews of project proposals, participating in the development of the comprehensive plan and related code updates, and providing lead work direction to Planners and other lower level staff. The job descriptions for Planner and Associate Planner are attached for reference. In addition, salary forecasts demonstrating costs and savings that will net zero increase to the budget. Attachments: Planner Job Description Associate Planner Job Description Forecast Packet Pg. 153 2.8.a City of EDMONDS Washington Planner Department: Planning and Development - Planning Pay Grade: NR-32 Bargaining Unit: Non -Represented FLSA Status: Exempt Revised Date: October 2012 Reports To: Planning Manager POSITION PURPOSE: Under general supervision, performs general planning related activities and tasks for assigned area within City Planning; provides technical assistance in the processing of planning permits for the City of Edmonds; reviews building permits for compliance with zoning, critical areas and design review requirements; conducts critical reviews and various planning reviews as assigned. The Planner performs projects independently and supports the planning function in responding to customer inquiries, processing planning permits and participating in short-term and long-term planning activities. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES: The following duties ARE NOT intended to serve as a comprehensive list of all duties performed by all employees in this classification, only a representative summary of the primary duties and responsibilities. Incumbent(s) may not be required to perform all duties listed and may be required to perform additional, position -specific duties. • Provides technical assistance in the processing of planning permits for current applications for the City; conducts a variety of reviews of building permits for compliance with zoning, critical areas, environmental and design review requirements and conducts critical reviews and various planning reviews as assigned. • Perform site inspections; coordinates requirements from other departments; reviews applications and appeals for compliance with development code and compliance with environmental regulations; creates associated reports. • Communicates with the public in person and on the telephone regarding general complex planning issues. • Responds to questions from the public, applicants and developers regarding the City's development review process and assists applicants in the completion of application materials. • Ensures compliance with all applicable Federal, State and local rules, regulations and codes. • Prepares and maintains a variety of records and reviews related to assigned activities and updates or makes recommendations to policy and code in assigned areas. • Conducts various inspections associated with permit compliance in assigned area and fulfills requests for public records including compiling files, emails and data related to a particular request. • Prepares and updates maps, graphics and public information materials to support current and long-range planning projects; develops and maintains Geographic Information Systems (GIS) mapping and database records as assigned. • Participates on assigned committees; attends associated meetings and provides necessary support and information. Planner Last Reviewed: Last Revis Packet Pg. 154 JOB DESCRIPTION Planner 2.8.a 2 of 4 • Maintains professional development including staying abreast with a variety of Federal, State and local regulations pertaining to land development and maintaining current knowledge of trends and developments in the planning field. • Communicates with governmental agencies and other cities regarding projects affecting the City of Edmonds and to coordinate activities, exchange information and resolve issues or concerns. Prepares and maintains a variety of records and reviews related to assigned activities • Reviews and makes recommendations to City codes or policy changes as appropriate and based on experience with daily operations and planning. Required Knowledge of: • Basic planning principles, practices and code of ethics. • General trends and issues in development and planning fields. • Basic construction, architectural design and development techniques. • Basic principles of customer service and public relations. • Basic research methods and report presentation. • Structure, organization and inter -relationships of city departments, agencies and related governmental agencies and offices affecting assigned functions. • Federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations, codes and administrative procedures related to assigned activities. • GIS development and maintenance. • Effective oral and written communication principles and practices to include customer service. • Basic project management techniques and principles; time management and project prioritization • Modern office procedures, methods, and equipment including computers and computer applications such as: word processing, spreadsheets, and statistical databases. • English usage, spelling, grammar and punctuation. • Principles of business letter writing. Required Skill in: • Providing technical assistance in the processing of planning permits for current applications and in the development of short-range plans for the City of Edmonds. • Conducting basic code interpretation, architectural review, and code enforcement. • Understanding and interpreting legal and technical planning language and communicating the language in a way that is understandable to others. • Reviewing commercial and other building permits and conducting various types of reviews. • Providing information to the public regarding general and complex land and construction issues. • Handling difficult planning related situations with people. • Ensuring compliance with federal, state and local regulations related to land development. • Explaining policies, procedures, rules and regulations. • Maintaining current knowledge of rules, regulations, requirements and trends. • Meeting assigned schedules and timelines. Planner Last Reviewed: Last Revis Packet Pg. 155 JOB DESCRIPTION Planner 2.8.a 3 of 4 • Compiling and verifying data and prepare reports. • Utilizing personal computer software programs and other relevant software affecting assigned work. • Establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with staff, management, vendors, outside agencies, community groups and the general public. • Applying basic project management techniques and principles. • Communicating effectively verbally and in writing including public relations. • Administering citizens' boards. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Education and Experience: Bachelor's Degree in Urban, Regional, or Municipal Planning, Geography, or related field and two year of experience performing planning duties including code and permit reviews, analysis, and evaluation, and preparation of basic reports. An equivalent combination of education, training, and experience which allows the incumbent to successfully perform the essential functions of the position may also be considered. Required Licenses or Certifications: • Valid State of Washington Driver's License and a driving record acceptable to the City's insurance carrier. • A criminal background check is required following a verbal offer of employment. Criminal history is not an automatic employment disqualifier. Results are reviewed on a case -by -case basis. WORKING CONDITIONS: Environment: • Indoor/Outdoor/Office environment. • Driving a vehicle to work. Physical Abilities: • Hearing, speaking or otherwise communicating to exchange information in person and by phone • Reading and understanding a variety of materials. • Operating a computer and other office equipment. • Walking or otherwise moving and ascending/descending stairs during site visits. • Ability to wear appropriate personal protective equipment based on required City Policy. Hazards: • Chemicals, fumes or gases associated with utilities systems and projects. • Contact with angry and/or dissatisfied members of the public. Planner Last Reviewed: Last Revis Packet Pg. 156 JOB DESCRIPTION Planner Incumbent Signature: Department Head: Date: Date: 2.8.a 4of4 Planner Last Reviewed: Last Revis packet Pg. 157 2.8.b City of EDMONDS Washington Associate Planner Ile. ,-61- Department: Planning and Development Pay Grade NR-33 Bargaining Unit: Non -Represented FLSA Status: Exempt Revised Date: November 2012 Reports To: Planning Manager or Senior Planner POSITION PURPOSE: Under general supervision, processes building and land use permit applications for the City; reviews projects for compliance with applicable codes such as zoning, critical areas and design standards; serves as staff liaison to assigned boards and commissions; provides information to the public regarding general and complex land and construction issues; coordinates GIS/mapping activities; conducts various planning reviews as assigned; may provide lead work direction to Planners and other lower level staff on assigned projects. