Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2019-07-02 City Council - Full Agenda-2387
1 2 3 4 5. o Agenda Edmonds City Council snl. ,nyo COUNCIL CHAMBERS 250 5TH AVE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 JULY 2, 2019, 7:00 PM CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE ROLL CALL APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA 1. Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes of June 25, 2019 2. Approval of Council Special Joint Meeting Minutes of June 25, 2019 3. Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of June 25, 2019 4. Approval of Council Retreat Meeting Minutes of June 7, 2019 5. Approval of claim checks and wire payment. 6. Acknowledgment of Claim for Damages 7. Lynnwood Mazda Pedestrian Easement 8. Wassall Pedestrian Easement at the NE corner of 639 2nd Ave 9. Postpone Public Hearing for 184th Street SW Street Vacation 10. Ordinance Land Use Permit Decision -Making and Quasi -Judicial Process AUDIENCE COMMENTS (3-MINUTE LIMIT PER PERSON) - REGARDING MATTERS NOT LISTED ON THE AGENDA AS CLOSED RECORD REVIEW OR AS PUBLIC HEARINGS 6. ACTION ITEMS 1. Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Discussion (20 min) 2. Civic Park Financing (20 min) 7. STUDY ITEMS 8. 9. 10. 11. 1. Multi -Family Tax Exemption Program Overview (20 min) 2. Council discussion on next steps for emergency access to the waterfront. (60 min) MAYOR'S COMMENTS COUNCIL COMMENTS CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(1). RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. ADJOURN Edmonds City Council Agenda July 2, 2019 Page 1 4.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 07/2/2019 Approval of Council Special Meeting Minutes of June 25, 2019 Staff Lead: Scott Passey Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review and approve the draft meeting minutes on the Consent Agenda. Narrative N/A Attachments: Cmd062519 spec mtg Packet Pg. 2 4.1.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING DRAFT MINUTES JUNE 259 2019 Elected Officials Present Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Mike Nelson, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Tom Mesaros, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember Mike Nelson, Councilmember Elected Officials Absent Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Dave Earling, Mayor Staff Present Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Carrie Hite, Parks & Recreation CALL TO ORDER/CONVENE IN JURY MEETING ROOM At 6:00 p.m., the City Council Special Meeting was called to order by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5"' Avenue North, Edmonds. 2. EXECUTIVE SESSION: COLLECTIVE BARGAINING The City Council then adjourned to the Jury Meeting Room in closed session to discuss pending or potential litigation per RCW 42.30.140(1)(a). I_\ larelli ng At 6:15 p.m., the meeting was adjourned. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 1 Packet Pg. 3 4.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 07/2/2019 Approval of Council Special Joint Meeting Minutes of June 25, 2019 Staff Lead: Scott Passey Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review and approve the draft meeting minutes on the Consent Agenda. Narrative N/A Attachments: E062519 Special Packet Pg. 4 4.2.a SPECIAL EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES June 25, 2019 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Buckshnis, Council President Pro Tem Michael Nelson, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Dave Earling, Mayor Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER STAFF PRESENT Phil Williams, Public Works Director Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir. Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir Scott James, Finance Director Rob English, City Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Nicholas Falk, Deputy City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:15 p.m. by Mayor Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas in the Council Chambers, 250 5" Avenue North, Edmonds. 2. JOINT MEETING WITH SOUTH COUNTY FIRE & RESCUE COMMISSION Jim Kenny, Chair, South County Fire Commission, introduced Commissioners Jim McGaughey, David Chan, Christine Frizzell, and Bob Meador; and Interim Fire Chief Doug Dahl. Councilmembers introduced themselves. Chief Doug Dahl said a presentation was made in May; this was an opportunity for questions. Chief Dahl introduced Assistant Chief/Fire Marshal Kevin Zweber, Acting Deputy Chief of Operations John Chalfant, Deputy Chief of Training Jason Isotalo, Acting Assistant Chief of Operations Thad Hovis, Deputy Chief of EMS Shaughn Maxwell and Deputy Chief Robert Eastman. Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis referred to the Heat Map, commenting with the hospital on the border, she could see why the City's numbers might be a little skewed. City Attorney Jeff Taraday said Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis asked him research the conversation last year about this time about Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor (NUUF) and the dynamic that exists with that and the metric that was set up to provide a way of quantifying situations where one jurisdiction may be doing more of its share than another jurisdiction. As Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis mentioned, the hospital is a huge call generator that happens to be within Edmonds' boundaries and contributes to that balancing factor. Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis referred to a comment made by Councilmember Nelson last year, regarding a March 2018 Fire Commission meeting that he watched where Assistant Chief Dahl indicated in October 2017 it was apparent Mountlake Terrace and Lynnwood BLS units were responding to Edmonds more than Edmonds units were responding to those cities which was impacting the NUUF in Edmonds' contract. To help address that, a deal was struck, not in the contract or written down anywhere, whereby an Special Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 1 Packet Pg. 5 4.2.a Edmonds unit would respond before another Mountlake Terrace or Lynnwood unit. Fire Chief Dahl said that is not being done anymore. Council President Pro Tern Buckshnis asked if that would be a factor in this year's numbers. Chief Dahl said it was done for approximately three months. Mr. Taraday said it started in August 2017 and stopped in early 2018 although he was not certain of the exact date it stopped. Chief Dahl said it stopped shortly after Chief Stedman jointed South County Fire (SCF) in 2018. Utilizing that practice a few months in 2017 and a short time in 2018 could definitely have impacted the NUUF. Mr. Taraday said the incomplete data for the portion of 2017 when it was in place, didn't show that it significantly lowered the NUUF and depending on which month, in some cases it reversed for Mountlake Terrace. He summarized it was not done for an entire year so there was not a year's worth of data to consider. For citizens who were watching, Council President Pro Tern Buckshnis asked Mr. Taraday to define NUUF. Mr. Taraday said it is Neighboring Unit Utilization Factor; a way of measuring. He explained in 2009, the City had its own Fire Department and operated three fire stations. It was his understanding at that time the Edmonds Fire Department operated as a standalone fire department except in cases of mutual aid. Chief Dahl said that was not true. He explained the reason NUUF was added to the adjusted contract was because Edmonds eliminated Medic 17 and there needed to be a way to measure how a decision made by the City of Edmonds could affect the rest of the area, how many times that caused a neighboring unit, mostly Station 14 in Lynnwood and Station 19 in Mountlake Terrace, to pick up those calls and how far out of balance it could be. Above 10% was determined to be out of balance or out of threshold notice. In 2010 the District changed to Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL), a GPS dispatch of the closest unit. The past practice in Edmonds was not as precise; the run card was manually produced by looking at a map and identifying which unit would respond, but did not require Edmonds units respond before Station 14 or 19 responded. Run cards are now computer generated by selecting the closest unit. Council President Pro Tern Buckshnis asked if there was a way to adjust the numbers to reflect that informal "firemen's agreement" in part of 2017 and 2018. Chief Dahl said without going into the contract, there were things to look at. SCF discontinued that practice because they did not favor giving Edmonds a different level of service than any other area and they still feel that way. Their service is their service and dispatch protocols are established in that manner. Council President Pro Tern Buckshnis commented SCF is more regionalized now. She did not have a problem with the NUUF being out of balance because there were not consistent numbers for 2017 and 2018. Mr. Taraday said what is getting lost in the discussion is while it's true NUUF was implemented because Medic 17 was coming offline and the parties wanted to see what impact that would have, it is not true that Medic 17 drove the NUUF where it is today. The numbers from January 2017, before that change was made, show that the Lynnwood - Edmonds NUUF was out of balance 1.96, approximately what it is today and the Mountlake Terrace - Edmonds NUUF was out of balance 1.51. It was a problem even before Medic 17 was eliminated and it is a problem because of the way AVL works. Council President Pro Tern Buckshnis advised she sent Councilmembers the study that was done by Finch that recommended eliminating Medic 17. She recalled the redundant unit at one station was eliminated. Chief Dahl said Edmonds now has 3 single medic units run by 9 people and 12 people and a single dual medic unit. Council President Pro Tern Buckshnis summarized a unit was eliminated but units were added. Chief Dahl agreed. Councilmember Nelson Council said the agenda memo talks about NUUF and options for addressing it. One of the options is "it may be possible to balance the NUUF with no additional financial cost to the City, by building small delays into the computer aided dispatch system for BLS calls only." Councilmember Nelson said essentially when someone calls 911 for BLS, that response would be slowed down. For example Special Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 2 Packet Pg. 6 4.2.a if a child breaks his leg at a park that borders Lynnwood, the Lynnwood station would not respond, instead Station 16 would respond. Chief Dahl said that was the original proposal, an agreement in 2017 that was later stopped. Councilmember Nelson said the Fire Chief at the time thought that was a degrade of service. Chief Dahl said that was a fair statement. Councilmember Nelson asked if that was the same today. Chief Dahl said SCF does not believe in treating Edmonds residents any different than anyone else in the RTA. Councilmember Nelson referred to the agenda memo that stated, "The net result is that the City's three fire stations would function similarly to the way that they functioned when the City had its own fire department prior to 2010." He pointed out that raised the question of why have the wonderful benefits of a fire authority if the service was the same as when the City has its own fire department. He pointed out under that scenario only BLS calls would be delayed. Councilmember Nelson asked if all BLS calls were actual basic life support. Chief Dahl answered 8-10% are increased to ALS. Councilmember Nelson said of the 5,500 BLS calls in 2018, 2,999 were BLS; and of that, 239 end up being paramedic calls. Therefore this idea would potentially slow down paramedic calls. Chief Dahl answered it could be. Councilmember Nelson referred to a statement in the agenda memo, "Another option would be incorporating private ambulance transport into the EMS service, as is done in Seattle and Everett." He asked if SCF was aware of the City of Edmonds contacting anyone about private ambulance service. Chief Dahl said they were advised by a local ambulance company, NW Ambulance, that they had been contacted. NW Ambulance advised them as a professional courtesy; he was unaware of what the contact entailed. Councilmember Nelson referred to another option cited in the agenda memo, "...reduce ongoing operating costs, by relocating one or more of the City's fire stations, especially if one or more of the City's stations is moved closer to one of the aid call hot spots. The parties acknowledge that none of these three fire stations are ideally located and that the City could be better served by two ideally located fire stations." He summarized that would be essentially getting rid of a fire station. He asked whether that would result in increased response time. Chief Dahl anticipated responding to 5,500 calls with 2 stations instead of 3 would result in an increase in the response time. Councilmember Teitzel referred to NUUF, neighboring fire units respond to Edmonds more than Edmonds units respond to neighboring jurisdictions. He noted that was not just fire, it was fire and aid calls. Chief Dahl agreed. Councilmember Teitzel he asked if it would be possible to determine the NUUF for fire versus aid. Chief Dahl said that information could be provided. Councilmember Teitzel asked if the numbers included non -emergency transports where a patient is transported from the doctor's office to Swedish Hospital for additional treatment. Chief Dahl said it includes all emergency transports. Councilmember Teitzel asked if the data could be separated to determine the number of non -emergency transport from a doctor's office to Swedish. Deputy Chief Eastman said he will try to break out that information. Councilmember Teitzel was concerned that non -emergency transports from a doctor's office to Swedish are affecting response time and the NUUF. Councilmember Teitzel referred to the heat map, noting there are a lot of calls around Hwy 99. He asked if there was a way to better address medical calls in that area by stationing a vehicle, paramedic and potentially a medic at the hospital and how much it would cost. Chief Dahl said that is similar to the peak activity unit which SCF has discussed with Edmonds in the past. He recalled the cost of a BLS unit was about $700,000. Councilmember Mesaros referred to the imbalance with Lynnwood and Mountlake Terrace and the root cause. He recalled hearing while serving on the Sno911 Board, when a Mountlake Terrace is at hospital dropping off a transport and comes back online, they are physically in Edmonds. He asked if anyone had Special Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 3 Packet Pg. 7 4.2.a tracked those units being the closest unit to respond to Edmonds. Chief Dahl said that could be tracked but the majority of units put themselves out of service until they get back to their area. However, in an emergent call, a medic call or a fire call, they will jump the call. Sometimes a unit will clear Swedish Edmonds and if there is a CPR across the street, they will respond. He did not anticipate the number of times that happened to be super significant but they could research it. Councilmember Mesaros anticipated the reverse would happen if Swedish were located in Lynnwood or Mountlake Terrace. He summarized that was one of factors; units transporting patient that were coming to Edmonds. With regard to degradation of services, Councilmember Tibbott said all three Edmonds stations have cross - trained personnel and are not dependent on medic service from Station 17 to back up another station. He asked if there had been a degradation in service as a result of the cross -trained program. Chief Dahl answered not specifically. The comment was related to an increase in response time not the care the person received. Councilmember Tibbott summarized there has not been a degradation, but an increase in NUUF which could be attributable to the GPS locator. Chief Dahl said that was a fair statement. Councilmember Tibbott said if the practice were to return to BLS sent separately using GPS, would there be a decrease in time by having a cross -trained unit respond versus the nearest unit. Chief Dahl answered it would vary by call. Using the Meadowdale area as an example, Station 14 can get there in 4 minutes, if Station 16 were sent first, it would be 6 minutes and if 16 were not available and Station 20 were sent, it was 12 minutes. He reiterated it depends on the call and where the unit is located at the time. SCF uses the closest unit and jurisdiction regardless of borders. Councilmember Tibbott summarized at this point there was no data to support that change in response time. Chief Dahl said it was only studied for three months. Councilmember Tibbott asked what was discovered in those three months. Chief Dahl said he would need to research the data. Mr. Taraday referred to his notes from a conversation with SCF