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES: The following duties ARE NOT intended to serve as a comprehensive list of all duties performed by all employees in this classification, only a representative summary of the primary duties and responsibilities. Incumbent(s) may not be required to perform all duties listed and may be required to perform additional, position -specific duties. • Reviews building permit applications for compliance with zoning, site development standards, critical areas regulations and design standards. • Prepares for and conducts presentations before various boards and commissions regarding project proposals and code amendments. • Reviews land use applications including: subdivisions, conditional use permits, design review, rezones, Comprehensive Plan amendments and annexations and writes detailed reports based on the evaluation of proposals compliance with city codes. • Prepares and issues public notice of applicable land use projects via mail; posts and writes publication notices through the local newspaper; follows required timelines for public notice. • Conducts various field visits for critical areas inspections, posting of public notice for land use projects, inspections associated with building permits and compliance with conditions of approval; fulfills requests for public records including: compiling files, emails and data related to a particular request. • Communicates regularly with the public, including owners of private property as well as project applicants such as: architects, developers, surveyors, biologists and geotechnical engineers. • Communicates via phone, email and in person at the public service counter and at various meetings. • Participates on assigned committees; attends associated meetings and provides necessary support and information. • Reviews applications for land use compliance; sends letters and researches past approvals and reviews conditional use permits for home occupations. • Conducts SEPA review of project proposals including various land use and building permit applications and code revisions. Associate Planner— Planning and Development Last Reviewed: 11/5/2024 Last Revised: 11/2012 Packet Pg. 158 2.8.b 2 of 4 JOB DESCRIPTION Associate Planner — Planning and Development • Maintains public handouts and makes updates/revisions as necessary; maintains specific pages of the City's website and updates/revises as necessary and conducts updates of the City Community Development Code and Comprehensive Plan as necessary; prepares draft code language as directed and conducts public hearings before the Planning Board and City Council applicable to such updates. • Prepares and updates maps, graphics and public information materials to support current and long-range planning projects. • Develops and maintains Geographic Information Systems (GIS) mapping and database records as assigned while coordinating GIS/mapping activities with outside organizations. • Prepares and maintains a variety of records and reviews related to assigned activities. • Reviews and makes recommendations to City codes or policy changes as appropriate and based on experience with daily operations and planning. • Participates in the development of the comprehensive plan. • Maintains professional development including staying abreast with a variety of federal, state, and local regulations pertaining to land development and maintaining current knowledge of trends and developments in the planning field. Required Knowledge of: • Planning principles, practices and code of ethics. • General trends and issues in development and planning fields. • Planning principles, including creation of policies and creation of specific laws. • Basic construction, architectural design and development techniques. • Principles of customer service and public relations. • Research methods and report presentation. • GIS development and maintenance. • Structure, organization and interrelationships of city departments, agencies and related governmental agencies and offices affecting assigned functions. • Federal, state and local laws, rules, regulations, codes and administrative procedures related to assigned activities. • Effective oral and written communication principles and practices to include customer service. • Project management techniques and principles; time management and project prioritization. • Modern office procedures, methods, and equipment including computers and computer applications such as: word processing, spreadsheets, and statistical databases. • English usage, spelling, grammar and punctuation. • Principles of business letter writing. • Lead work and staff oversight of daily tasks. Required Skill in: • Providing technical assistance in the processing of planning permits. • Serve as staff liaison to the Planning Board and/or Architectural Design Board. • Conducting code interpretation, architectural review and code enforcement. • Understanding and interpreting legal and technical planning language and communicating the language in a way that is understandable to others. • Reviewing commercial and other building permits and conducting various types of reviews. • Providing information to the public regarding general and complex land and construction issues. Associate Planner— Planning and Development Last Reviewed: 11/5/2024 Last Revised: 11/2012 Packet Pg. 159 2.8.b 3 of 4 JOB DESCRIPTION Associate Planner — Planning and Development • Handling difficult planning -related situations with people. • Ensuring compliance with federal, state and local regulations related to land development. • Applying and explaining policies, procedures, rules and regulations. • Maintaining current knowledge of rules, regulations, requirements and trends. • Meeting schedules and timelines. • Utilizing personal computer software programs and other relevant software affecting assigned work and in compiling and preparing spreadsheets. • Establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with staff, management, vendors, outside agencies, community groups and the general public. • Applying project management techniques and principles. • Communicating effectively verbally and in writing including public relations. • Leading and delegating tasks and authority. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Education and Experience: Bachelor's Degree in Urban, Regional, or Municipal Planning, Geography, or related field AND Three years of experience performing planning duties including policy and code review, analysis, and evaluation, and preparation of detailed reports; prefer responsibility for leading projects or staff in a municipal planning environment; OR An equivalent combination of education, training, and experience that will allow the incumbent to successfully perform the essential functions of the position. Required Licenses or Certifications: • Valid Driver's license required at time of hire. State of Washington Driver's License required within 30 days of hire. • Must be able to successfully complete and pass a background check. WORKING CONDITIONS: Environment: • Indoor/Outdoor/Office environment. • Driving a vehicle to work. Physical Abilities: • Hearing, speaking or otherwise communicating to exchange information in person and by phone • Reading and understanding a variety of materials. • Operating a computer and other office equipment. • Walking or otherwise moving and ascending/descending stairs during site visits. • Ability to wear appropriate personal protective equipment based on required City Policy. Hazards: • Chemicals, fumes or gases associated with utilities systems and projects. • Working in and around moving traffic. • Contact with dissatisfied or abusive individuals. Associate Planner— Planning and Development Last Reviewed: 11/5/2024 Last Revised: 11/2012 Packet Pg. 160 2.8.b 4 of 4 JOB DESCRIPTION Associate Planner — Planning and Development Incumbent Signature: Department Head: Date: Date: Associate Planner — Planning and Development Last Reviewed: 11/5/2024 Last Revised: 11/2012 Packet Pg. 161 2.8.c Forecast 1- No Reclassification. Hire Associate Planner Current Pay Name Current Annual Amount Grade, Step Planner NR-32, 4 96,193.48 96,193.48 Planner NR-32, 4 96,193.48 96,193.48 Associate Planner NR-33 13 96,193.48 56,112.86 Filled effective 6/1 Forecast 2 - Reclass 1 Planner. Fill Associate Planner. Maintain 1 Planner Current Pay Name Current Annual Amount Grade, Step Associate Planner NR-33, 4 100,995.14 99,394.59 Associate Planner NR-33, 3 96,193.48 64,529.13 Filled effective 6/1 Planner NR-32, 4 96,193.48 96,193.48 260,117.19 Cost difference from Forecast 1 11,617.37 Forecast 3 - Reclass 1 Planner. Promote to Associate Planner. Fill Planner Current Pay Name Current Annual Amount Grade, Step Associate Planner NR-33, 4 100,995.14 99,394.59 Associate Planner NR-33, 4 100,995.14 99,394.59 Planner NR-32, 3 91,603.00 45,801.50 Filled effective 6/1 Cost difference from Forecast 1 (3,909.15) 244, 590.67 Forecast 4 - Reclass 1 Planner. Promote to Associate Planner. Fill Planner. Reduce Admin .20 Current Pay Name Current Annual Amount Grade, Step Associate Planner NR-33, 4 100,995.14 99,394.59 Associate Planner NR-33, 4 100,995.14 99,394.59 Planner NR-23,3 91,603.00 45,801.50 Filled effective 6/1 Admin Assistant .20 NE-29, 4 85,356.00 (4,979.10) Cost difference from Forecast 1 Forecast for 2026 - No Reclassification. Hire Associate Planner Current Pay Name Current Annual Grade, Step Planner NR-32, 5 105,882.00 Planner NR-32, 5 105,882.00 239,611.57 Amount 105,882.00 105,882.00 Packet Pg. 162 2.8.c 111,180.00 111,180.00 105,882.00 Associate Planner NR-33, 5 111,180.00 110,738.50 322,502.50 Forecast 3 - Reclass 1 Planner, Promote to Associate Planner, Fill Planner (Non -Furlough Ratesj Current Pay Name Current Annual Amount Grade, Step Associate Planner NR-33, 5 Associate Planner NR-33, 5 Planner NR-32, 5 111,180.00 111,180.00 105,462.50 Filled effective 6/1 327,822.50 Cost Difference from Forecast 1 5,320.00 Forecast 3 - Admin Assistant Salary Savings Current Pay Name Current Annual Amount Savings Grade, Step Admin Assistant NE-29, 6 91,120.00 82,008.00 9,112.00 89,628.00 94,104.00 Q Packet Pg. 163 2.9 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 04/15/2025 Priorities for 2025 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Ideas Staff Lead: Council President Tibbott Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History The Edmonds Comprehensive Plan was adopted in December 2024, after a two-year update process. To address minor changes that were not able to be considered earlier, City Council approved a special process on March 4 for potential 2025 amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. The process included Council members submitting ideas for minor Comprehensive Plan amendments in 2025.Consistent with the approved 2025 amendment process, Council members submitted to the Council's legislative executive assistant their ideas for Comprehensive Plan amendment ideas to study. Those 28 ideas were consolidated into a table and shared as part of the Council's March 25th meeting. At the Council's March 25 meeting, the 28 ideas --in abbreviated form --were divided into five categories. It was discussed that Items from Category 5 ("Code Updates/Other") should not be considered as Comprehensive Plan amendment ideas. Also some items could be combined (such as four different ideas about the same neighborhood hub). At its April 1 meeting, the Council took action to advance two ideas for further consideration and study - 1. North Bowl Hub (four councilmembers proposed amendments for this, #1 (Eck) #4 (Olson) #10 (Chen) and #19 (Dotsch) 2. Establishing Critical Areas Program (#14). The remaining topics were proposed to be brought back at a later date. (Minutes, attached) Councilmember Vivian Olson has requested to remove three of her proposed amendment ideas, specifically #2 concerning Hummingbird Park, #3 regarding BD2 rezoning between 6t"/8t"/Main/Dayton, and #6 about Meadowdale Clubhouse. Council President Tibbott has proposed to remove two amendment ideas, #27 regarding Francis Anderson Center and #28 regarding the Wade James Theater. The spreadsheet of Councilmember's Comprehensive Plan Amendment Ideas has been updated to reflect Council's April 1 action, staff's recommendation of those ideas more fitting for code updates or other, and those ideas proposed to be removed for consideration at the request of the councilmember who brought the idea forward. Recommendation Packet Pg. 164 2.9 Approval (at a future meeting) of Council's intention to docket remaining amendment ideas for further consideration in the future. Narrative On April 1, Council voted to advance the study of two ideas: 1. North Bowl Hub - this is the collective of 4 council proposals (1, 4, 10, 19 of attachment 1) to review the North Bowl Hub 2. Establish Critical Areas Program (14 of attachment 1) If council agrees to docket the remaining ideas for future consideration, these two ideas will advance as follows: Next Steps: After Council has determined which ideas to advance forward, a study period will begin for items on the Council -approved list. Results of the study will be reported by the end of June. The planning department will be working on related development codes, including Neighborhood Centers and Hubs (July 2025), Critical Areas Ordinance (2025), Interim Ordinance concerning Landmark Trees (202512026). In early July, the Council will decide on which ideas to formally propose as Comprehensive Plan amendments. The proposed amendments will go through a public process (including Planning Board) and other steps. In early September, the Council will vote on adopting any of the proposed amendments into the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan. Attachments: 2025-04-01 City Council - Full Minutes-3874 pages 6-8 4.14.25 Comp Plan Amendment Ideas Council updated to reflect proposed changes Summary of approved, proposed docket and proposed remove Process. Legislative.Amend ments,Rvsd Ideas.By. Category. Packet Pg. 165 2.9.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING ACTION MINUTES April 1, 2025 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Rosen, Mayor Will Chen, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Council President Michelle Dotsch, Councilmember Vivian Olson, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Chris Eck, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Jeff Taraday, City Attorney (remote) Shane Hope, Interim PDS Director Nicholas Falk, Deputy City Clerk The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 pm by Mayor Rosen in the Council Chambers, 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember Dotsch read the City Council Land Acknowledgement Statement. 3. ROLL CALL Deputy City Clerk Falk called the roll. All elected officials were present. 4. PRESENTATIONS 1. ANNUAL PRESENTATION FROM THE EDMONDS CENTER FOR THE ARTS The Edmonds Public Facilities District / Edmonds Center for the Arts (ECA), as a component unit of the City of Edmonds, shared an annual presentation with City Council. Ray Liaw, President began by speaking about who they are and their relationship to the city. Kathy Liu, Executive Director, spoke on their mission, and the three core activities; curating a dynamic performance season, to engage and educate the community, and support and host events. She spoke on their 2024/2025 season, giving examples of their diverse programming. Kathy touched on examples from their education and community engagement. She provided Edmonds City Council Minutes April 1, 2025 Page 1 Packet Pg. 166 2.9.a examples of the 2024/2025 rentals they secured, the expanding interest, statistics showing the increase in business, and a high-level breakdown of their audience demographics. Their financial update was presented showing their projected outlook to remain much the same as the previous year. She went over some of the one-time costs and capital improvements/investments they have put forward to keep the facility safe, modern and accessible. Kathy closed with presenting their 2023 Audit, which came back with no findings, and what ECA has ahead: their 2025/2026 season, strategic planning, and celebrating their 20th anniversary. 2. MAYOR'S FINANCIAL REPORT With council being up to date, Mayor Rosen opted to give precedence to other council business. 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER ECK MOVED APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. RECEIVED FOR FILING 1. CLAIM FOR DAMAGES 2. WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS 3. PLANNING BOARD UPDATE 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS 1. Tim Greiner, Edmonds, objected to the sale of Hummingbird Park and questioned the surplus of four parks. 2. Donald Wayne, Edmonds, objected to the council comment that Hummingbird Park is not utilized, the drainage issue/flooding of the park, proposed a B&O Tax. 3. Jordan Rudd, Edmonds, commented in opposition of considering the sale of Hummingbird Park. 4. Chelsea Rudd, Edmonds, commented in opposition of selling any city park. She mentioned her interaction with the council on the redevelopment of the park. 5. Jack Shull, Edmonds, commented in opposition to the parks being considered for sale as an asset. He touched on litigation if the council chose to move it forward for consideration. 6. Gordon Black, Edmonds, commented on the success of a park and how it is not a commercial space, but how it is used by the community as he has seen it. He opposed the park being considered selling it. He quotes several sections of the comprehensive plan and how it applies to preserving the parks. 7. Bob Ledford, Edmonds, commented on how if you sell a park, you can't get it back. He mentioned the positives from the council walkabouts; urged the council to utilize the community experts to help solve the problem. 8. Phillip & Hanna Witte commented in opposition to Frances Anderson Center and Hummingbird Park being considered to sell. Proposed paid parking, increasing corporate development tax, opening a hotel, increased ordinance enforcement, and property tax increases to offset deficit. Edmonds City Council Minutes April 1, 2025 Page 2 Packet Pg. 167 2.9.a 9. Eric Bidstrop, Edmonds, commented in opposition to sell Hummingbird Park. He stated the sale goes in direct opposition to the comprehensive plan. He encouraged the council to consider ongoing revenue streams instead of one-time funds. He also encouraged the public to vote for the RFA in the upcoming election. 