and Chief Stedman on March 23, 2018 where the findings of that trial period were discussed; the added delay occasioned by that arrangement was one second. The minutes of last year's meeting with SCF reflect that he referenced that one second. Councilmember Tibbott observed having a different arrangement for BLS response did not significantly change medical care. Mr. Taraday said he does not have the data, only his notes from that meeting. He was certain SCF could provide that data so it could be more carefully evaluated. It was his understanding from that meeting that it was an extremely insignificant change in the overall response time. Councilmember Tibbott asked if that matched SCF's data. Chief Dahl said it was how one wanted to look at the data. Did the City get lucky for three months? It was a small study; SCF determined it would not provide a different level of service to Edmonds than they were providing anyone else. It was up to the Council to decide if one second, one minute was too much. SCF has been clear they are providing closest unit. Councilmember Tibbott asked if SCF was proposing a change to accommodate use of GPS and the NUUF. Chief Dahl said SCF has not made any proposals or provided any notice yet. Councilmember Tibbott summarized as far as SCF was concerned, the contract is in place and the status quo is working. Chief Dahl agreed the status quo was in place. Councilmember Tibbott referred to Mr. Taraday's comment about percentages of NUUF from other cities. Mr. Taraday said his comment was that it was a mistake to draw the conclusion that the NUUF was out of balance as a result of eliminating Medic 17. In January 2017, before Medic 17 was removed, the NUUF numbers were approximately what they are now: Mountlake Terrace to Edmonds is out of balance 1.51 and Lynnwood to Edmonds is out of balance 1.96. That was the status quo before Medic 17 was taken offline. It is up to the Council to determine what they want to do, if anything, about the NUUF being out of balance. Medic 17 was located downtown and AVL did not select it for calls near the hospital. If the Council wanted Special Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 4 Packet Pg. 8 4.2.a to add resources to the system, possibly locating it closer to the hospital would make a difference related to NUUF. Councilmember Tibbott recalled asking Chief Redding if Medic 17 was moved anywhere in Edmonds, which station would be best. His reply was he wouldn't want it at any of the stations and would rather it be on Hwy 99 close to the hospital. Chief Dahl said that was a fair statement. Councilmember Tibbott said if the Council thought it was important to increase services in/around hospital by adding a medic vehicle, would it be sensible to create additional ILA so that that would be supported by neighboring cities. Chief Dahl said SCF's data shows a vehicle closer to Hwy 99 would help that general call area. He referred to a list of the top 10 highest producing call addresses, pointing out they are not medical offices. They are adult family homes and one of the highest call producer is an adult family home near Caspers and 9'. The high call areas are not just in the hospital zone but also adult family homes. Councilmember Tibbott referred to the comment about going from three stations to two, noting he had not heard any conversation about that. Chief Dahl said SCF has not looked at that and studies do not recommend Edmonds drop to two stations. Mayor Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas said she distinctly remembered discussions with Fire District 1 about keeping three stations but they were not located in the appropriate places and if FD1 had their way, they would move one of the Edmonds stations. Chief Dahl agreed they have always said that; the three stations in Edmonds are not ideally located. Station 17 is not in a good location; it is against the water and in a response circle, they do not respond to the west. If money were no object, Station 17 would be moved further east and closer to the hospital. Mayor Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas recalled discussion about moving stations to provide better coverage, not reducing stations. Mayor Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas referred to changing minimum staffing in stations and asked if there was a standard level of staffing in every station. The documentation indicates the Edmonds and Mountlake Terrace have same staffing levels and at least one Lynnwood station has the same staffing level. Chief Dahl explained the minimum was three. Station 11, 15, 10 and 21 are staffed at 5 or more dedicated rigs. Edmonds is staffed like the other seven SCF stations. Mayor Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas said when Medic 17 was removed, staffing was leveled out to the same as the rest of stations. Chief Dahl said Station 17 went from a 5 person station to a 3 person station. Mayor Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas asked if the reason there was higher staffing at other stations was because they have different vehicles, ladder trucks, et. Chief Dahl answered it is related to equipment or call volume because their unit utilization is above the recommended average. They are not cross -staffed units; there is a dedicated engine and a dedicated medic unit. Mayor Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas observed two of most easterly stations have 3-person staffing and if they needed additional coverage, it would be provided by Station 11. Chief Dahl answered Station 11 and 12 as well as the closest unit from District 7, Station 77, which is near Station 13. Mayor Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas said the stations with added staff cover for nearby stations when necessary. Chief Dahl said all stations cover for each other. Mayor Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas said she had never heard anyone talk about reducing a station in Edmonds. Chief Dahl said the revised agreement stated Edmonds had the right to look at that. Neither Edmonds nor SCF have asked to look at that. Councilmember Nelson said three stations versus two was stated in the Council agenda memo as a long term option to deal with the imbalance. The bigger question was on one hand the Fire Chief said there was an impact and the City Attorney said there was no impact. He encouraged the Council to keep that in mind Special Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 5 Packet Pg. 9 4.2.a when looking at levels of service and response time; whether the Council was listening to the City Attorney or the emergency professionals. Board Chair Kenny said SCF is engaged in a capital facilities planning process for fire stations and other facilities. The stations owned by Edmonds have needs and will eventually need to be replaced. The Council should think about repair and replacement of those stations and during that process is a good time to discuss station location. That discussion is occurring across the entire RFA and SCF staff has discussed it with City staff. Mayor Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas asked whether other cities own their stations. Board Chair Kenny said Mountlake Terrace owns theirs; Brier does not. 3. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 6:55 p.m. Special Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 6 Packet Pg. 10 4.3 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 07/2/2019 Approval of Council Meeting Minutes of June 25, 2019 Staff Lead: Scott Passey Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Scott Passey Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review and approve the draft meeting minutes on the Consent Agenda. Narrative N/A Attachments: E062519 Packet Pg. 11 4.3.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES June 25, 2019 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Mayor Pro Tem Diane Buckshnis, Council President Pro Tem Michael Nelson, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Dave Earling, Mayor Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Phil Williams, Public Works Director Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir. Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir. Shane Hope, Development Services Director Scott James, Finance Director Kernen Lien, Environmental Program Mgr. Mike DeLilla, Senior Utilities Engineer Rob English, City Engineer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Nicholas Falk, Deputy City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:17 p.m. by Mayor Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas in the Council Chambers, 250 5' Avenue North, Edmonds. She announced the meeting was being audio recorded and may not be video -recorded due to technical difficulties. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. ROLL CALL as Deputy Clerk Nicholas Falk called the roll. All elected officials were present with the exception of Mayor N Earling and Councilmember Johnson. w COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY MAYOR PRO TEM FRALEY-MONILLAS TO EXCUSE COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON. MOTION CARRIED E UNANIMOUSLY 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA Q Councilmember Teitzel asked to pull Item 4.5, ECC 5.32 and 5.05.060; Park Rules and Dog Rules. Councilmember Teitzel asked for clarification before approving Item 4.5. Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite relayed she received a call from the Edmonds School District requesting a slight change in the ordinance related to dogs on public grounds. The district would like to allow dogs on school grounds but they have a policy that regulates it. She displayed a recommended change to the ordinance: (change is italicized): 5.05.060 Dogs on public grounds. A. It shall be unlawful for an owner to allow any dog to stray and/or enter with or without a leash or other means of restraint upon any seheal groun , playfield, playground, sprgyground, or anX public beach. park, beaeh, Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 1 Packet Pg. 12 4.3.a BE. All degs pemaiffed in areas designeAed in subseetion (B) of this seetion shall be on a leas' Dogs .are permitted in cityparks, on the waterfront walkway and on other public property not listed in subsection (A) of this section, and shall be on a leash and in the owner's control at all times. Dogs are permitted off leash, and under the owner's control, in the off leash area south of Marina Beach Park. Dogs are permitted on school Qrounds subiect to Edmonds School District polices Ms. Hite explained the district's policy states dogs are not allowed on school grounds lh hour before school, during school hours and'/2 hour after school. Outside those hours, the district wants to welcome the public to use their grounds with their dogs. COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT, TO APPROVE ECC 5.32 AND 5.05.060; PARK RULES AND DOG RULES AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED (5-0-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT BUCKSHNIS ABSTAINING. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS TO APPROVE THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 18, 2019 2. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JUNE 18, 2019 3. APPROVAL OF CLAIM, PAYROLL AND BENEFIT CHECKS, DIRECT DEPOSIT AND WIRE PAYMENTS 4. EDMONDS EMPLOYEE ASSOCIATION, LOCAL 3517 (AFSCME COUNCIL 2) 2018-2020 COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENT 5. ECC 5.32 AND 5.05.060; PARK RULES AND DOG RULES 6. SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Cam Tripp, Edmonds, said he was here on behalf of the 11,000 who have signed the petition to save the beach and on behalf of some not able to sign the petition, Mike Oreo, Rainshadow, Alki, Midnight, Wavewalker, Windsong, and Joy and Princess Angelina, some of the remaining 76 resident endangered orcas that live on this coast. The seashore along Edmonds is a key part of the Salish Sea system and a designated marine wildlife reserve. When visiting the beach last week, he encountered two scientists doing water quality sampling who said they go to 11 places from Seattle to Everett and the Edmonds marine sanctuary is the only place that never has water quality issues. The beach is pristine and amazing; building on that beach would do irreparable harm to the Salish Sea system so it is important to keep it clean. The vision for the Edmonds waterfront does not include a massive development but keeping it beautiful, natural and pure. He has heard there needs to be a process for capturing the Edmonds community values; one of the values is citizens love the beach and the Salish Sea and he requested the Council honor that community value. He thanked the Council for their commitment to public service, a selfless, high calling and expressed appreciation for the Council's efforts. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 2 Packet Pg. 13 as Ln N O O W c m E t 0 2 Q 4.3.a Ross Demmick, Edmonds, thanked Shane Hope for organizing the group to provide input on the draft Urban Forest Management Plan (UFMP) and Kernen Lien taking their input and refocusing the document. He also thanked Council President Pro Tern Buckshnis and Councilmember Tibbott for their interest in what he had to say. His comments to the Council on prior iterations of the plan have focused on two problems, first, its shaky scientific foundation, particularly statements and calculations that were unsupported by the cited reference documents and inconsistent with the contractors online tools. This aspect was particularly offensive to him having spent his career presenting good environmental science for informed government decision -making. Second, was the lack of consideration of the inherent conflict between trees and the human or built environment. Without that conflict, there would be no need for a plan to save trees or shave the marsh, the beach. The plan is also much closer to describing the nature versus human conflicts that have resulted in the decline of the urban forest. They are about views, structural integrity, and cost of maintenance. He still questioned the utility of the document as a plan. It now has a section that provides guidance on what it means to have the right tree in the right place, but a plan needs to go a step further. Plans require a strategic direction, a mission statement, and coherent goals and actions. Imagine a comprehensive plan for trees; what are we trying to achieve with the urban forest in each part of the community? What is the objective of tree planting or preservation on the Hwy 99 corridor and how does that differ from other areas of Edmonds? How do these objectives influence the selection of tree species? Those questions remain largely unanswered in the revised plan. The pieces for a great plan exist in the revised UFMP but without a responsive contractor, he was unsure City staff or citizens have the time to transform the plan into what it could and should be. He could neither recommend that the Council approve or reject the UFMP; it is vastly improved but he believed it was still flawed. Lee Kimmelman, Edmonds, said it was important to recognize that saving the beach and the needs of the waterfront are somewhat related but two different things. It was critical that citizens and the City Council G recognize what happened last week set a mandate for what citizens do not want to happen at the waterfront. c It was also important to recognize that there are realities related to increased ferry and train traffic and 0 increased tourism that put a burden on Edmonds. It is unrealistic to expect Edmonds will remain the same c into the future. He called on the City Council and the community to be proactive in recognizing that changes a are coming and to work to identify changes that work for all. He acknowledged some changes will be a difficult and require economic, environmental and comfort compromises and finding a workable solution a, will require everyone to work together. He did not want the Save the Beach effort to be become a single , O issue item that prevents the community from moving forward. o w Laurie Rasmussen, Edmonds, relayed My Edmonds Neighbors reported there are nearly 10,000 signatures for Save the Beach. The effort continues with people putting up posters and signs and wearing buttons to rally to Save the Beach and not have Waterfront Connector constructed. She referred to an opinion article where the person reviewed the study that was done regarding the connector and recognized three different areas that were in conflict. The author of that article requested the contractor review the a study results and return to the Council with the information he found. With regard to utility rates, she preferred the Council consider bonds instead of utilizing the pay-as-you-go method. Jim Carraway, Edmonds, commented on the potential for a motion to consider last week's vote. He was initially in favor of the Waterfront Connector, but that support was ill-founded because he did not have all the information. First, he was under the impression that the state and federal funding had been secured which it has not been. He was also surprised to learn the $18.8M federal BUILD grant the City would be requesting was out the norm for this year's potential grants. As a result, he questioned the effort to spend more taxpayer dollars on a project that could not be funded. He was also under the impression there would be little to no impact to the beach because it would connect at Bell Street, not Edmonds Street. He learned the beach is a protected marine sanctuary; that alone should have killed the project. As an Edmonds resident, he expected elected officials to do their job by being fiscally responsible with taxpayer dollars and to take Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 3 Packet Pg. 14 4.3.a into consideration the desires of the people who elect them and to protect the environment and the city. One of the topics that keeps coming up is safety; one of the options is $20M cheaper and would address public safety. Maura Doe, Edmonds, expressed her support for the Save the Beach campaign. She was perplexed last week as it seemed like common sense once she saw the visual and learned of the marine sanctuary. She was appalled the Mayor had continued the conversation and said that hearings had been held, etc. She has two children and works full-time; she expects her elected officials to use common sense, intelligence and job skills to make good decisions. The beach is a beautiful visual for visitors and the face of the community. She urged the Mayor and Council to be careful about what they do and use common sense. It doesn't matter how much money has been spent to explore an option if at the end of the day it did not make sense. Ruth Lakey, Edmonds, encouraged the decision -makers to use creative thinking and think outside the box. The solution is a simple idea and does not take a lot of imagination. She was certain the City has the ability to think of a creative solution that would acceptable to everyone and secure the beauty of the City and the beach. 