10. Kathy Stahl, Edmonds, commented in opposition to the sale of Hummingbird Park. She has witnessed activities constantly occurring and mentioned the wildlife impacts. 11. Greg Goodman, Edmonds, commented in support of keeping the park. He also spoke on the north bowl hub, reading a portion of the traffic safety, and how the last traffic study designated it as a hazardous and dangerous place. He would like the council to reconsider that area. 12. Kim Siegrist, Edmonds, spoke for the North Bowl Coalition (Marty Renish, Linda Hoad) thanking them for the walk and talk. They asked the North Bowl Hub to be removed or limited to Alternative A. 13. Adam Sindelar, Edmonds, commented in support of keeping Hummingbird Park mentioning how selling this, or any park, is a permanent loss for the community. 14. Georgina Armstrong, Edmonds, commented on what being a `tree city USA' means. She feels the city fails in meeting the `tree city' standards. She commented on the loss of the mature tree, "big red". 15. Robin Wright, Edmonds, commented in opposition of the council considering the sale of community centers and parks. She would rather scale back on replaceable city staff or programs than sacrifice community centers and parks. She wanted them to reconsider the Growth Management Plan:5-Corners proposal and the flooding/gully issues in Yost Park. 16. Glen McPherson, Edmonds, commented in support of saving Hummingbird Park. 17. Jack Faris, Edmonds, commented in support of saving Hummingbird Park. 18. Lindsay Mead, Edmonds, commented on the history of Hummingbird Park and community usage over the decades. He mentions that green space cannot be replaced, all the parks. Parks are not a solution to the budget crisis. 19. Chris Ziobru, Edmonds, commented in support of saving the parks. He feels parks are the public's asset, should not be considered for sale, and improved communication back to the public would be appreciated. 20. Nicki & Juno Barr, Edmonds, commented with her daughter on how they do not want to lose Hummingbird Park. They love the park and spend a lot of time there together. 21. Oona & Kennedy Hall, Edmonds, commented in support of keeping Hummingbird Park. He spoke on hitting rock bottom and how he moved to Edmonds for that park. The value of parks binds us intergenerationally. 22. Dylan Borowski, Edmonds, commented in support of saving Hummingbird Park. He spoke on a one-time cash for a permanent loss is not okay, if the city doesn't consider sustainable revenues, it will find itself in another budget deficit. 23. Kathleen Sears, Edmonds, commented on the tree, "big red" and its destruction. She commented on the benefits of heritage trees. 24. Kimberly Wayne, Edmonds, commented in opposition of selling Hummingbird Park. She expressed concern for the environmental impact in developing the park, urging the council to remove it from consideration. 25. Lora Hein, Edmonds, commented on the loss of the tree, "big red". She feels that we do not meet the criteria to be a green city any longer and we preserve our parks and trees. 26. Brian Webster, Edmonds, commented on saving our parks and in opposition to the sale of Frances Anderson Center. Edmonds City Council Minutes April 1, 2025 Page 3 Packet Pg. 168 2.9.a 27. Cristina Teidoro, Edmonds, commented in support of how vital parks are and her concern of the council considering other parks in her neighborhood to sell too. 28. Jamie Gouge, Edmonds, commented on the thriving city and in opposition to the sale of parks. She also spoke on the sale of FAC and the tremendous loss to the community programs if that were sold. 29. Angie Balm, Edmonds, commented on her involvement with the community through the Frances Anderson Center and her childcare business there. 30. Gwen Winterspa, Edmonds, commented on her concern about the state of the city. She felt the city failed to protect the tree, "big red", feels we need to protect heritage trees and their benefits. She also spoke in opposition to selling parks or the Frances Anderson Center. 31. Lee Ledford, Edmonds, commented in support of saving Hummingbird Park. They felt that being semi -disabled, the park provides them an accessible space to enjoy. 32. Mia Vanderveer, Edmonds, commented on the loss of the tree, "big red" and the loss of environmental benefits it provided. She also spoke on the loss of FAC and how it would ruin the years of shared history by the community. 33. Petula, Edmonds, commented on the loss of the tree, "big red" and the sadness and disappointment of the community in its loss. 34. Macy Lawrence, Edmonds, commented on the positive development of the city, but also the disappointment of the loss of the tree, "big red" and in favor or saving Hummingbird Park. She felt there was a lack of transparency with the tree removal. 35. Peggy Man, Edmonds, commented on developing a hub on Puget Drive and Olympic View Drive and how it would negatively affect that community. She doesn't feel there is a capacity to develop density in that hub and opposes the initiative. 36. Kylie Wright, unknown, commented in support of keeping the Frances Anderson Center bringing personal experiences forward to share. She supports the all -ages community activities in that space and would like the council to keep it for future generations. 37. Lee Agle, Edmonds, commented on the Frances Anderson Center and how it is a hub of the community and providing examples of the many different activities there. She is shocked that the sale of the property is even on the table to deal with the city's shortfall. 38. Sarah Davis, Edmonds, commented on the use of the FAC and how she feels she became part of the community by using those facilities. 39. Kim Butler, unknown, commented on the community's support of the environment. She feels the loss of the tree, "big red" is a tremendous loss. She does not feel there is a strong tree protection policy in the city. 40. Lindsay, Edmonds, commented in support of keeping all our parks. 41. Simone Bower, Edmonds, commented on the loss of the tree, "big red". She is angry about the loss of the tree and concerned about the lack of communication. She also feels disappointed in the mayor and council. 42. Mirian Topaz -King, unknown, commented on how we can't save the tree now, but we can save the parks and the Frances Anderson Center. 43. Craig Brewer, Edmonds, commented on the loss of the tree, "big red", feels we need to cut staff deeper, raise taxes, and reconsider the development of the hubs and centers. He urged them to not consider the north hub as the community does not have the ability to handle the capacity of increased development. 44. Bonnie Rogan, Edmonds, commented in opposition of the sale of Frances Anderson Center. She has benefited from the services and community events there, strongly urges the city to keep the community space. Edmonds City Council Minutes April 1, 2025 Page 4 Packet Pg. 169 2.9.a 45. Joe Scordino, Edmonds, commented on the lack of appropriate polices to protect and preserve our open green spaces. He feels the city has done a terrible job in preserving our spaces. 46. Jim Oganowski, Edmonds, commented on the financial difficulties and wants to see a recovery plan. He feels that there are many community experts that are willing to participate and help to create an informed decision. 47. Kat, Edmonds, commented on how lucky Edmonds is to be a small town in a big city. She is advocating for her children by asking the council to not sell the Frances Anderson Center or parks because that is where generations make memories. 48. Kevin Fagerstrom, Edmonds, commented on the shared responsibility of the community. He commented on the relationship between the RFA vote and the parks; how they are separate items on the ballot. 49. Isabell, Edmonds, commented on the Frances Anderson Center and feels it is the heart of Edmonds. She does not feel it should be considered for sale and should be kept. 50. Nora Carlson, Edmonds, commented on the loss of the tree, "big red" and feels the city should keep their hands off our city parks. The city needs to think creatively about finances rather than sacrifice our community spaces. 51. Grant Hazard, Edmonds, commented on Frances Anderson Center and Hummingbird Park. He feels there is so much good that comes from these community spaces and would not like to lose them. He proposed a short-term rental tax, increased property taxes, and a hotel on the waterfront as a better long-term revenue source. 52. Marietta, Lynnwood, commented on opposing selling the Frances Anderson Center. She does not feel that selling the Frances Anderson Center or parks is an appropriate long- term solution to the budget. She urges the council to reconsider. 53. Taylor Geiger, Edmonds, commented in opposition of selling the Frances Anderson Center or parks. 54. Laura Harper, Edmonds, commented in opposition of selling the Frances Anderson Center or parks. It should not be considered. 55. Finis Tupper, Edmonds, commented on the loss of "big red". He also commented on the hearing examiner meetings regarding Perrinville Creek. He feels we are selling our parks and giving away our fire stations. 