6. REPORTS ON COMMITTEE MEETINGS Finance Committee Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis reported on topics the committee discussed: • Edmonds Public Facilities District Financial Report o Finances are improving o Have adopted a Strategic Plan • Civic Field Debt Service Options Discussion o Considering various bond scenarios • April 2019 Monthly Financial Report • Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Discussion • Washington State Auditor's Office Financial Intelligence Tool o Auditor will make a presentation to full Council • Utility Rate Increase & Future Adoption of a Utility Rate Ordinance • Supplemental Agreement with Parametrix for the Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector Parks and Public Works Councilmember Teitzel highlighted items the committee discussed: Supplemental Agreement with Parametrix for the Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector Utility Rate Analysis and Future Adoption of a Utility Rate Increase Park Rules and Dog Rules o On -leash dogs under the owners control will be allowed in parks and owners must pickup after dogs o Additional dog waste bag stations will be installed o Will be done on a trial basis Public Safety, Planning & Personnel Councilmember Nelson reported on items the committee discussed: • Indigenous People Land Acknowledgement • Draft UFMP 7. STUDY ITEMS 1. UTILITY RATE ANALYSIS & FUTURE ADOPTION OF A UTILITY RATE ORDINANCE Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 4 Packet Pg. 15 as N O O W c m E Q 4.3.a Public Works Director Phil Williams introduced Senior Utilities Engineer Mike DeLilla. Mr. Williams explained the intent is to design rates for the next three years as was done for the previous three years and the three years prior to that. He advised no decision was sought tonight other than possibly authorizing the City Attorney to prepare an ordinance and set a public hearing date. He reviewed: • Diagram of Utility Rate Study Process which includes o Establish Fiscal Policies o Revenue Requirement o Forecast Costs and Revenues o Cost of Service Analysis o Costs by Function o Costs by Customer Class o Fixed Charges o Design Rates o Volume Charges • Overview of Revenue Requirement Analysis o Defines "cost -based rates" as rates based on aggregate obligations ■ Operating costs ■ Capital project expenditures ■ Debt service payments ■ Other financial needs o Establishes a multi -year financial plan beyond the current budget cycle (5 years) o Key Elements of Revenue Requirement Analysis: ■ Defining revenues and expenses ■ Developing capital funding strategy ■ Establishing fiscal policy "framework" Key assumptions o Annual Cost inflation ■ General (CPI): 2.5% ■ Benefits:10.0% ■ Water Purchase Costs: - 19% in 2020; 8% in 2021; 5%+/-per year thereafter ■ Construction Costs: 4.0% o Operating Forecast ■ Generally based on 2019 -2020 Budget - Adjusted for inflation in future years - Taxes computed on projected revenues o Annual Growth ■ Water/Sewer: z 85 ERUs per year ■ Stormwater: z 55 ESUs per year Utility Policies (Goals) o Rate Analysis Policy on a 3-year cycle to: ■ Improve ability to weather financial cycles, risks and disruptions ■ Stabilize rates over time ■ Account for changes that are outside or control (Alderwood rates) ■ Account for large future projects o Capital Fund Policy ■ Meet all utility financial obligations ■ `Pay as you go' Rate funding for replacement/maintenance give significant savings to the program. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 5 Packet Pg. 16 as Ln N to 0 w c m E 0 2 Q - Repayment of interest on a $10M bond at 4.5% over lifetime of 20 year bond is approx. $5.2M* ■ Avoid deferral of fiscal maintenance responsibilities ■ Keep intergenerational equity ■ Target includes reserves for repair and replacement, cost overruns, and emergencies ■ Accounts for seasonal fluctuations in spending *Approx. $4.3M in 2019 $ using 2.5%CPI (43% total project cost savings) Setting up Policies (examples Policy Purpose Policy Target Operating Reserve ✓ Minimum cash reserve to Water = 90; Sewer = 45-90 accommodate varied revenue and Storm; Solid Waste=30 Days expenditure timing O&M Capital Reserve ❑x To meet emergency repairs, 1-25 of capital assets (original unanticipated capital and project cost cost overruns Replacement Reserve Rate funded capital - annual basis Original Cost Depreciation; Funding (RRF) ✓ Replacement Cost Depreciation Equipment Reserve ✓ To fund ongoing vehicle and Estimated replacement value equipment replacement Debt Service Coverage Compliance with existing debt Target 2.0 or higher covenants ad maintain credit Minimum 1.25 worthiness for future debt needs Revenue Sufficiency Set rates to meet the total annual Rates shall be set to cover financial obligations of the utility and O&M, debt service, reserves be self-supporting and fiscal policy achievement • 2019 Water Rates (10ccf usage) Lake Forest Park (via SPU) $94.15 Shoreline (via SPU) $94.15 Woodinville WD $78.87 Seattle $77.65 Mountlake Terrace $72.16 City of Kirkland $66.55 Edmonds $65.47 Arlington $52.73 Mukilteo WSDW $4.47 Everett $44.82 Olympic View WSD 444.69 Redmond $44.44 Lynnwood $41.88 Alderwood Water & Wastewater $38.73 as Ln N O O w c m E 0 2 Q Capital Needs Forecast - Water o Graph of capital costs by year 2019-2024 o $21,867,000 in capital projects from 2019-2024 ■ Water Mains: $20,072,000 ■ Reservoirs: $1,795,000 o Cash resources are expected to fully cover the projected capital costs ■ Reflects pay-as-you-go (cash -only) funding philosophy Water Revenue Requirement Forecast Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 6 Packet Pg. 17 o Graph of O&M Expenses, Debt Service, System Reinvestment, Reserve Funding, Revenue @ Existing Rates, and Revenue @ Proposed Rate Proposed Projected Existing 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Annual Water Rate Increase 5% 5% 5% 5% 4% Monthly single-family bill @ 7ccf $45.66 $47.92 $50.30 $52.79 $55.41 $57.64 Tax 6.41 6.08 5.03 5.28 5.54 5.76 Total 1 $52.07 1 $54.00 1 $55.33 1 $58.07 1 $60.95 1 $63.04 o Rate increases are needed to generate funding for capital needs (system reinvestment) Water Financial Plan Scenarios 2019 Study Proposed Projected 2020 2021 12022 2023 2024 Annual Water Rate Increase 5% 5% 5% 5% 4% Projected AWWD Rate Increase 19% 8.1% 5.3% 5.6% 5.0% Projected Water Purchase Costs ($ M) $2.3 $2.5 $2.6 $2.8 $2.9 2016 Study Projected 2020 2021 12022 2023 2024 Annual Water Rate Increase 5% 5% 5% 5% 4% Projected AWWD Rate Increase 9.9% 3.1 5.3% 5.3% 5.3% Projected Water Purchase Costs ($ M) $2.0 $2.1 $2.2 $2.3 $2.4 o Alderwood WWD rate increases are higher than previously projected o Cumulative projected 2019-2014 increase is 63% (was 38% in 2016 Study - $500,000) • 2019 Storm Rates 1 ERU Seattle $43.06 Everett $24.14 Shoreline $21.78 Mukilteo $21.57 Kirkland $19.34 Edmonds $18.90 Lake Forest Park $16.96 Redmond $16.56 Lynnwood $13.91 Mountlake Terrace $11.45 Woodinville $7.26 Arlington $6.89 as LO N to 0 w c m 0 2 Q Capital Needs Forecast - Stormwater o Graph of capital costs by year 2019-2024 o $26,807,000 in capital projects from 2019 to 2024 o Cash resources are expected to cover - 99% of projected capital costs ■ Reflects "pay-as-you-go" (cash -only) funding philosophy ■ City received $545,000 loan from Snohomish County Public Works Assistance Fund - Part of loan already drawn ($408,750 of proceeds remaining) - Increases stormwater utility's annual debt service by z $33,000 Stormwater Revenue Requirement Forecast o Graph of O&M Expenses, Debt Service, System Reinvestment, Reserve Funding, Revenue @ Existing Rates, and Revenue @ Proposed Rate Pro osed I Projected Existing 2020 1 2021 F2022 1 2023 1 2024 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 7 Packet Pg. 18 4.3.a 2019 Annual Stormwater Rate Increase 9.5% 9.5% 9.5% 4% 4% Monthly single-family bill $17.18 $18.81 $20.60 $22.56 $23.46 $24.40 Tax 1.72 1.88 2.06 2.26 2.35 2.44 Total 1 $18.09 1 $20.69 $22.66 1 $24.82 1 $25.81 $26.84 o Rate increases are needed to generate funding for capital needs (system reinvestment) Stormwater Financial Plan Scenarios 2019 Study Pro osed Projected 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Annual Stormwater Rate Increase 9.5% 9.5% 9.5% 4.0% 4% System Reinvestment Funding ($ Thousands) $1,750 $2,10 $2,500 $2,600 $2,750 Debt Service ($ Thousands) 4757 $755 $754 $759 $756 2016 Study Projected 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Annual Stormwater Rate Increase 7.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% System Reinvestment Funding ($ Thousands) $1,800 $1,950 $2,050 $2,100 $2,100 Debt Service ($ Thousands) $671 $670 $669 $675 $673 o Compared to 2016 Study, ■ Cumulative net cash requirement for 2020 -2024 CIP increased by $3.1 million - $1.7 million in additional system reinvestment funded from 2020 -2024 ■ Debt service is z $85,000 per year higher, due to: - $33,000 per year for new Snohomish County Public Works Assistance Fund loan - $52,000 per year for 2013 Bond payment (previously included in sewer debt service) 2019 Sewer Rates (10ccf usage) Seattle $144.80 Kirkland $107.33 Alderwood Water & Wastewater $76.06 Woodinville WD $72.48 Arlington $70.15 Mukilteo WSDW $65.21 Lake Forest Park $63.27 Shoreline $59.50 Redmond $59.48 Everett $49.44 Lynnwood $48.93 Edmonds $48.02 Mountlake Terrace $48.00 Olympic View WSD $39.10 CD Ln N to 0 w c m 0 M Q Capital Needs Forecast - Sewer o Capital costs by year 2019-2024 o $41,291,000 in capital projects from 2019 to 2024 ■ WWTP Projects: $18,134,000 ■ Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer: $6,665,000 ■ Sewer Mains: $16,417,000 ■ Lift Station No. 1 Study: $75,000* *excludes $15M replacement cost expected to occur within 10 years o Cash resources are expected to fully cover the projected capital costs ■ Reflects "pay-as-you-go" (cash -only) funding philosophy ■ Olympic View WSD, Mountlake Terrace, Ronald WWD pay for z49% of net WWTP costs Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 8 Packet Pg. 19 4.3.a e Sewer Revenue Requirement Forecast o Graph of O&M Expenses, Debt Service, System Reinvestment, Reserve Funding, Revenue @ Existing Rates, and Revenue @ Proposed Rate Pro osed Projected Existing 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Annual Sewer Rate Increase 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% Monthly single-family bill $43.65 $46.71 $49.98 $53.48 $57.22 $61.23 Tax 4.37 4.67 5.00 5.35 5.72 1 6.12 Total $48.02 $51.38 $54.98 $58.83 $62.94 1 $67.35 o Rate increases are needed to generate funding for capital needs (system reinvestment) Sewer Financial Plan Scenarios 2019 Study (Status Quo: Full Cash Funding for CIP) Pro osed Projected 2020 2021 12022 2023 2024 Annual Sewer Rate Increase 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% System Reinvestment Funding ($ Thousands) $2,900 $3,350 $3,805 $4,000 $5,337 Debt Service ($ Thousands) $1,551 $1,553 $1,520 $1,428 $1,431 2019 Study ($9 M WWTP Bond) @ 4.5% Pro osed Projected 2020 2021 1 2022 2023 2024 Annual Sewer Rate Increase 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% 5.0% System Reinvestment Funding ($ Thousands) $2,800 $3,000 $3,250 $3,70 $4,150 Debt Service ($ Thousands) $1,551 $1,899 $2,212 $2,120 $2,123 2019 Study ($9 M WWTP Bond) @ 3.5% Pro osed Projected 2020 2021 1 2022 2023 2024 Annual Sewer Rate Increase 5.0% 5.0% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% System Reinvestment Funding ($ Thousands) $2,700 $2,650 $2,700 $3,000 $3,250 Debt Service ($ Thousands) $1,586 $1,875 $2,127 $2,048 $2,064 2016 Study Projected 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Annual Stormwater Rate Increase 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% 4.0% System Reinvestment Funding ($ Thousands) $1,250 $1,500 $1,900 $2,100 $2,500 Debt Service ($ Thousands) $1,604 $1,605 $1,572 41,479 $1,481 0 2019 -2024 CIP is $24.5 million higher in current study than projected in 2016 study o WWTP improvements ($18 m), Lake Ballinger TS ($6 m), Dayton Main Replacement from 3rd-9th($3.4 m) o Rate increases reflect planned replacement of Lift Station 1 within 10 years ($15m); not included in 2016 study Sewer Rate Model Forecast 2020-2029 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 ***2029 Pay as you go 7.00% 7.00% 7.00% 7.00% 7.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% 3.00% -4.97% Bond $9M @4.5%* 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 5.00% 4.50% 4.50% 4.00% 4.00% 2.87% Bond $9M @3.5%** 5.00% 5.00% 4.50% 4.50% 4.50% 4.50% 4.50% 4.50% 4.50% 4.14% *Long term rate assumption per FCS Group (model is a long term view on market trends) **Current Rate assumption per discussions with NW Municipal (Consultant City uses for Bonding) ***Does not factor in future large projects after LS#1 Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 9 Packet Pg. 20 as LO N to 0 w c m Q 4.3.a • 2019 Total Bill - 1/4" single family@ l Occf* City 2019 2020 2021 2022 Seattle $265.51 $273.48 $281.68 $290.13 Kirkland $193.22 $199.01 $204.09 $211.13 Shoreline**** $175.43 $180.69 $186.11 $191.70 Lake Forest Park $174.38 $179.61 $185.00 $190.55 Woodinville $158.61 $163.37 $168.27 $173.32 Mukilteo 136.25 $140.33 $144.54 $148.88 Edmonds $132.38 $140.02 $147.18 $156.63 Mountlake Terrace*** $131.61 $135.56 $139.63 $143.81 Arlin on* * $129.77 $133.66 $137.67 $141.80 Redmond $120.48 $124.09 $127.82 $131.65 Everett*** $118.40 $121.95 $125.61 $129.38 Lynnwood 1 $104.72 $107.86 1 $111.10 1 $114.43 ** Has not had a rate adjustment in at least the past 6 years. *** 55% sewer rate increase expected per sewer comp plan and rate analysis * * * * 10% total increase expected in 2020 ***** 10% increases in storm rates for 2020 and 2021 o Rates assume 10 ccf/month usage for water/sewer as applicable o Rates assume 3% rate increases for each year after 2019 for all other jurisdictions o Edmonds' rates increased per recommendation Councilmember Mesaros asked whether the current debt service was only on stormwater. Mr. Williams answered there is debt service in all three utilities; he recalled it was approximately $18M for Water. c Councilmember Mesaros asked when that debt expires. Mr. Williams answered the dates vary as funds v were borrowed three times in 2012, 2013 and 2014. Councilmember Mesaros asked why Lynnwood's rates were so low and whether they were also buying water from Alderwood Water. Mr. Williams answered > Lynwood does buy water from Alderwood. About 6-7 years ago, the Edmonds City Council understood the n issue of aging infrastructure. Edmonds is the second oldest city in Snohomish County. Few other cities were making a system reinvestment as early as Edmonds. Although that requires raising rates, it will pay a off in the end with fewer main breaks and fewer liability claims. LO to Councilmember Mesaros asked about Lift Station 1. Mr. Williams explained its location on Sunset is w precarious, any power outage where the generator does not come on immediately will result in untreated wastewater overflowing into Puget Sound because the holding tank is very small. The goal is to design a E project to prevent that from happening. As system flows increase and as climate change makes storms more episodic, peak flows occur very rapidly. The project would eliminate Pump Station 1; the most cost effective approach appears to be boring a gravity sewer line through the hump in Sunset Avenue at Edmonds Street a to Main and connect by gravity. The cost of that project is at least $50M. Councilmember Mesaros referred to early comments about how pristine the waterfront is; an overflow would be one of worst things that could happen to the waterfront. Councilmember Mesaros asked about the rate for retired seniors that have a financial burden. Mr. Williams answered there is a senior/low income discount, similar to other cities' discount. The discount uses the state definition so the City does not have to quality people; if someone qualifies for a property tax discount or any other state discounts, they qualify for a 25% discount in their entire Edmonds utility bill. Councilmember Mesaros said he was predisposed to the idea of pay-as-you-go. The additional $4.3M in costs, even though it is spread over 20 years is an additional $4.3M that ratepayers would have to pay that they would not pay under a pay-as-you-go scenario. He acknowledged the concept of pushing that out to the next generation, but for many people, they will still be living in Edmonds in 20 years. Any way to Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 10 Packet Pg. 21 4.3.a mitigate spending additional money is a good plan but he acknowledged that needed serious thought. Mr. Williams agreed it was a question with two sides. The upside of pay-as-you-go is instead of paying for the cost of financing, those funds can be used for projects. Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis suggested if the Council wanted to consider bonds, having Scott Bauer make a presentation to the Finance Committee. She recalled the committee recently discussed 20 year bonds for Civic which are 2.12%. Her husband said the 10 year treasury at 2%. She felt the costs in the example were very high. She preferred bond instead of pay-as-you-go, pointing out this financial environment will not last forever and rates continue to decrease. She was hopeful the federal situation will eventually calm down and there will be stabilization but that will mean a spike in inflation and higher interest rates. She recalled the Council approved a pay-as-you-go philosophy in the past but was unable to find the minutes regarding that decision. Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis asked about the need to finance $9M. Mr. Williams said the current cost estimate is $18M although efforts are underway to reduce it; half the cost would be the City's expense. Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis asked if Alderwood did a bond issue and whether that affected their rates. Mr. Williams said Alderwood is making significant capital project investments in their system. Ratepayers that purchase water are invited to look at financials several times a year and allowed to comment, but in the end it is Alderwood Water's decision. With regard to the 2.12%, Mr. Williams assumed that was a GGLO bond issue; generally utilities do not get those rates. Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis reiterated it would be good to have bond counsel present to discuss bonds. Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis asked why only $7M in grants was projected. She has seen $36M c projects more complicated than the Edmonds Marsh get fully funded through RCO, Conservation Futures, c etc. She observed the daylighting of willow Creek was shown as a stormwater project. Mr. Williams assured if grants can be identified, staff will apply for them. That amount was determined to be what would be c realistic to expect for that project. Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis said WRIA recently supported a River Bend for $38M to relocate a mobile home park and the $14 M for Wayne Golf Course was paid with a grant funds. a, LO Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis referred to the chart on page 180 of the packet, Stormwater Rate & o GFC Model - Revenue Requirement Analysis and asked what "system reinvestment" meant. Mr. Williams W said it was another word for capital projects, investing in the stormwater system. Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis suggested footnoting the debt service. She referred to page 182, Sewer Rate & GFC Model m E — Summary and asked about capital sinking fund of $700,000 and bond reserve. Mr. Williams explained that was set up by the consultant who tried to smooth rates as much as possible. Rates can be set to cover the capital project that needs to be done first, the pyrolysis project, and generate additional funds to help a seed the next two projects. Senior Utilities Engineer Mike DeLilla said the bond reserve is funds for the bond payment. Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis commented when this was first considered 7-9 years ago, there was the recession, home values were down, etc.; that situation has changed drastically which is why she supports considering bonds. Mr. Williams said he was impressed by the Council's fiscal prudence, the common sense to begin addressing the aging infrastructure was brilliant, putting the City yards ahead of many similar jurisdictions. Councilmember Teitzel asked for confirmation that the City is still on a 1 % replacement schedule/year. Mr. Williams answered yes and no, long term 1% is the expectation; for example 7,000 feet per year for water. If that is done, it will take 100 years to replace all the pipes but begins to look like a maintenance program Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 11 Packet Pg. 22 4.3.a when the life of the asset is 100 years as replacing 1%/year requires starting over at the end of 100 years. He compared it to painting the Golden Gate Bridge. He commented borrowing money was a good way to get started, but rate funding maintenance is the right way to go. Councilmember Teitzel agreed rate funding makes sense for maintenance because bonding every year increases the debt load. He favored bonding for large, one-time capital projects like Civic, potentially Lift Station 1, Edmonds Marsh, etc. especially when bond rates are low. He has received a lot of calls and emails recently about this; although these are utility rates, citizen view it as a tax. He was interested in ways to mitigate it for the next few years such as using funds already in the budget such as via fund transfer to mitigate the revenue requirement and give ratepayers a break. Councilmember Teitzel asked whether other funds such as a General Fund interfund transfer could be used to defray the Utilities' revenue requirements. Mr. Taraday answered there is potential for an interfund load potential, he would need to research the term and interest rate. He pointed out it was usually the Utility Funds that are making those loans to the General Fund because the General Fund often is leaner than the Utility Funds. With regard to whether the General Fund can simply transfer money, not as loan, to the Utility Fund, he was not able to find any clear prohibition against it. At the time he and Councilmember Teitzel exchanged emails, he was not thinking about the fact that some City residents are Edmonds utility customers and some are Olympic View Sewer District customers. That dynamic influences his thinking; if they were all customers of the same City utility it would be easier to justify a transfer under the theory that everyone is paying taxes and benefits from lower rates. In this example, everyone is paying the tax but only City utility customers benefit from the lower rates. Councilmember Teitzel asked if it would be illegal. Mr. Taraday said he was not aware of any prohibition. Mr. Williams said if the goal was to take general governmental resources and place it in an enterprise fund to avoid the need to implement all or part of the rate increase, one way he has seen it done that is clearly legal would be to reduce the tax. About 10% of the funds collected by stormwater and sewer (currently 14% of water but that being reduced to 10% in 2 years) come to the General Fund. Councilmember Teitzel was in favor of using bonding capacity for large, one-time capital projects such as a Lift Station 1 and the pyrolysis project. He asked whether a hybrid approach whereby those large, one-time a, projects were funded with a bond could mitigate the rate increase. Mr. Williams said it would spread it out , n over 20 years. He did not anticipate rate -funding those large capital projects. The suggestion was to rate o fund the first project, estimated at $9M and when the other two projects are further in design, they could be w funded together via bonds. Councilmember Teitzel suggested looking for opportunities to use bonding where it makes sense to bring down the rate increase. Councilmember Tibbott said a 100-year replacement schedule sounds like a very long bond program so the pay-as-you-go approach seems like the wise way to fund that. He observed it appeared reserves needed to a be increased and asked about the plan to boost reserves. Mr. Williams said the plan would be to work with the Council through the committee structure to start that conversation, study what other jurisdictions are doing, what industry experts recommend, etc. Whatever is selected, he recommended a gradual plan over a period of years, especially if the City is not planning to borrow right now. If the plan is to borrow in 4-5 years, there would be time to adjust balances to avoid borrowing money to put into reserves to get a lower rate. Councilmember Tibbott commented if water rates increase, there is a tendency for consumption to go down. He asked if water usage has gone down. Mr. Williams said he did not know that it was related to rates increase; he suspected it was related to technology improvements such as toilets, showerheads, etc. that use less water. A sharp increase in one year, such as Mountlake Terrace raising their rate by 95%, would probably evoke behavior changes. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 12 Packet Pg. 23 4.3.a Councilmember Nelson said it sounds like most of Council agrees to fund these, but the question is how. One option is pay-as-you-go, another option is pay -as -you -use or bonding and paying off the debt over the project's lifetime. He provided the definition of intergenerational equity, a concept that users of a capital project will change over its useful life and fairness requires these costs be spread to those who will use the infrastructure over time. From this perspective, long term financing is often more equitable than using currently available funds. He was interested in what is more equitable. There are a lot of big ticket capital projects $20M, $26M and $40M for sewer, water and stormwater. He recommended exploring the pay -as - you -use method of funding. Mayor Pro Tern Fraley-Monillas referred to annual cost inflation under key assumptions, and specifically 10% for benefits and asked if the proposal was for ratepayers to pay for that. Mr. Williams said that is labor and benefit costs for the employees funded from the Utilities. Salaries have a reasonable relationship with CPI but for the past few years, but benefits have inflated at a rate above inflation. Mayor Pro Tern Fraley- Monillas asked how many staff were paid by the Utility Funds. Mr. Williams estimated approximately 45, about half of the Public Works employees are related to one of the three utilities. Mayor Pro Tern Fraley-Monillas referred to the lower rates for seniors/low income, pointing out the increase would still affect those ratepayers. Mr. Williams agreed but the percentage increase is on a lower amount. Mayor Pro Tern Fraley-Monillas asked the total annual debt service on stormwater, sewer, and water. Mr. Williams said it is currently about $670,000, projected to increase to $700,000. He offered to email Councilmembers the amount owed on bonds that have already been issued. Mayor Pro Tern Fraley- Monillas expressed interest in the monthly cost. Council President Pro Tern Buckshnis did not wat to wait five years to do a bond and recommended thinking progressively about using the City bonding capacity because rates will never be this low again. The market and economy is changing daily; rates went down today. She favored looking into bonding sooner rather than later and having Scott Bauer make a presentation to the Finance Committee. She supported pay -as - you -use; future generations should pay for replacement of pipes. She also agreed policies needed to be developed. as Mr. Williams said debt is a tool. It appeared there was consensus for picking the first project, the pyrolysis , n project, and bonding for the $9M cost. The other two projects are not ready for bond funding. Council o President Pro Tern Buckshnis suggested determining an amount for the current pay-as-you-go program, the w 100 year replacement of pipes and add that to the pyrolysis project. Mr. Williams said he did not hear a consensus for that; he thought Councilmember Nelson was interested in bonding for large capital projects. He did not hear any other Councilmembers expressing support for bonding for pipe replacement. Council President Pro Tern Buckshnis said that is what she meant, pick a project and add funds for the 100 year replacement. Q Mayor Pro Tern Fraley-Monillas said a public hearing will be scheduled and there would be more discussion. Mr. Williams summarized the next time this is presented to Council, staff will show an option that borrows now for the pyrolysis project. Mayor Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas suggested Councilmembers email Mr. Williams regarding their interests. Councilmember Mesaros supported looking at bonding but that was not his first choice. He referred to the graphs of capital project costs by year, anticipating there would be more projects in five years. If the City bonded for those, debt service would continue for those projects as funds are borrowed for new projects, creating a compounding effect. Even though there is some sense of equity to spread the cost over a period of years, over the long term, the total cost to the taxpayer is greater. For the person who lives in the City for 20 years, there is no intergenerational equity. He supported Councilmember Teitzel's suggestion to bond Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 13 Packet Pg. 24 for large, onetime projects but not the for the replacement program. The goal is to keep rates as low as possible over the long term. Mr. Williams said if the desire is to bond for a large project, the pyrolysis project is ready to be funded; the bond could be for the entire $18M project because the draft new agreement with sewer partners allows apportioning the debt service to the partners. The other two projects are not close enough to being ready to go and the proceeds of a bond must be spent within three years. Mayor Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas brief recess. 2. INDIGENOUS PEOPLES LAND ACKNOWLEDGMENT FOR PUBLIC MEETINGS Development Services Director Shane Hope not an expert but has been learning and appreciates the subject. She reviewed: • Land Acknowledgement o What is it? ■ Formal statement that recognizes unique and enduring relationship that exists between indigenous people and their traditional territories o Why do it? ■ Way to show respect & ■ To correct perception that Native peoples are gone from the land or have little to offer today's communities What are Native peoples of Edmonds area? o Tulalip Tribes (represents other tribes) o Snohomish Tribes o Swinomish Indian Tribal Community o Suquamish Tribe o Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians Note: all considered to be Coast Salish people (shared language) How has City Council been involved so far? o Heard suggestion for land acknowledgement at public meeting o Discussed making land acknowledgement & agreed to wait for more research o Reviewed at PPSP Committee meeting on 6/11 — with concurrence to move issue forward to full Council o Received tonight's info packet Why acknowledge Native peoples and not other groups? o True: other groups of people have sadly lost lands and experienced oppression o Only Native Americans have been here for many hundreds of years Who else makes Acknowledgement? o Other cities in WA ■ No others, as far as we know o Other organizations? ■ Edmonds Center for the Arts ■ Western WA University ■ North Cascades Institute ■ Various cultural, religious and arts organizations Should City contact tribal representatives first? o Outreach so far ■ To Tulalip Tribes ■ To Snohomish Tribe ■ One person said anything we do would be good ■ Tribal Council will be taking up issue o Options Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 14 Packet Pg. 25 as Ln N to 0 w c m E 0 2 Q 4.3.a 1. Further seek and wait for response 2. Decide now to use statement (at least in interim) 3. Do nothing more about statement Method for making Land Acknowledgement? o Options include ■ Read statement at beginning of regularly scheduled Council meetings (excluding committee meetings0 ■ Read statement only at certain meetings (for example, the first meeting of each month) ■ Display statement by printing prominently on each meeting agenda ■ Something else? Potential Acknowledgement Statements o "We would like to open this meeting with an acknowledgment that we are on the traditional lands of the Coast Salish people." o "We are committed to working with local tribes to acknowledge their ancestral lands and are honored to do so this evening." o We are on the traditional homelands to the Coast Salish Tribes. We pay our respects to elders past and present." o Other... • Is Acknowledgment only step or "end of story?" o Acknowledgment can be useful for raising awareness of local community members & strengthening relationships with tribes o Not substitute for other substantive actions • Beyond Land Acknowledgement: what else? o Current practices ■ Examples �j - Notification of City projects & programs under SEPA c - Outreach to tribal representatives on major studies (e.g., Marsh) - Participation with tribal representatives on various regional boards & commissions o o Other possibilities? a ■ Find out what tribes want a ■ May include: as - Meeting place N - Joint ceremony or special event to - Invitation to speak w - Other.... m What are options to discuss now? E 1. Whether to move forward with some kind of land acknowledgment a. Either now or Q b. After more input from tribal representatives 2. If yes to # La - what method to use: a. Read at beginning of some or all regular Council meetings b. Display statement prominently on agenda c. Something else 3. If yes to # La - what language to use 4. If yes to # Lb - how? • Next steps o Possible follow-up with Tulalips or other tribal representative o City Council discussion of options o Council vote on Land Acknowledgement: ■ Statement ■ Method Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 15 Packet Pg. 26 4.3.a o Other Council actions ■ In consultation with tribes Mayor Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas asked about the outreach to the Tulalip Tribe and whether they had been asked this question previously. Ms. Hope answered it had been asked of individual Tribal Council members but not the Tribe itself. It is her understanding the Tribe will discuss it at one of their meetings. She was unsure of the expected outcome of that discussion or how long it may take; they meet once a month. Councilmember Mesaros said of the three examples, he preferred the first but could live with any of them. He asked if the Edmonds School District does an Indigenous Peoples Land Acknowledgment. Ms. Hope said they do for certain meetings. Councilmember Mesaros preferred to have the statement read aloud and to have it in English so everyone understands the words the City is trying to convey. If the Tulalip Tribe feels it would be respectful to read it in their native language, he would support doing both. He suggested waiting to hear from the Tulalip Tribe regarding what they would prefer. With regard to other things that could be done, he liked the idea of an annual special event to honor the Coastal people such a joint ceremony or special event to help understand the history of Edmonds before the Europeans showed up. Councilmember Teitzel supported moving ahead, finding it proper and respectful to recognize the people who were here before us and that these are their lands. He supported reading a statement before every Council meeting and having it printed on the Council agenda. He agreed with Councilmember Mesaros about the sample statements; he was satisfied with the first one but it does not go far enough in that it does not mention respect. He suggested a hybrid: "We are meeting today on the traditional lands of the Coast Salish people. We offer our deepest respects to the tribal members past and present." He agreed with talking to the Tulalip Trip before moving ahead and providing sample language to ensure they would not be offended. Councilmember Nelson said his first choice would be to hear from the Tribal community — what they think of an acknowledgement and whether there is a specific statement they would find most beneficial and pay c proper respect. He was interested in the acknowledgement as a first step into future actions such as an a informal meeting with the Tribal Council to discuss ways the City and the Tribe could partner on projects a versus the existing way the City communicates with them by telling them what is being done and asking a, for their input. n N to Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis echoed Councilmember Nelson's suggestions. She works with many W Tribal representatives on the Puget Sound Salmon Recovery Council and met several in Washington D.C. for Puget Sound on the Hill. She agreed with asking the Tribes and the elders what they want. In Washington E D.C. several elders spoke to federal legislators. It is very important to engage the Tribes first and to be respectful of their traditions. Q Councilmember Tibbott agreed with everything other Councilmembers have said. If multiple acceptable statements were developed, one option would be to have the Council chose one for each month so the statement would change, providing a broader understanding of the acknowledgment and to keep it fresh. He acknowledged that would require more engagement with the Tribes which could be a good thing. He supported moving forward with an acknowledgement as soon as possible. Mayor Pro Tem Fraley-Monillas agreed with what other Councilmembers have said. Working for the Department of Social and Health Services, she had an opportunity to work with Tribes on a number of issues; different Tribes have different cultural interests. The respectful thing to do is to reach out to the Salish people prior to making a decision about a statement. In researching this topic, they concluded none of statements being read had formal authorization from the leadership of Tribes. Finding out what the Tribal leadership wants instead of having a group of Caucasian Councilmembers make the decision is an Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 16 Packet Pg. 27 appropriate step. With regard to a celebration, she agreed with doing more than a statement and suggested the Council direct the Diversity Commission to think about an annual event or activities that the Diversity Commission could oversee. Ms. Hope concluded staff will try to get some input from the Tribes. 8. ACTION ITEM 1. DRAFT URBAN FOREST MANAGEMENT PLAN Development Services Director Shane Hope reviewed: • History o Edmonds area was once largely forested o Trees removed by settlers & loggers in late 1800s and early 1900s o As town grew up, new trees sprouted or were planted o City government has maintained trees in ROWs and on City property o City has code for tree cutting & management on private property (esp. critical areas) but code could use some updates o In 2016, Tree Board recommended adopting new code to require minimum # of trees on each private property, along with arborist reviews & permits for cutting trees on private property o Council chose instead to have an Urban Forest Management Plan developed, which could guide long-term tree management, especially on public property, and provide policy guidance, including education & incentives, for managing trees on private property o UFMP began in 2017, including ■ Consultation with Tree Board ■ Consultation with Planning Board ■ Consultation with staff ■ Community outreach such as: - Press releases - Open houses - Survey - City website with UFMP info - Newsletters update o Numerous meetings agendas ■ Tree Board ■ Planning Board ■ City Council o Public hearing (with notices) ■ Planning Board ■ City Council o UFMP Revisions made along the way, including 3 draft versions: ■ July 2018 ■ Nov 2018 ■ May/June 2019 Comments on prior drafts 0 4 categories of complaints 1. Wanting UFMP to set framework for adopting more restrictions on private property 2. Wanting UFMP to point up more issues with trees (including problems, not just benefits) 3. Wanting UFMP to have more local information 4. Requesting various "clean-up" & technical corrections o Categories of agreement or support Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 17 Packet Pg. 28 CD Ln N to 0 w c m E Q 4.3.a ■ Appreciation of improvements ■ General support for Goals ■ General support for recommended actions • What was done between November 2018 draft and May 2019 draft: o Informal committee formed in early 2019 to work on improvements o Changes made, including: ■ More attention to native trees ■ Rewrite of diseases and pests section ■ Removal of map and references to specific tree planting "opportunity areas" (but still encouraging planting) ■ Modification of statements not backed by scientific findings for our region ■ More background discussion of tree issues ■ Additional information about City regulations for development ■ Additional information on selecting trees ("right tree, right place") ■ Additional information on trimming trees ■ Caveat about applicability of survey that has been done early in UFMP process ,. ■ Removal of reverences to specific dollar amounts represented by tree functions (but still recognizing value of trees in many ways) ' c • Contents of Current Draft Plan o Background, Edmonds Context & Purpose o Public process o Benefits & Challenges of Urban Forest o Tree Selection Factors o State Regulatory Framework o City Planning Framework U o Tree Canopy Cover Information c o Planting opportunities o Edmonds' Urban Forest Practices c o L Major & Emerging Diseases & Pests a o City Regulatory Framework Q o Regional Resources o, o Case Studies i o Summary of Needs to o Goals & Actions w • Overarching UFMP Goals c 1. Maintain or enhance citywide canopy coverage E A. Update tree regulations to reduce clearcutting or other development impacts on urban forest & to consider changes to tree replacement requirements & penalties for code violations a B. Adopt policy of no net loss to overall C. Ensure protection of tree resources in environmentally critical areas D. Develop voluntary heritage tree program E. Enforce City regulations on tree -cutting F. Establish tree bank or fund to which donations can be made G. Support sustainable ways to combat pests & diseases H. Consider need for dedicated City arborist 1. Report every 10 years on canopy coverage J. Periodically update UFMP 2. Manage public trees proactively A. Use best available science in caring urban forest on City properties & ROW B. Have adequate resources (staff, contractual help, training, etc.) to monitor health of public trees & make decisions on their care Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 18 Packet Pg. 29 4.3.a C. Develop & maintain inventory of trees in key public places to document tree condition & risks D. Update Street Tree Plan periodically E. Support removal of invasive plants that threaten trees F. Coordinate among departments on tree issues & identify lead City staff person G. Develop & implement tree planting plan on City property & ROW to ensure diversity & suitability H. Implement program of regular maintenance for City trees I. Lead or facilitate volunteer activities for tree planting/care on City property & ROW J. As part of City -sponsored capital projects, provide funding for appropriate trees in ROW & on City properties K. Provide annual report City Council on tree management for City properties & ROW 3. Incentivize protecting and planting trees on private property A. Have program of giving away trees &/or tree vouchers for use in Edmonds B. For properties that retain certain amount of tree canopy cover, explore establishment of incentives (with examples named) C. Develop certification/awards program to public recognize property owners that maintain certain amount or type of healthy trees 4. Provide resources to community to educate/inform on tree planting and care A. Provide signage or other information about significant public trees B. Provide for Tree Board, esp. to: develop community education materials; participate in or initiate tree planting & tree care activities; report annually on Tree Board activities C. Develop & disseminate info for public on value of trees & to provide guidance on tree selection & management 5. Promote "right tree, right place" A. Make readily available list of compatible trees in various kinds of settings B. Identify key areas to increase canopy & for private properties, encourage appropriate tree planting or other techniques; for public property, act appropriately plant trees or otherwise increase canopy 'o C. Identify & plan for care of unsuitable trees &, as necessary, for pruning or removal when they a are potential damaging to people, buildings, or infrastructure a D. Ensure that development regulations require native trees & vegetation to be planted in critical a, areas, esp. near streams & other wildlife habitat areas , n E. In updating Street Tree Plan, identify specific species of trees that should be planted to be o compatible with street environment w What will happen when UFMP is adopted? c o Implementation can get underway, including actions identified for each goal, starting with most E critical activities o Monitoring of UFMP goals & actions can begin a o UFMP can be re-evaluated in 5-10 years & adjusted as needed Recommendation o Adopt UFMP either tonight or on Consent Calendar Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis requested the UFMP be presented to the Tree Board at their meeting this Thursday and have them provide guidance on a mission statement. She commented the Tree Board has Goal 4 covered. She thanked Mr. Demmick who spent over 300 hours on the UFMP, Bill Phipps who looked at many other UFMPs, Frank Russo who rewrote the pest section, Kernen Lien, Shane Hope, Carrie Hite, Rich Lindsay, Jesse Curran, Debra Dill, and many others. She concluded this draft was not perfect but it was better than the previous. COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL TO EXTEND FOR 30 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 19 Packet Pg. 30 4.3.a Council President Pro Tern Buckshnis recommended a 30% tree canopy. She suggested providing more background information for Council such as a comparison of tree canopy in other cities. Councilmember Nelson referred to Goal 1, Maintain or enhance citywide canopy coverage, and recommended picking one; saying both is not clear enough. He preferred enhance although he recognized that may not be tangible. With regard to Item F, Establish tree bank or fund to which donations can be made, he recommended starting that within a year. Councilmember Teitzel commented this document is far superior to where it started; the consultant has incorporated the input into this draft. He agreed with Council President Pro Tern Buckshnis' suggestion to have the Tree Board provide additional input. He viewed the UFMP not as a specific action plan, but as a directionally plan to point the City in the right way. He has heard complaints that it does not go far enough, it is not stern enough about protecting trees on private property. However, that was not the direction to the consultant. In 2015, citizens expressed concerns about property rights to the Planning Board when the Tree Code was proposed. With that in mind, the consultant was directed to focus primarily on public trees. There is more that needs to be done with regard to private trees. c Councilmember Mesaros agreed with Council President Pro Tem Buckshnis' suggestion to allow the Tree Board to review the UFMP. Ms. Hope said the Tree Board did look at the UFMP at their last meeting (Councilmember Buckshnis was absent). Environmental Program Manager Kernen Lien said the UFMP was provided to the Tree Board the afternoon of their meeting so there was not a lot of discussion. Councilmember Mesaros suggested waiting a week to allow the Tree Board to provide comment. — c 3 Councilmember Mesaros appreciated Councilmember Nelson's comment about maintain or enhance, 0 agreeing those two words send difference messages. He liked "enhance" because the City should strive to - enhance not just maintain its urban forest. Even small, incremental increases are enhancement. 