56. Kaitlin Gates, Edmonds, commented on the city taking away the parks and community spaces and how that impacts children. Please be proactive, be creative, and find another solution. 57. Britni Kipp, Edmonds, commented on the idea of selling parks off. She feels getting outside facilitates personal healing and bonding. She urges the council to not take those spaces away. 58. Marie Svendson, Edmonds, commented in support of saving Frances Anderson Center and Edmonds parks. 59. Nicole Ryder, unknown, commented in support of saving Hummingbird Park. She proposed long-term revenue options such as increasing tourism and parking fees. 60. Elizabeth Peck, unknown, commented in support of keeping the Frances Anderson Center and parks. 61. Nate Schmidt, Edmonds, commented in support of keeping the Frances Anderson Center, emphasizing the point from a prior speaker of community daycare needs. 62. LK Sheridan Herber, unknown, 63. Garrett Johnson, Edmonds, commented in support of keeping the Frances Anderson Center and the city parks. Edmonds City Council Minutes April 1, 2025 Page 5 Packet Pg. 170 2.9.a MEETING EXTENSION COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 9:45. MOTION TO EXTEND AGENDA CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. RECESS AT 8:56 PM, MAYOR ROSEN RECESSED THE MEETING UNTIL 9:03 PM. THE MEETING RECONVENED AT 9:03 PM. 8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES MARCH 25, 2025 2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENTS. 9. COUNCIL BUSINESS COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED TO TABLE ITEM 9.1. MOTION FAILED 1-5-0 WITH COUNCILMEMER NAND VOTING IN FAVOR, COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, DOTSCH, OLSON, ECK, AND COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT VOTING AGAINST, AND COUNCILMEMBER PAINE ABSTAINING. 1. PRIORITIES FOR 2025 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT IDEAS Shane Hope, Interim PDS Director, presented on the approach to address the 2025 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Ideas provided by Council. Consistent with the approved 2025 amendment process, Council members submitted to the Council's legislative executive assistant their ideas for Comprehensive Plan amendment ideas to study. Those 28 ideas were consolidated into a table and shared as part of the Council's March 25th meeting. The 28 ideas --in abbreviated form --were divided into five categories. It was discussed that Items from Category 5 ("Code Updates/Other") should not be considered as Comprehensive Plan amendment ideas. Also, some items could be combined (such as four different ideas about the same neighborhood hub). COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH MOVED TO UTILIZE THE SHORT LIST OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT IDEAS BY CATEGORY IN OUR PACKET FOR THE ORDER OF PRESENTATION AND DISCUSSION OF ALL THE COUNCILMEMBERS' PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT IDEAS. A POTENTIAL FINAL VOTE OR PROPOSED HIERARCHY OR RANKING OF AMENDMENTS TO BE CONSIDERED, WILL NOT TAKE PLACE UNTIL AFTER ALL AMENDMENTS ARE PRESENTED AND DISCUSSED." MOTION FAILED 2-5 WITH COUNCILMEMBERS Edmonds City Council Minutes April 1, 2025 Page 6 Packet Pg. 171 2.9.a DOTSCH AND OLSON VOTING IN FAVOR, COUNCILMEMBERS PAINE, NAND, CHEN, TIBBOT, AND ECK VOTING AGAINST. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOT MOVED TO: 1. START OUR DELIBERATION WITH THE 6 AMENDMENT TOPICS THAT HAVE BEEN PRIORITIZED ON THE COUNCIL AMENDMENT CHECKLIST PROVIDED BY EMAIL AND COLLATED BY OUR EXECUTIVE ADMINISTRATOR. 2. THAT EACH OF THE SIX BE DESCRIBED BY THE COUNCIL MEMBER OR MEMBERS WHO ADVANCED THAT AMENDMENT SUGGESTION. 3. THAT WE RECEIVE CLARIFICATION AS COUNCIL DESIRES FROM THE STAFF 4. AND FINALLY, VOTE ON THESE FIRST SIX AMENDMENTS IN RANDOMIZED ORDER. THE FIRST FOUR THAT GET FOUR AFFIRMATIVE VOTES WILL BE FORWARDED TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. 5. IF FOUR ARE NOT IDENTIFIED FROM THE FIRST SIX, THEN WE WILL MOVE TO THE NEXT THREE THAT WERE PRIORITIZED BY THE COUNCIL. AND DESCRIBED AND VOTED ON IN THE SAME MANNER AS BEFORE WITH ALL PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED AMENDMENTS AGAIN CONSIDERED IN RANDOMIZED ORDER. 6. IF FOUR ARE NOT IDENTIFIED BY COUNCIL ACTION OF THE FIRST 9, THEN WE WILL MOVE TO INDIVIDUAL AMENDMENTS BROUGHT FORWARD BY INDIVIDUAL MOTIONS TO CONSIDER, THEN VOTED UPON UNTIL WE HAVE FOUR. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 10:15. MOTION TO EXTEND AGENDA CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. MAIN MOTION REGARDING PROCESS FAILS AS A TIE 3-3-0 WITH COUNCILMEMBERS PAINE, TIBBOT, AND ECK VOTING IN FAVOR, COUNCILMEMBERS CHEN, DOTSCH, AND OLSON VOTING AGAINST AND COUNCILMEMBER NAND ABSTAINING. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOT MOVED TO DELIBERATE ON TOP 2 AND HANDLE THE REMAINING AT A DIFFERENT MEETING. MOTION PASSES 5-1-0 WITH COUCNILMEMBERS PAINE, CHEN, TIBBOT, OLSON, AND ECK VOTING IN FAVOR, COUNCILMEMBER DOTSCH VOTING AGAINST AND COUNCILMEMBER NAND ABSTAINING. The council deliberated on the top 2 amendment ideas; North Bowl Hub change and Establish Critical Areas Program, to put on the list for further consideration and study. COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOT MOVED TO ADVANCE NORTH BOWL HUB FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION AND STUDY. MOTION PASSES 6-0-0 WITH COUCNILMEMBERS PAINE, CHEN, TIBBOT, OLSON, ECK, AND DOTSCH VOTING IN FAVOR AND COUNCILMEMBER NAND ABSTAINING. Edmonds City Council Minutes April 1, 2025 Page 7 Packet Pg. 172 COUNCILMEMBER CHEN MOVED TO ADVANCE ESTABLISHING CRITICAL AREAS PROGRAM FOR FURTHER CONSDIERATION AND STUDY. MOTION PASSES 6-0-0 WITH COUCNILMEMBERS PAINE, CHEN, TIBBOT, OLSON, ECK, AND DOTSCH VOTING IN FAVOR AND COUNCILMEMBER NAND ABSTAINING. The remaining topics will be brought back at a later date. 10. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmembers commented on various issues. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 10:20. MOTION TO EXTEND AGENDA CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER OLSON MOVED TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 10:30. MOTION TO EXTEND AGENDA CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Rosen provided comments. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 10:26 pm. 6;� SCOTT PASSE , CLERK Edmonds City Council Minutes April 1, 2025 Page 8 Packet Pg. 173 2.9.b 1 Chris Eck Vivian Olson 2 Proposal Removed by CM Olson request Vivian Olson 3 Proposal Removed by CM Olson request 4 Vivian Olson I would like to revisit all of the comp plan amendments regarding height and area size for the North Bowl. Council I believe the decisions the Council made previously Action April 1 to advance this idea for further study, collectively with other North Bowl ideas. Re -look at North Edmonds Bowl Hub Reduce height allowances in the areas where Sound views will be blocked unnecessarily limit the growth for the North Hub. A list of all comp plan decisions made pertaining to the North Bowl, versus what was proposed by the Planning Dept. and Planning Board. Along with the current household estimates based on those decisions versus how much household growth we can have if we closely adhered to the recommendations of the Planning Department and Planning Board. ZMALM (Francis Anderson (Francis Anderson 6enter (FA6) If cormi-munity does not of thfc— could happen prudent. If City wish to pay to stipport I IVAG the expensive pending overhatii system, expanding here (in this prinie town center the possibilities location) would of what be would continties te) own the library and FAG, this zoning change have no effect. If we do not, we have itiany options. Considering Cornnitinity engagement Iq,istorieal Significance, to RFP 1 for developer wouLd hope that ideas/visions any plan that to sell would be found favor a the honored the building's history, — with community and maybe playfieids for even preserving for the cornnitinity -g-ing --- of youth and festival purposes. (south of Puget Drive), change rule about not being allowed This upzoning was never appropriate for this hub and the units to re -build single family, remove density on Grandview and would be absorbed with new proposals if some of the new areas northwest of it. Council Action April 1 to advance proposals were embraced. this idea for further study, collectively with other North Bowl ideas. Council and staff walking this area; Community engagement a Packet Pg. 174 2.9.b This was another CM's idea that came late in the process and was therefore not vetted. Exploring the possibility of adding a Lake Community engagement, shadow studies, view studies (to 5 Vivian Olson Lake Ballinger height limits View view units in this location by adding one more level of height make sure others closeby are not negatively impacted) is worth considering Vivian Olson The ciubhouse is not getting much tise by the conirntinity HiF recent years; a neighboitood business of appropriate scale may be a real benefit to this neighborhood (perhaps a bodega tltal- Proposal Meadowdale Beach parks in the stimmer?). If treated as BDI or title assties and