0 0 Councilmember Mesaros recalled complaints about development on undeveloped properties where all the a mature trees are cut down. He asked about requirements for replacing those trees. Mr. Lien answered if a there are no critical areas and it is a flat, developable property, there are no tree density requirements on a, private property. Councilmember Mesaros said this is a beginning; he was hopeful over the next several , O years consideration be given to whether it was feasible to require for every tree that cut down, two be o planted. He acknowledged those trees would be smaller and hopefully would be the right tree in the right w place; trees provide shelter, shade, protection against wind and absorb CO2. Ms. Hope said that is addressed in Goal LA, Update tree regulations to reduce clearcutting or other development impacts on urban forest E and to consider changes to tree replacement requirements and penalties for code violations. Councilmember Mesaros summarized on the whole, this is a much better document that the previous version. Q Ms. Hope summarized the UFMP will be presented to the Tree Board for input and then returned to the City Council. 9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Pro Tern Fraley-Monillas reported the applications for the Housing Commission have been distributed to Councilmembers by their assigned zone. She asked about a date by which Councilmembers needed to select two commissioners and one alternate. Ms. Hope commented it was difficult to predict how long that would take; Councilmembers will determine their own process. She encouraged the Council to move forward at a reasonable speed and suggested decisions be made by the end of July. The Council agreed. Ms. Hope said she will communicate that date to the applicants. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 20 Packet Pg. 31 4.3.a Mayor Pro Tern Fraley-Monillas reported the state auditors are on site; Councilmembers will be invited to the audit entrance conference and she encouraged them to attend. She announced she had appointed John Hoag to the Economic Development Commission. 11. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Tibbott explained he voted last week to stop the connector project. He took that action after listening to people and studying new facts. He wanted to be clear a lot of reflection went into that decision. One of the factors he studied was the marine sanctuary ordinance. He also reread the At -grade Crossing Report and did a word search for "marine sanctuary ordinance" and found it only one time in that document, a comment made by a citizen about dogs going into marine sanctuary. There was no other reference in the document to the marine sanctuary ordinance. As a result many were caught off guard when they discovered the connector would touch down in the marine sanctuary. The intent of that ordinance was to preserve a pristine area for perpetuity. There are different interpretations about how that could be maintained. He received the marine sanctuary ordinance late Monday afternoon. He wanted to assure residents he was not going back on his decision. He suspected there will be efforts to look for other and better solutions as soon as possible. Councilmember Tibbott relayed his conversation with Mayor Pro Tern Fraley-Monillas tonight about the possibility of discussing a pathway forward for a solution and there are plans to bring that back to the Council, possibly as soon as the next meeting so there is something concrete to work on with staff, stakeholders and the regulatory agencies that are decision makers. He was very confident that the safety record on the waterfront could be maintained and was optimistic that other solutions could be identified that will make a difference. 12. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) At 10:14 p.m., Mayo Pro Tern Fraley-Monillas announced that the City Council would meet in executive n session regarding potential litigation per RCW 42.30.110(1)(i). She stated that the executive session was ° a scheduled to last approximately 15 minutes and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. No action was anticipated to occur as a result of meeting in executive session. Ln Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Pro Tern Fraley-Monillas and m Councilmembers Buckshnis, Teitzel, Tibbott, Mesaros and Nelson. Others present were City Attorney Jeff w Taraday, Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite and Public Works Director Phil Williams. At 10:30 p.m., Mayor Pro Tern Fraley-Monillas announced the executive session would be extended for 5 minutes. The E executive session concluded at 10:35 p.m. 13. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN Q EXECUTIVE SESSION Mayor Pro Tern Fraley-Monillas reconvened the meeting at 10:35 p.m. 14. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:35 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes June 25, 2019 Page 21 Packet Pg. 32 4.4 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 07/2/2019 Approval of Council Retreat Meeting Minutes of June 7, 2019 Staff Lead: Scott Passey Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Nicholas Falk Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation Review and approve the draft meeting minutes on the Consent Agenda. Narrative N/A Attachments: E060719 Retreat Packet Pg. 33 4.4.a EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL RETREAT DRAFT MINUTES June 7, 2019 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Dave Earling, Mayor Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Michael Nelson, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER STAFF PRESENT Al Compaan, Police Chief Phil Williams, Public Works Director Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir. Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir. Shane Hope, Development Services Director Scott James, Finance Director Carolyne LaFave, Mayor's Executive Assistant Maureen Judge, Council Legislative/Exec. Asst. Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jeannie Dines, Recorder The Edmonds City Council retreat was called to order at 9:31 p.m. by Council President Fraley-Monillas in the Brackett Meeting Room, 121 5' Avenue N, City Hall — 3ra Floor, Edmonds. 2. INTRODUCTIONS/MINUTE TO ARRIVE Council President Fraley-Monillas introduced facilitator Phyllis Shulman, co-founder and sole principal of Civic Alchemy, a consulting firm that provides consulting services to public agencies, organizations, businesses and communities, and described Ms. Shulman's background. Attendees introduced themselves. Ms. Shulman began the meeting with a "Minute to Arrive," requesting attendees turn off/silence their cell phones and bring themselves into the room, away from what they came from, what they are going to after and whatever is pulling on their minds. 3. AGENDA REVIEW Ms. Shulman described the purpose of today's retreat: • To strengthen the foundation for constructive relationships • To improve internal communications and identify what contributes to positive external communications • Not to discuss any past, specific conflicts other than the past helps inform the future She reviewed ground rules: 1. Be present 2. No blame. 3. Be respectful 4. Appreciate each other's humanity Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes June 7, 2019 Page 1 Packet Pg. 34 4.4.a 4. ICEBREAKER Ms. Shulman distributed a "dance card" with a series of questions; attendees went around the room asking questions of each other and then shared what they learned about each other. 5. CURRENT STATE • Overall Themes Ms. Shulman acknowledged like any governing body or any group of people working together in an organization, there are times when things are rough, there are tensions, conflicts, and things haven't worked out well. The purpose of today is to identify ways to work together. Whole Group Brainstorm: What are the unique circumstances and challenges you are facing currently and during the rest of the year that can affect constructive internal communications? o Election o Mayor's seat and several Council seats up for election o Competition for attention o Several Councilmembers retiring, turnover o Change — creates opportunity and anxiety o Directors approaching retirement age o Polarizing — creates conflict o Affects the way Councilmembers vote o Tribal o Tension o Staff caught in the middle o With Mayor not running, lame duck o Big issues need to be addressed o Election changes Councilmembers' commentary o Interest in homelessness and housing affordability o Three Councilmembers are running for mayor and up to five Councilmembers leaving the Council o Sense of urgency o New things with new people o Council candidates running because something's wrong o Backlog of uninteresting but necessary projects o Mayor and Council positions are nonpartisan but during election process, partisan politics tends to leak into the process o Decisions will be made in the next six months on big projects (Waterfront Connector, Hwy 99, Civic Park) and then there will be a new group of people o Citizens are getting more interested in issues — taking position on issues o Rearranging the Council will create challenges o Staff will be implementing the current mayor's agenda until December 31 o Staff is also implementing Council adopted policy Ms. Shulman recognized this a particularly dynamic time filled with a lot uncertainty such as an urgency to get things done while you can which is created by the atmosphere in an election year. People are running against each but still have to work together. Even if everything was going great, that amount of uncertainty brings up anxiety and concerns. In response to the question of now what Ms. Shulman, explained first, it's important to acknowledge it exists. Each person has a different role in the landscape and each role has different dynamics. Appreciate that the dynamics exist. Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes June 7, 2019 Page 2 Packet Pg. 35 4.4.a 5. THEME: ATTRIBUTES OF WELL -FUNCTIONING GROUPS PARTICULARLY IN A POLITICAL SETTING • Overview of attributes related to group interactions Ms. Shulman distributed and reviewed a handout, Attributes of Well Function Groups Particularly in a Political Context: o Approach with Dignity o Understand Mental Models o Ability to See Perspectives/External Considering o Going Beyond Assumptions and engaging in inquiry o Mindfulness o Not holding grudges o Being adaptive o Having discipline o Effective communication, ability to connect and development of relationships o Transparency and accessibility o Focusing on interests, not positions o Being able to identify a technical challenge compared to an adaptive challenge o Diversity of thought/opinions as an asset o Accountabilities o Systems approach Overview of positions vs interests Ms. Shulman described: o Interests are the needs, desires, ad concerns that people have in regard to a given situation. Interests focus on what outcome is important and why? Problem solving can be more effective once there is agreement on the interests of a group. o Positions (or solutions) are how people meet their interests. Positions can take into account the set of interests expressed. Overview of adaptive challenges vs technical challenges o Technical Challenge compared to Adaptive Challenge ■ Key question: What is the principal challenge being faced? ■ A technical challenge is a challenge that requires the straightforward application of expertise to solve the problem. ■ An adaptive challenge is a challenge that is more complex in that it necessitates addressing and/or changing people's values, habits, practices, and priorities. This requires leadership that orchestrates a process of getting the variety of people who own some of the problem to do adaptive work. There are different adaptive challenges with different contexts. Ms. Shulman said the number one thing that matters is psychological safety. During workshops at the state level, what people talk about most is a desire for government to function, to bridge the political divide, for elected officials to communicate, civic discourse. The public wants government to work together for common good despite differences. • Themes: What is currently working well Ms. Shulman summarized feedback from attendees about what works well, 1) when people respect each other, 2) meetings and phone calls, direct communication, 3) being proactive with each other before a public setting and courteous about being responsive, 4) communicating professionally when there are differences of opinions, and 5) teamwork and engaging together to handle complex things. Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes June 7, 2019 Page 3 Packet Pg. 36 4.4.a 6. THEME: THRIVING INDIVIDUALS AND GOVERNMENT Ms. Shulman distributed a worksheet: Thriving Individuals and Government and asked attendees to take three minutes to think about and write down answers to the following questions: • What do you need to personally thrive and be successful as an elected official or department head? What do you need from elected officials and department heads for you to personally thrive in your job? • What do the City Councilmembers, Mayor and Directors need to thrive and be successful together as the leadership of the City? Ms. Shulman explained when people understand that others need, they can change how they interact with them. Attendees shared their responses. o Honest communication, when asked a question, don't just say uh-huh, uh-huh, signifies agreement. Be forthright o Need trust fellow Councilmembers and staff, and if can't, erodes ability to be effective. If ever feel stabbed in the back, find it difficult to get beyond. Effective communication and honesty and trust what someone is saying. Difficult to effectively communicate without trust. o Respect - be respected for one's ability to do a job. Mutual sense of respect, trust comes more easily. o Interested in progress on specific projects. Need to know if directors consider them priorities and how to work together to implement priorities. Need more time to work things out. o Difficult with shifting sands on project/policy. Marshalling troops to do something, priorities eroding/shifting but not clear. Hard to thrive when not sure if platform is unstable, shifting, sinking. o Like flexibility and thinking creatively about possible solutions. Once reach solution, value follow-through. o Sense of respect, approach with dignity. Responsiveness — when reach out to someone, want to get timely reply. o Trust one another and with that trust, an expectation that everyone has the best intentions. o Come to table and assume good intent, start at that place. Trust and respect, we're all one team. Work together with good intent. o All have same interest and reach best position o Trust, respect, collaboration, working together as team, assume we're one team, have same interest with different positions o What is our purpose? Are we achieving that purpose? Getting feedback on whether meeting goal. Develop vision, objectives to reach vision. Need sense of purpose. And then revisit whether achieving that vision. Honest communication. o Respect. Ways to show respect — listening and forcing oneself to listen to what person is saying versus thinking about your response. Be better listeners. Difficult in Council meetings but public would like to see. Think creatively about small changes that could be made instead of just saying no. Easy to do behind the scenes such as questions, suggestions via email instead of having to respond at a Council meeting. o Concept in philosophy and rhetoric, principle of charity: one should interpret other people's statements and actions in their best, most reasonable form and not in their worst, most offensive way possible. Conflict can be prevented and resolved through a return to the principle of charity. Important to understand what conflict is and isn't; conflict is not a simple different of opinion or competition, or different in background/experience. A conflict is a work relationship in which at least one person is angry, resentful or hurt and behaves in a way that impedes the functioning of the organization. Respectful communication requires understanding behaviors/elements that cause someone to be angry, hurtful or resentful. Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes June 7, 2019 Page 4 Packet Pg. 37 4.4.a o Resist the temptation to be offended. Internal choice to be offended, but be honest with each other to say ouch, that was harsh but get your point. Important because if have respect, trust and working for the common good and assuming good intent, should be free enough to say that a comment hurt but not be offended. o Do not put something in email you do not want on the front page of the newspaper. Don't put something in writing that offends or elicits an angry response. Try not to offend, especially in written communication o One of the most restraining things has been the lack of teamwork. The theory of getting 4 votes and not communicating with other 3 Councilmembers makes her feel resentful and creates an environment where she responds by get 4 votes instead of having an open conversation. Getting 4 votes and run away builds walls and creates adverse interactions o Can have disagreements and vote different ways, and then accept outcome. o Teamwork, collaboration and cooperation — understand where each other is coming from. Time to figure things out and have discussions is helpful. o Important to common good to respect the public process and past decision making. Engage in robust processes and respect the outcome o All roles should be appreciated for their unique contributions o Respect and public input is important, getting public input is important but is it from the public at large or a small vocal group? The Council respects public input but may not always agree with it. o Easier to be on the "I'm against something" side. Hard to get things done, figure out what's right for the whole City. Sometimes have to take a position that some members of public do not support. Criticism is easy. More people come to Council meetings upset about things than what they like. Expect naysayers, weigh their input in decision. o Do not want everyone to always agree. o Exciting times. Passionate about projects/programs and want to contribute to community. Ms. Shulman summarized what contributes to respect and trust is attitude and behavior. Electeds and staff have different roles, democracy is messy. Government is organic, need relearn over and over again how to be together. There is a reason people run for office or choose to be a director in a city. 7. THEME: IMPROVING INTERNAL COMMUNICATIONS 0 General themes for improvement Ms. Shulman recognized the following themes from comments: 1. Respect. Already have established Code of Ethics. Encourage to read occasionally 2. Ability to ask questions respectfully and be able to disagree in a way that is not personal and uses good communication skills 3. Professionalism — given size of staff and Council and City, face-to-face or phone calls work to vet issues, vetting via email does not work as well. 4. Differentiate between dynamics of politics and the presentation of information needed for policy making 5. Transparency. Direct communication. Honesty. 6. Responsiveness 7. Preparedness and being proactive. Ask questions ahead of meetings, can provide more thoughtful, complete information 8. Leadership is important. Councilmember have ability to be leaders. Helpful if Mayor and Council President's goal for organizational norm is positive communication Ms. Shulman distributed and reviewed Top Eight Tips for Keeping Communication Respectful: Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes June 7, 2019 Page 5 Packet Pg. 38 4.4.a 1. Keep all communication (email, phone, twitter, etc.) civil and professional 2. Only communicate about city business 3. Other than coordination on scheduling, do not use city staff, offices, phones or computers for campaign related activities 4. Refrain from utilizing open public meetings to make personal attacks or criticism of elected officials, city staff or community members. 5. Don't use a public forum to shame others. 6. Consider your body language when communicating or listening to others in public meetings 7. Minimize surprises at public meetings including vet amendments or new ideas prior to introduction and/or discussion 8. Utilize the following general guidelines for when best to utilize different forms of communication: When best to use email/social media (remember these are all disclosable to thepublic) When best to use phone or in person meeting Constituent communications Policy deliberations Scheduling and logistics Peer consultation Sharing of existing information including briefing papers, etc. Political strategizing Newsletters and other outreach Discussion and attempted resolution of conflicts or disagreements Showcasing a city project or activity Discussion of personnel matters Sending questions to staff Exploration and discussion of misunderstandings Constituent engagement • Identification of 5-6 principles Ms. Shulman distributed post -it notes and asked attendees to identify principles that they believed would improve communication. Responses were grouped as follows: o Share as much relevant info as possible rather than holding something back that may be helpful to my personnel agenda o Avoid surprises that require an immediate response on camera o No surprises — communicate up front o Honest, respectful communication inside and outside public meetings o Respectful interactions in all forms o Be respectful of person you are talking with, talk with them, not at them o More frequent and substantive communication on important issues out of public forum o Follow through on decisions o Stand behind decisions voted on by Council o Respect for previous process, engagements, information and decision -making o Recognize the public interest in the other's position o Provide feedback o Once you get feedback, acknowledge receipt of feedback, then follow up on it by either implementing suggested change or discuss - ask for clarification o Be responsive o Appreciation of different perspective o Assume the best of intentions o Assume the other has good intentions o Principle of charity — interpreting another person's comments or opinions in their best, most reasonable form o Assume best intentions Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes June 7, 2019 Page 6 Packet Pg. 39 4.4.a o Assume input being provided for the right reasons o Resist temptation to be offended o Include everyone in ideas, not just 4 votes and go o Collaborative approach o Separate personal politics from decision -making o Work out differences in person if possible o Speak directly about issue without overselling or ignoring the other person o Listen carefully and acknowledge what was said before responding if it is a critical point, i.e. prove you listened o Decrease use of email, too easy to say negative things o Read your own email with a critical eye before sending o Trust o Trust each other o Provide time between meetings for big decisions. Attendees identified commonalities in the responses: o Honesty, respect, teamwork, collegiality, collaboration, teamwork, recognizing we're all members of the same team o Desire for good communication o Defining what good communication looks like and committing to it o Communication, trust, respect o Respect, trust, collaboration o Learn how to discuss and understand and bring that to Council meeting • Discussion Suggestions included: o Do this same exercise in February when new Councilmembers and Mayor are seated o Hold a quarterly half day retreat — various topics such as communication, issues staff will be bringing to Council in the next three months, develop commonality regarding interests, vision and how to achieve it, create oneness instead of us versus them o Two to three Councilmembers meet with directors to retain openness and build trust, more opportunity for open dialogue in small groups. o Hold collaborative workshop around major topics such as Civic Park. Difficult to have open, honest discussion in open Council meeting. There is a difference between deliberation at Council meetings versus communication at a retreat. o Quarterly study session regarding a topic. • Personal commitments Ms. Shulman distributed Personal Commitments and encouraged attendees to complete the statement(s) "I value ; therefore, I will (identify behaviors) " • Reflections Attendees offered the following: o Appreciate everyone's participation. Atmosphere of participation was great o View Council and staff as a team, appreciate work doing to make the City better. Can be a better team going forward o Value everyone's willingness to come and participate in the retreat o Unfortunate three electeds are not present. Group did good work but missing electeds were not able to participate Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes June 7, 2019 Page 7 Packet Pg. 40 4.4.a o Ms. Shulman did a tremendous job for the group o Value mutual understanding, communication is a tool versus an end. Strive for understanding of each other, strive to understand another person's viewpoint and strive to be understood. Does not necessarily mean agreement o Value tempered calmness. If someone is overheating, stating their opinion without respect, may indicate listening but actually shutting down. Council President Fraley-Monillas announced a budget retreat is scheduled for July 12' The retreat was recessed for a lunch break at 12:58 p.m. and reconvened at 1:39 p.m. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember ELECTED OFFICIALS ABSENT Dave Earling, Mayor Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Michael Nelson, Councilmember STAFF PRESENT Maureen Judge, Council Legislative/Exec. Asst. Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Council President Fraley-Monillas introduced the afternoon session of the retreat: Council Questions and Visioning. 1. Three -Touch Rule - How study items are brought forth and voted on in area cities. First touch — Introduction and Q&A Second touch — Discuss concerns and vet issues • Third touch — Vote Discussion included the three touch rule helping to eliminate surprises and ensure well thought out ideas and communication; Shoreline, Mukilteo and Lynnwood's practice; allowing the Council to make informed decisions without undue pressure; issues that are not significant enough to warrant three touches; how the three -touch rule would be adopted (such as via resolution); Council being reactive rather than proactive; and potential exceptions to three touch rule such as items discussed in Executive Session that come out for decision. Council suggestions included: a. Having a fourth touch if amendments are made at the third touch b. Not voting immediately following a public hearing unless there's no public comment c. Amendments should be made at the second touch d. Committee meetings count as one -touch e. Have Audience Comments follow the Consent Agenda f. Establishing a dollar threshold for when the three -touch rule applies � Council President Fraley-Monillas and Ms. Judge research what other cities are doing g. The above suggestions do not include emergency ordinances 2. Talk About Our Approach to Interviewing Candidates for the Housing Commission. Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes June 7, 2019 Page 8 Packet Pg. 41 4.4.a Councilmember Tibbott introduced this topic. Discussion included questions that were on the Housing Commission application, inability for Councilmembers to interview all candidates, each Councilmember following their own selection/interview process, and alternates attending meetings (possibly sitting at the dais). Council suggestions regarding the process included: a. Get list of candidates b. Select top 3-5 candidates c. Conduct face-to-face interviews d. Determine availability (tentative meeting date 3rd Thursday) e. Make selection by July 31, 2019 f. Meetings start in August • Two Councilmembers sign up to attend each monthly meeting 3. How do we actively engage the public early in our decision -making process? Council President Fraley-Monillas relayed this topic was suggested by Councilmember Teitzel. There have been several topics where the public has gotten involved late in the process such as Civic Park, Waterfront Connector, Haines Wharf, Urban Forest Management Plan, etc. which illustrates there is some communication deficit between the City and the public. She asked how to better engage the public earlier in the process. Discussion included the existing public process, extensive public engagement on Civic Field, misinformation that sometimes gets the public involved, City does not have a staff person that does public engagement, people don't believe a project will happen until they see the bulldozer, using the local press to cover City issues, effectiveness of emailed vs mailed communications, reaching citizens for whom English is not their first language, the Council ultimately makes the decision, and the cost of mailing to all Edmonds households. Suggestions included: a. Looking back at projects when the public get involved late in the process and determine the trigger. Interview people about projects b. Preference for overkill on notification such as mailers for larger capital projects c. Not presuming that the process is broken - there will always be people who get involved late d. Getting staff input regarding ways to engate the public early in the process e. Establishing a dollar threshold for providing mailed notice f. Consider whether the City is using the Cable TV station as a resource. For example televise open houses, etc. 4. Future planning - Timeline with Council Vision Council President Fraley-Monillas invited Councilmembers and staff to respond to the follow questions: 1. How do we see our City in 5 years? 2. What would we like to see changed within the next 5 years? 3. In a perfect city, what would you see? Suggestions were grouped by years as follows: 2020 1. Prioritized and budgeted Facility Maintenance Schedule 2. Future building with more underground parking now 2021 1. Update Codes 2022 1. Support small business beyond the BID and DEMA Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes June 7, 2019 Page 9 Packet Pg. 42 4.4.a 2023 1. Board & Commission Ordinance: streamlined & standardized 2. More diversity in racial and cultural mix 3. Creative District fully recognized and engaged 4. More diversity in business mix across the City 2024 1. Connected walkways & alternate transportation system 2. Completion of the 4' Avenue Arts Corridor 3. More housing density in select areas 2025 1. More people living AND working in Edmonds 2. 500 Units of affordable housing in place by 2025 3. City office annex on Highway 99 — Police annex? 4. Enhanced environment with tree protections 5. Public walkway around the Edmonds Marsh by 2025 2026 1. Redevelopment on Highway 99 (code and economics to catalyze redevelopment) 2. Close Main Street to vehicular traffic from 3' Ave. to 6' Ave 2027 1. Restoration of Edmonds Marsh 2028 1. City with a complete sidewalk system 2029 2030 1. 2,000 units of affordable housing by 2030 2. Interconnected park system with trails and walking connections to other parks 3. Underground utilities on Highway 99 4. All City utilities underground by 2030 5. Ideally -located fire stations 6. New ferry dock collocated with other transportation 7. 100% clean energy throughout the city including private homes Beyond 1. A vibrant Highway 99 within 20 years Discussion included challenges with updating the code, cultural programming being done by ECA, holding community court on Hwy 99, funding for Hwy 99, citywide sidewalk plan, prioritizing projects via the budget, and preparation for the July budget retreat. Council President Fraley-Monillas announced a Council Student Representative has been identified; he will be a senior at Lakeside and lives in Edmonds. She plans to introduce him to the Council at a special meeting in early July. Council President Fraley-Monillas said Councilmember zone assignments for the Housing Commission will be made soon. 5. ADJOURN The retreat was adjourned at 3:46 p.m. Edmonds City Council Retreat Draft Minutes June 7, 2019 Page 10 Packet Pg. 43 4.5 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 07/2/2019 Approval of claim checks and wire payment. Staff Lead: Scott James Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Nori Jacobson Background/History Approval of claim checks #237438 dated June 21, 2019 for $1,245.57, #237439 dated June 25, 2019 for $58,596.00, #237440 through #237511 dated June 27, 2019 for $840,940.71 and wire payment of $417.67. Staff Recommendation Approval of claim checks and wire payments. Narrative In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council. Ordinance #2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends either approval or non -approval of expenditures. Attachments: us bank ck 06-21-19 claim 06-25-19 claims 06-27-19 wire 06-27-19 FrequentlyUsedProjNumbers 06-27-19 Packet Pg. 44 4.5.a vchlist 06/21 /2019 9:34:45AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 237438 6/21/2019 062693 US BANK 1 Vouchers for bank code : usbank 1 Vouchers in this report Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice PO # Description/Account 4519 AED SUPERSTORE - YOST POOL - AED Superstore - Yost Pool - AED CE 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 Tap Plastic - PD Supplies 001.000.41.521.22.35.00 Display & Costume - PW EOC Suppli 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 Fac Maint - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 Tap Plastic - Parks Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 Display2Go - Parks Supplies 001.000.64.576.81.31.00 Total Bank total Total vouchers Page Amoun c a� E �a a 252.8, L 3 249.7 c �a 111.1 � Y m 57.3, U E 434.9, 12 U 4- 139.5E o 1,245.5, > 0 L 1,245.5, a a 1,245.51 N tD O Y V Y C f0 N 7 r Q Page: 1 Packet Pg. 45 4.5.b vchlist 06/27/2019 2:06:34PM Bank code: usbank Voucher Date Vendor 237439 6/25/2019 002100 BARNARD, EARL 1 Vouchers for bank code : usbank 1 Vouchers in this report Voucher List City of Edmonds Page Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun . . JUNE2019 EXCESS PENSION SETTLEMENT P y APPROVED ON COUNCIL CONSEN E 617.000.51.517.20.29.00 58,596.0( a Total: 58,596.0( a) Bank total : 58,596.0( c Total vouchers : 58,596.0( N Y V t V E V O O L Q 0. 