cornnitinity engagement with t' 6 Removed by CM neighbors. - Olson request Sale of the propertywouid generate reventie and lower City costs for building maintenance of a faciLitythat is (per neighbors) not adding a lot of valtie to the residents (reventies from this are taxes from the residents that we de not need to eoiieet�. Westgate CARA/ DensityConcern about underground springs on the northmost side of this Center were brought Environmental protection and setting of expectations of future Environmental study (maybe historically done and needing 7 Vivian Olson up late in the process; if verified, may be reason to revisit buyers about what can realistically be built here to be researched?) the boundaries of the Center Allow building height to be 20 story/floor in the International District with 20% of affordable housing Provide much needed affordable housing, and Generate much Study if market conditions support such building height in 8 Will Chen made available by developers. Affordable housing needed tax revenue the International District. guidelines shall follow state RCW and/or city resolution or ordinance. Will Chen Sorted as CODE/OTHER and not Allow hotel on the Port of Edmonds and the Waterfront Study if market conditions support more hotels at the Port 9 More tourism and increase tax revenue. considered as properties. of Edmonds and Waterfront areas. Comp Plan Amendment Idea Revisit North bowl center and hub. Council Action April 1 10 Will Chen to advance this idea for further study, collectively with Reconsider input from residents. Public input. other North Bowl ideas. y a� a. 0_ E 0 U LO N 0 N a� 0 •L a a� a� CU a� 0 a 0 L Q as a� L as Q. c 0 U y m c as E as E a _ CU a Q. E 0 U LO N _ d E t U a Packet Pg. 175 2.9.b Susan Paine Sorted as 11 CODE/OTHER and Allow neighborhood cafes and stores in all our not considered as neighborhood Hubs and Centers. Comp Plan Amendment Idea Susan Paine Sorted as 12 CODE/OTHER and not considered as Comp Plan Amendment Idea 13 Michelle Dotsch Displacement I'd like to propose that Edmonds adopt a similar code change to Shoreline article - what Shoreline has allowing neighborhood cafes and stores in all https://www.theurbanist.org/2024/12/18/shoreline-votes- of our neighborhood Hubs and Centers. There are 2 differing approaches, my preference is what Shoreline allows, which includes mid -block cafes/stores, the other which comes from Seattle is a corner lot strictly. One more request, when we decided our NHCs, we didn't talk much about displacement as an issue, and I believe that there are only a few areas where that would be a problem. When the issue of displacement comes up in our land use discussions, it would be helpful to bring that forward. Purpose: to insert the environmental protections and policies into the comp plan land use element that the city did not follow the Explicitly state and detail and/or expand the following requirements of the WAC. Under Land Use element. Comp plan mandatory policies in both the Land Use and the will lay out how it is to be dealt with. Housing element increasing Housing Elements of the Comp Plan. density without providing how it will impact the environment. EIS did not look at watershed impacts and critical area impacts. WAC listed under comp plan mandatory elements. Anticipated benefit: to proceed with additional development that will be least impactful to our environment and critical areas. This 1) Avoid environmental impacts through appropriate land will ensure consistency. When such policies are incorporated use designations [WAC 365-196-485(4)]. This could include into the comprehensive plan as part of the Land Use element, the wildlife corridor city map as a starting point. 2) Avoid consistency of the regulations can be readily assessed. This is directing new growth to areas with high probability of directly from the WAC and more information needed to refer to conflicts between new development and protecting critical are the WAC listed above. A previous meeting held with Interim areas [WAC 365-196-485(4)] 3)Identify open space corridors within and between urban growth areas for multiple purposes, including those areas needed as critical habitat by wildlife [WAC 365-196-485(1)(c)] Development Director Hope in 2024 gave consideration that these could be of benefit but timing prior to comp plan update approval in 2024 was limited to look at so now could be a great opportunity to consider this. This lines up with the statement in the comprehensive plan that states: "City of Edmonds — Mission to lead in environmental stewardship". to -ditch -parking -mandates/ MRSC (Seattle) article - https://mrsc.org/stay- informed/mrsc-insight/november-2024/corner-stores Packet Pg. 176 2.9.b Purpose is to implement this required WAC as an amendment to provide overarching policy and priorities for protecting critical areas in the comprehensive plan. Benefit: Overarching benefit will protect and enhance our critical Establish a Critical Areas Program and set forth its areas. There has been mention of the need to update the Critical underlying policies and priorities for Land Use [WAC 365- Area Code (ECDC title 23) this year and the current plan polices 14 Michelle Dotsch 196-485(1)(e)], Council Action April 1 to advance this idea should also be reviewed at the same time to ensure they provide for further study. the needed guidance to the updated Code provisions. For instance, ensure expand wetland buffers to be consistent with WDOE and WDFW recommendations. The current policies are very general and not well coordinated with the current Code. Good goals and policies will lead to a better Code. Purpose: This RCW listed above has these goals that area to be Establish proactive goals for the following in the Land 15 Michelle Dotsch considered that were not fully reviewed in the comp plan update Use Element [RCW 36.70A.020]: most likely due to the time constraints in 2024. Benefit: improve both the human and natural environment, that Council states at every meeting we are stewards of these lands. Retaining and Expanding Open Space This would provide policies and standards for managing our tree canopy in Edmonds, lessening any future litigation against the City. Conserving Fish and Wildlife Habitat including protecting wildlife corridors and preventing stormwater adverse impacts on aquatic habitat Preserving Natural Environment including mature tree and tree canopy goals from the Urban Forest Management Plan Enhancing the State's High Quality of Life, Including Air and Surface Water Quality Modify the Land Use Element to include mandatory [RCW 36.70A.070] "REVIEW DRAINAGE, FLOODING, AND Purpose: Bring the Land Use element up to mandatory statutory STORMWATER RUNOFF in the area and nearby 16 Michelle Dotsch requirements. Benefit: Above plus this would avoid losing grants jurisdictions and provide guidance for corrective actions to because not adhering to the law. mitigate or cleanse those discharges that pollute waters of the state or waters entering Puget Sound." m �a a a E 0 U LO N 0 N L a� r 0 .I- 9-m. U) m to m 0 a 0 a w 0 a) w a� 0 r as a 0 0 0 U c� m _ m E _ m E Q _ 0 a a 0 U 0 N _ d E s 0 r� Q Packet Pg. 177 2.9.b 17 Michelle Dotsch 18 Michelle Dotsch 19 Michelle Dotsch Revise the Land Use Criteria and Zoning Map to designate the Edmonds Marsh Wildlife Sanctuary open Purpose: to bring that land together in accordance with the City's space zoning (bounded by Hwy 104 to the east; BNSF plans and priorities for the last 10 years. Benefit: to allow Railroad Tracks to the west; Harbor Square to the north; restoration and other activities to proceed with one common and Pine Street up to and then along the base of the Point purpose to restore nearshore wildlife habitat. Edwards bluff to the south). Identify Critical Areas and adjacent buffer areas with an overlay designation on the Future Land Use and Zoning Maps. Purpose: Currently, the City Code (23.40.020) specifies that Critical Area regulations apply as an overlay to other existing development provisions. However, these are not identified on the plan or zoning maps for the benefit of existing and future property owners and residents. They are identified on separate GIS maps, but most residents only know about their existing zoning designation if even that. Benefit: The development process will be better informed if everyone knows about these important critical areas. This is for truth and transparency in planning management. Purpose: The State required count of all housing unit capacity for all centers and hubs in Edmonds was 2400 units. The Council ended up going far above the requirement by an additional 72% to over 4130 units of capacity that ended up being approved. The city is also almost 900 units of excess total capacity for the entire Remove the North Bowl as a Hub Council Action April 1 City. Benefit: The North Bowl neighbors have explained in detail to advance this idea for further study, collectively with how the Hub concept does not comply here for the originally other North Bowl ideas. intended purpose of why this tiny area for a Hub designation and pull in lots on a dead end and narrow lane that was incorrectly labeled a through street. Because we have approved 4132 units and only need 2400 units, this tiny area will be easy to remove and not affect any state requirements so Edmonds will easily remain in compliance. a Packet Pg. 178 2.9.b 20 Include much greater commercial/retail/service space Michelle Dotsch requirements in our Centers and Hubs, such as add that Sorted as all Centers and Hubs development that includes 20 or CODE/OTHER and more units must have ground floor commercial/retail at a not considered as minimum. Any housing development with less than 20 Comp Plan units requires a minimum of 20% and the less than 20 units Amendment Idea cannot be achieved by reduced unit count of the parent lot through a lot split or lot hacking if under the same developer. Purpose: To prevent loss of commercial and retail/services that was the purpose of the Center and Hub model by using previous BN and BC zoning areas. Imagine now in this Interim Code Language it eliminates the intentional zoning of 50-90% of existing commercial space in Edmonds ... 50-90% of businesses gone from Westgate, Firdale Village, Five Corners, East Seaview, Lake Ballinger, and the wide swath around the hospital and 3 schools in the Medical District expansion. All replaced by bedrooms and not holding true to the intent of the Centers and Hub concept? This needs to be further discussed and fleshed out how we are planning these areas for current and future residents and business tax revenue. Benefit: Remove the unintended consequence of the loss of revenue, the loss of amenities and services, the growth of population without holding even the commercial and retail spaces that we have for our current population, but claiming they will be more vibrant when all this is promoting in our interim development code is more bedrooms and less business? Packet Pg. 179 2.9.b 21 Michelle Dotsch Remove the lots from the Five Corners Center designation north of Bowdoin Way and west of Summit Lane Purpose: To create a buffer zone of reduced land development intensity from the already damaged and diverted Shell Creek and reduce the impact of Yost Park high storm water events that are impacting degradation of the hillside and loss of tree canopy. Prevent Shell Creek from becoming the next Perrinville Creek before it's too late. This is keeping with the WAC 365-196-485 (4)(a): "avoiding impacts through appropriate land use designations. This complies with "when developing and reviewing the comprehensive plan and future land use designations, counties and cities should use available information to avoid directing new growth to areas with a high probability of conflicts between new development and protecting critical areas." We did this for Perrinville Creek, let's do this for our endangered Shell Creek as well. Benefit: Do no harm and be good stewards of the Land that we have been entrusted with to care for. Not allow the degradation to worsen or at least understand further what is going on with Shell Creek, a fish habitat and restoration project and its natural park surrounding it before we allow for more urbanized development than necessary on its edges. We have plenty of capacity already planned for and this is just excess units that are not counted towards any state requirement. Packet Pg. 180 2.9.b Purpose: These are all dead-end streets that now have urban Land uses that are incompatible. The same types of cul-de-sacs Lots were removed from the East Seaview Hub by the Planning Board due to the incompatible land use planning for this same type of small and narrow cul-de-sacs. Benefit: Keep similar land use types on these cut -de -sacs as is there now to preserve the coordination of the development within those small number of Remove all SF lots west of 80 Ave W from 213 St SW to to cul-de-sacs that we have plenty of excess capacity to do so. This 22 Michelle Dotsch is an area that has been popular with new and younger families to 2181" St SW from the Medical District Expansion area. that Edmonds is looking to provide housing options for with a yard where a swing set can be placed, and light can pass through. This incompatible higher development within the same narrow cul-de- sacs to the East will crowd out those other lots and cast shadows upon incompatible neighboring properties. All these lots will still fall under HB 1110 so they can increase development with ADUs and other middle housing typologies that are coordinated with the rest of the lots on the small cul-de-sacs. a Packet Pg. 181 2.9.b Purpose: The Centers and Hubs have already been considered in planning for a higher number of units per lot because of the Location and across all the designation areas within the Centers and Hubs. The location of a transit stop in those areas are not necessarily compatible for additional density over and above what has already been planned for. This would lead to potential increased density zoning of the centers and hubs that the neighbors and the neighborhoods did not consider during the process. We already have incentive zoning across wide areas in Amend Policy H-2.3 Provide for a higher number of units Centers and Hubs to improve affordability. The center and hub per lot around the transit stops in activity centers, areas are so compact that extra transit stop density is 23 Michelle Dotsch neighborhood centers and hubs to read "Consider superfluous. Benefit: Keep the Center and Hubs consistent in providing..." and remove "activity centers" from the policy their publicly noted zoning designation capacity as they are statement. already planned for well above the required units with even additional height bonuses offered in many areas. The Activity Centers are already zoned for growth that is not required to be denser and serves no purpose to grow beyond what is required, as we carefully excluded the Hwy 99 activity center and Downtown activity center for that exact unintended outcome of uncoordinated additional growth. Removing activity center Language here would keep that promise to Hwy 99 and the Downtown core and can easily be fixed by removing activity centers from this statement. Under neighborhood centers, page 44, Remove the sentence "Centers permit a wide range of building types and will offer the ability to accomplish daily tasks without a Purpose: this is not an accurate statement that anyone can 24 Michelle Dotsch car to large sectors of the citv. " 25 Michelle Dotsch On page 44 under the heading: Some of the key access LARGE sectors of the city without a car. Purpose: again, accomplishing many daily tasks without a car is not realistic for Edmonds and should not currently plan like it is so. Benefit: compatibility of growth with actual service realities characteristics of the neighborhood centers and hubs are: and Edmonds' preferred method of vehicle travel included to not Please remove the bullet point: "Complementary Uses: create gridlock and limited parking safety issues. Visitors to enable compact building forms, providing the ability to accomplish many daily tasks without a car." Edmonds almost all use personal vehicles to do so, and this will allow for them to participate in economic growth of our city if they can easily access these areas or they will go elsewhere to spend their money. City Hall: To explore ways our city might utilize these Explore if upzoning or rezoning is suitable for the property. What zoning is compatible with the surrounding area? How 26 Neil Tibbott properties more fully if the allowed uses were expanded Prepare for the property for redevelopment or other compatible could the existing zoning be more fully utilized? beyond their current designations. uses within current designation. Packet Pg. 182 2.9.b 27 Removed at CP titiLize these pi'OpertieS ffltffe fuily if the allowed uses were Tibbott's request expanded beyond their current designations. i Removed at CP Y. t i i i z- - - - - ir ii i - r til - - i-- t- - - .f - g V. - -Tibbott's request expanded beyond their current designations. - - — — r4wee_ r� �.�eswc�rsw�,��.rwcx a er�w�. �r�—Eswie sss li�►7�/1 �/ll/1 /lf l\�:1►71.J <Ull/lll�lf l\�A i----------- ---ue Packet Pg. 183 2.9.c Approved by Council 4/1/2025 for Further Study: (Items 1, 4, 10, 19) North Bowl Hub change (Item 14) Establish Critical Areas Program Proposed to be docketed for future consideration: (Item 7) Westgate Center possible reduction (Item 21) Five Corners Hub reduction (Item 22) Medical District Expansion Center reduction (Item 26) City Hall property —future land use options (Item 5) Lake Ballinger site height limits (Item 8) Highway 99 Internation District height limits (Item 13) Add policies re: environment, open space, and limiting growth (Item 15) Establish four new goals in the Land Use Element (Item 16) Modify Land Use Element re: stormwater (Item 17) Revise Land Use Map to designate Marsh Sanctuary area as open space (Item 18) Combine Future Land Use Map with critical area and buffer overlay map (Item 23) Remove "activity centers" from policy about number of units around transit stops (Items 24, 25) Modify language for accomplishing tasks without a car (p. 44 of Comp Plan) Proposed to be Removed: (Items 2, 6) Hummingbird Park —future land use options (Items 3, 27) Frances Anderson Center site —future land use options (Item 6) Meadowdale Clubhouse site —future land use options (Item 28) Wade James Theater property —future land use options Packet Pg. 184 2.9.d Outline of Legislative Process For Consideration of 2025 Comprehensive Plan Amendments March 4 • The Council discusses and finalizes a process for Council to propose and consider 2025 amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. March 5 to 18 • Council members individually provide their ideas for amendments to the Council's Legislative Executive Assistant so the ideas can be included in a future agenda packet for Comprehensive Plan Ideas to study. (Note: 2025 amendments should be limited in number and scope, especially because a major update just took place.) March 25 • All amendment ideas that have been submitted ahead from City Council members are included in the agenda a packet for the March 25 meeting. a E • At the meeting,City staff provide an overview of the amendment ideas and key y p y points to consider. ° v • For each idea, brief questions or clarification may follow. N April 1 0 N L • Council members discuss and vote on which of the amendment ideas will get further study in the next three ° so months. These ideas represent the Council's approved list for further study. A�.) •L April 2- June 30 ° •L • Staff studies the proposals on the Council's approved study list and identifies key information. a July 8 • Council reviews results of the study and votes on which of the ideas from the study list should become "proposed amendments" for formal consideration. vi • The Planning Board receives this information and begins considering whether/what to recommend to the E Council. a=i August 12 a A public hearing is held on any City Council amendment proposals. Planning Board's recommendation is provided on or about the same time. r N August 19 (Committee of the Whole) • Council may discuss the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments. J vi September 9 4) • Council votes on final proposed amendments to adopt into the Comprehensive Plan. ° IL w _ October -November E E • Council separately considers and votes on any Comprehensive Plan amendments for the Capital Facilities Element 5 (e.g., CIP updates). Q Packet Pg. 185 2.9.e Short List of Comprehensive Plan Amendment Ideas By Category Ideas for Neighborhood Centers & Hubs • North Bowl 4 conflicting or overlapping approaches (Olson, Eck, Dotsch, Chen) • Westgate Possibly reduce area (Olson) • Five Corners Remove lots (Dotsch) • Medical District Expansion Remove lots (Dotsch) City Property Ideas • City Hall property Consider options for future land use (Tibbott) • Frances Anderson Center site Consider options for future land use (Olson, Tibbott) • Wade James Theater site Consider options for future land use (Tibbott) • Meadowdale Clubhouse site Consider options for future land use (Olson) • Hummingbird Park site Consider options for future land use (Olson) Private Proaerties (not necessarily centers or hubs • Lake Ballinger height limits (Olson) • Greater building height International District Hwy 99 (Chen) Packet Pg. 186 Ideas to Revisit Goals, Policies, etc. 2.9.e • Add certain policies to Land Use and Housing elements re: environment and open space and to limit growth (Item 13, Dotsch) • Add Environmental Program policy (Item 14, Dotsch) • Establish four new land use goals (Item 15, Dotsch) • Modify land use element (Item 16, Dotsch) • Revise land use criteria and map (Item 17, Dotsch) • Amend policy about density by transit stops (Item 23, Dotsch) • Amend language about neighborhood centers (Item 24, Dotsch) • Amend language about complementary uses (Item 25, Dotsch) Code -Specific and Other Ideas • Allow hotels on port and waterfront properties (Chen) • Allow neighborhood cafes and stores in all neighborhood centers and hubs (Paine) • Include requirements for more commercial in neighborhood centers and hubs (Dotsch) • Consider displacement in centers and hub (Paine) CU a� c a a E 0 U LO N O N L 0 m •L 0 a 0 a� d U >, CO 6 0 as c a� E 0 r a Packet Pg. 187 2.10 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 04/15/2025 Resolution Recognizing Earth Day 2025 Staff Lead: Councilmember Susan Paine Department: City Council Preparer: Beckie Peterson Background/History This resolution is brought forward to recognize the important benefits of using our local transit systems. Recommendation For information only. This resolution is scheduled to be presented and approved on consent during the April 21, 2025 council meeting, recognizing April 22, 2025 as Earth Day. Narrative This year marks the 55th anniversary of the first Earth Day. This year's theme is "Our Power, Our Planet". Resources for Earth Month activities can be found here: Edmonds Parks Activities - Earth Dav in the Park and Watershed Fun Fair <https://www.edmondswa.gov/government/departments/parks and recreation/programs classes and camps/discovery programs/annual public events> Earth Day with the Edmonds Stewards - Day of service in Edmonds <https://www.soundsalmonsolutions.org/events/2025/4/19/earth-day-edmonds> Earth Month Activities - The Nature Conservancy <https://www.nature.org/en-us/get- involved/how-to-help/earth-day/?fa=opentothepublic,limitedaccess,closedtothepublic> Attachments: 4.9.2025 RESOLUTION Recognizing Edmonds' Earth Day Packet Pg. 188 2.10.a RESOLUTION NO: A RESOLUTION OF THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL RECOGNIZING APRIL 22, 2025 AS EDMONDS' EARTH DAY WHEREAS, Earth Day is a time to reflect upon the health of our planet and acknowledge the responsibility we all share in preserving and protecting the environment for current and future generations; and WHEREAS, the city of Edmonds is a part of the global community, and we are facing a climate crisis, along with environmental emergencies and challenges; and WHEREAS the theme for Earth Day 2025 is "Our Power, Our Planet", which is an unwavering commitment to call for sustainable use of our limited resources for the sake of human and planetary health as well as reducing the use of our unsustainable power sources; and WHEREAS, humanity possesses immense power through collective action, innovation, and compassion to heal and sustain the Earth, ensuring that our ecosystems, communities, and resources are preserved for future generations; and WHEREAS, the urgency of addressing climate change, biodiversity loss, environmental degradation, and the disproportionate impact of these crises on vulnerable populations demands bold and immediate action across all sectors of society; and WHEREAS, to achieve the future Edmonds has envisioned for itself - a community with a high quality of life that is sustainable and equitable for all residents - the city of Edmonds recognizes that reducing the impacts climate change is important and cannot be accomplished without action at every level from national, state, our community, and individuals; and WHEREAS, this year marks the 55th anniversary of the first earth day movement, the city of Edmonds encourages all businesses, institutions, and individuals to celebrate the earth and commit to caring for the planet and its limited resources. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT: The city of Edmonds declares that we are in a climate emergency, acknowledging that climate change is upon us, and that the measures taken up to this point are not enough to limit the changes brought by this emergency. The city of Edmonds in committed to: 1. Empowering Youth and Future Generations Recognizing that the youth of today are the leaders of tomorrow, we pledge to empower the next generation with the knowledge, tools, and opportunities needed to continue the fight for environmental justice. We will support youth -led movements, educational Packet Pg. 189 2.10.a programs, and initiatives that elevate the voices of young people in shaping the future of our planet. 2. Investing in Green Innovation and Solutions We commit to supporting research, innovation, and the development of new technologies that promote sustainability, reduce environmental impact, and accelerate the transition to a green economy. Investment in clean technologies, sustainable agriculture, and carbon reduction strategies will be a priority for the global community. 3. Protecting Biodiversity and Ecosystems Governments, corporations, and individuals will work to protect critical ecosystems, including forests, oceans, wetlands, and grasslands. Efforts will be made to halt biodiversity loss, restore damaged ecosystems, and support conservation efforts, ensuring that the Earth's natural resources are safeguarded for future generations. Be it further resolved that, in the spirit of Earth Day 2025's theme of "Our Power, Our Planet", we will unite our collective power to ensure that we leave a sustainable, thriving planet for future generations. Together, through intentional acts and shared responsibility, we will use the power of innovation, compassion, and regional cooperation to create a more resilient and just world for all. RESOLVED this day of April 2025. CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR, MIKE ROSEN ATTEST: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. Packet Pg. 190