21 rn r Lh N O E V r C d E t V fC a Page: 1 Packet Pg. 46 4.5.c vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 237440 6/27/2019 076040 911 SUPPLY INC 237441 6/27/2019 001528 AM TEST INC 237442 6/27/2019 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES Voucher List City of Edmonds Page Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun r 75114 INV 75114 EDMONDS PD - MITSUI c 2 BLAUER PANT >, 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 179.9E a 2 BLAUER L/S SHIRT L_ 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 139.9E 3 3 BLAUER S/S SHIRT c 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 194.9 NAME TAPE � 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 40.0( aa) 10.0% Sales Tax U 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 55.4� E 75512 INV 75512 EDMONDS PD PECK- AL R 2 ALERT SHIRTS ,- 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 99.9E o ALERT NAME TAPE > 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 16.0( a 6 PATCH INSTALLATIONS a 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 18.0( Q 10.0% Sales Tax rn 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 13.4( ti Total : 757.8( 0 110764 WWTP: OIL & GREASE ANALYSIS OIL & GREASE ANALYSIS E 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 150.0( z Total: 150.0( m 1991293511 WWTP: 6/19/19 UNIFORMSJOWEL E Mats/Towels m 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 47.8E P Uniforms Q 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 3.5( 10.4% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 4.9E 10.4% Sales Tax Page: 1 Packet Pg. 47 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 2 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237442 6/27/2019 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES (Continued) 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 0.3E 1991293512 PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE E >% PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE f° a 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 51.5E L 10.4% Sales Tax 3 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 5.3E 1991299135 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATS PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE Y 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 1.6' um PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 6.1' E PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE R 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 6.1' PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 0 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 6.1' > PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE o 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 6.1 - a PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE Q 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 6.Of rn 10.4% Sales Tax ti 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 0.1; N 10.4% Sales Tax o 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.6, E 10.4% Sales Tax M 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.61 10.4% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.61 E 10.4% Sales Tax t 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.61 10.4% Sales Tax r Q 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.6' 1991299136 FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MAT FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 9.2� Page: 2 Packet Pg. 48 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 3 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237442 6/27/2019 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES (Continued) FLEET DIVISION MATS E, 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 19.1( 10.4% Sales Tax a 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 0.9 1 L 10.4% Sales Tax 3 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 1.9E c 1991303414 WWTP: 6/25/19 UNIFORMSJOWEL Mats/Towels 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 47.8E W Uniforms t 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 3.5( E 10.4% Sales Tax ii 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 4.9E ,- 10.4% Sales Tax O 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 0.3( > Total: 237.1E a a 237443 6/27/2019 064341 AT&T MOBILITY 287283883350 WIRELESS SERVICE FOR AlRCARE Q Mobile Aircards M 512.000.31.518.88.42.00 46.7E Total : 46.7E N m 237444 6/27/2019 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 108592 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS UB Outsourcing area Printing #600 E 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 42.7< 2 UB Outsourcing area Printing #600 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 42.7' y UB Outsourcing area Postage #600 E 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 132.2� U UB Outsourcing area Postage #600 f° 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 132.2E Q 10.1 % Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 4.3, 10.1 % Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 4.3, Page: 3 Packet Pg. 49 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 4 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237444 6/27/2019 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER (Continued) 10.1 % Sales Tax E, 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 4.4z UB Outsourcing area Printing #600 a 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 44.0, L 108723 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS 3 UB Outsourcing area Printing #300 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 186.8- UB Outsourcing area Printing #300 Y 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 186.8- (D UB Outsourcing area Printing #300 U 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 192.41 E UB Outsourcing area Postage #300 2 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 554.3,,- UB Outsourcing area Postage #300 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 554.3z > 10.1 % Sales Tax o 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 18.8, a 10.1 % Sales Tax Q 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 18.8 � rn 10.1 % Sales Tax ti 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 19.4z N Total : 2,139.05 c U) 237445 6/27/2019 001801 AUTOMATIC WILBERT VAULT CO 60651 ROUGH BOX - VAKULCHIK E ROUGH BOX - VAKULCHIK U 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 543.0( +% 60696 ROUGH BOX - ROMERO (D ROUGH BOX - ROMERO E t 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 543.0( m Total : 1,086.0( Q 237446 6/27/2019 076096 BATTERY SYSTEMS INC 4244954 FLEET - CORE REIMBURSE Fleet - Core Reimburse 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 -3.0( 4948330 UNITS E161,162,163EQ BATTERIES Page: 4 Packet Pg. 50 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 5 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237446 6/27/2019 076096 BATTERY SYSTEMS INC (Continued) Units El61,162,163EQ Batteries E, 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 448.5E 10.4% Sales Tax a 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 69.9E L Units E161,162,163EQ Batteries 3 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 224.2E c Total: 739.8° 237447 6/27/2019 069226 BHC CONSULTANTS LLC 10828 PROF. SERV: DEVELOPMENT COI U Prof. Serv.: Development Code 001.000.62.524.10.41.00 1,112.7E E 10922 PROF SERV: DEVELOPMENT COD ii Prof Serv: Development Code Amen( U 001.000.62.524.10.41.00 923.0� O 11032 PROF. SERV.: DEVELOPMENT COI Prof. Serv.: Development Code o 001.000.62.524.10.41.00 1,015.1E a Total : 3,051.0( Q 237448 6/27/2019 074307 BLUE STAR GAS 10633 FLEET AUTO PROPANE 745.9 GAL r- FLEET AUTO PROPANE 745.9 Gal ti N 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 1,409.0E c 10666 FLEET AUTO PROPANE 661.4 GAL N FLEET AUTO PROPANE 661.4 Gal E 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 1,247.3, 12 10694 FLEET AUTO PROPANE 554.9 GAL FLEET AUTO PROPANE 554.9 Gal 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 1,016.5' E 10722 FLEET AUTO PROPANE 575.4 GAL U FLEET AUTO PROPANE 575.4 Gal f° r 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 1,053.7( Q 13850 FLEET AUTO PROPANE 644.8 GAL FLEET AUTO PROPANE 644.8 Gal 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 1,218.8E Page: 5 Packet Pg. 51 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 237448 6/27/2019 074307 074307 BLUE STAR GAS 237449 6/27/2019 072005 BROCKMANN, KERRY 237450 6/27/2019 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 6 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) Total: 5,945.41, m 7784 7781 YOGA 7784 7781 YOGA INSTRUCTION E 7784 YOGA GENTLE MON INSTRUC a 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 316.8( m 7781 YOGA MON W/ KERRY INSTRI 3 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 470.21 7787 YOGA 7787 YOGA INSTRUCTION 7787 YOGA MON W/ KERRY INSTRI Y 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 189.2( u Total : 976.2' t U 20211727 CITY CLERKS COPIER LEASE 6/1/1 E CITY CLERKS COPIER LEASE 6/1/1 2 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 707.1 ' o 10.4% Sales Tax R 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 73.5, o 20211728 PARKS & REC C5250 COPIER CON' a PARKS & REC C5250 COPIER CON °- Q 001.000.64.571.21.45.00 413.3E 20211732 BLDG COPIER/PRINTER/COPIES . °r. Bldg copier/printer/copies N 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 42.1 co 20211734 P&R PRINTER IRC2501F CONTRAC' N P&R PRINTER IRC2501F CONTRAC' E 001.000.64.571.21.45.00 85.7E 12 20211735 PARK MAINT IRC2501F COPIER COI U PARKS IRC2501F COPIER CONTRAi 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 74.7z E 20211736 FLEET COPIER U Fleet Copier 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 45.8E Q 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 4.7 20211739 INV 20211739 EDMONDS PD CONTRACT CHARGE IRC55501 6/1 c Page: 6 Packet Pg. 52 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 237450 6/27/2019 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 7 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) r 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 c 185.7, BW METER USAGE IRC55501 5/19 E 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 26.8- a COLOR METER USAGE IRC55501 5/ L 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 224.4E .3 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 c 45.4E 20211740 WATER SEWER COPIER Y Water Sewer Copier U 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 77.1 £ r- Water Sewer Copier E 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 77.1 £ n 10.4% Sales Tax ,U 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 8.0< 0 10.4% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 8.0, o 20211741 PW ADMIN COPIER a PW Office Copier for Q 001.000.65.518.20.45.00 107.3E rn PW Office Copier for ti 111.000.68.542.90.45.00 60.8' N PW Office Copier for o 422.000.72.531.90.45.00 60.8' PW Office Copier for R 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 42.91 U PW Office Copier for 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 42.91 E PW Office Copier for t 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 42.9E 10.4% Sales Tax r Q 001.000.65.518.20.45.00 11.1 1 10.4% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.45.00 6.3' 10.4% Sales Tax Page: 7 Packet Pg. 53 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 8 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237450 6/27/2019 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES (Continued) 422.000.72.531.90.45.00 6.3' 10.4% Sales Tax E 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 4.4, a 10.4% Sales Tax L 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 4.4, .3 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 c 4.4E 20211742 INV20211742 EDMONDS PD N FAX CONTRACT CHARGE 6/19 U 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 36.0, 10.4% Sales Tax E 001.000.41.521.10.45.00 3.7,' n 20215749 DEV SERV: LARGE COPIER/PRINT U Dev Serv: Large copier/printer and O 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 944.6E Total: 3,479.7' o a 237451 6/27/2019 075023 CAROLYN DOUGLAS COMMUNICATION 91 COMMUNICATIONS CONSULTANT/ Q Consulting: Communications and M 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 2,500.0( Total: 2,500.0( N w 237452 6/27/2019 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY LY276438 WWTP: REGULATOR,OXYGEN,NITF 10.4% Sales Tax E 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 12.2( fd itrogen, oxygen+ hazmat charge U 423.000.76.535.80.31.00 117.3E Total: 129.5E E t 237453 6/27/2019 075042 COVERALL OF WASHINGTON 7100184846 WWTP: 6/2019 JANITORIAL SERVIC r 6/2019 JANITORIAL SERVICE Q 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 514.0( Total : 514.0( 237454 6/27/2019 070753 CREAAFFILIATES LLC 190220-3 4TH AVENUE CULTURAL CORRIDO Page: 8 Packet Pg. 54 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 9 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237454 6/27/2019 070753 CREAAFFILIATES LLC (Continued) 4TH AVENUE CULTURAL CORRIDO 125.000.64.594.76.65.41 3,443.7E Total: 3,443.7E 237455 6/27/2019 077138 CUMMINS INC. Bus License Refund LI Refund Cst #00326517 LI Refund Cst #00326517- 001.000.257.310 50.0( Total : 50.0( 237456 6/27/2019 069529 D & G BACKHOE INC E6JC.Ret Release E6JC.RETAINAGE RELEASE E6JC.Retainage Release 421.000.223.400 62, 301.6 Tota I : 62,301.E 237457 6/27/2019 006200 DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 3347878 EBCC.RE-AD RFQ FOR CM SERVIC EBCC.Re-Ad RFQ for CM Services 112.000.68.542.30.41.00 258.0E EBCC.Re-Ad RFQ for CM Services 126.000.68.542.30.41.00 64.5 EBCC.Re-Ad RFQ for CM Services 422.000.72.542.30.41.00 215.0� 3349126 E4FE.INVITATION TO BID AD E4FE.Invitation to Bid Ad 422.000.72.594.31.65.41 667.8( Total : 1,205.4( 237458 6/27/2019 076262 DERRICK, CARLY 3059 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT TUITION REIMBURSEMENT FOR AF 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 944.7( Total : 944.7( 237459 6/27/2019 071641 DILL, DEBRA 2542 TUITION REIMBURSEMENT TUITION REIMBURSEMENT TOWAF 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 753.1 < Tota I : 753.1; Page: 9 Packet Pg. 55 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 10 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237460 6/27/2019 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 19-3939 6/18/19 CITY COUNCIL MEETING r 6/18/19 CITY COUNCIL MEETING MI c m E, 001.000.25.514.30.41.00 392.0( 19-3940 NOTE TAKING/TRANS FOR JUNE 7 f° a Note taking for 9.3 hours for June City L 001.000.11.511.60.41.00 325.5( .3 Total: 717.5( c 237461 6/27/2019 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 1-96450 PM SUPPLIES: GREASE, COOLANT Y PM SUPPLIES: GREASE, COOLANT U 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 65.0' 10.4% Sales Tax E 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 6.7( 1-96451 PM SUPPLIES: V-BELT PM SUPPLIES: V-BELT o 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 23.3( 10.4% Sales Tax o L 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 2.4, 0- Total : 97.51 Q 237462 6/27/2019 076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE 1369 FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES T- Fac Maint - Supplies N 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 49.4, co 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 5.1 , E 1375 PM SUPPLIES: CABLE TIES, WREN fd 10.4% Sales Tax U 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 3.6z PM SUPPLIES: CABLE TIES, WREN E 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 34.9 1 U 1383 PM SUPPLIES: SPRINKLER, ROLLE f° PM SUPPLIES: SPRINKLER, ROLLE Q 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 45.9, 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 4.7£ 1384 PM SUPPLIES: NEEDLE DRAIN Page: 10 Packet Pg. 56 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 11 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237462 6/27/2019 076610 EDMONDS HERO HARDWARE (Continued) PM SUPPLIES: NEEDLE DRAIN 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 4.5� >, 10.4% Sales Tax a 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 0.4E L 1385 PM SUPPLIES: TAP PLUG, NUTS, B, 3 PM SUPPLIES: TAP PLUG, NUTS, B c 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 9.3E 10.4% Sales Tax Y 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 0.91 (D 1386 PM SUPPLIES: NUTS, BOLTS, SCRE U PM SUPPLIES: NUTS, BOLTS, SCRE E 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 4.6, 2 10.4% Sales Tax ,U 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 0.4� 0 Total: 164.4, > 0 L 237463 6/27/2019 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 2-25150 WEST PLANTER IRRIGATION 870 C a WEST PLANTER IRRIGATION 870 C Q 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 55.6' 2-25175 EAST PLANTER IRRIGATION 875 Cj EAST PLANTER IRRIGATION 875 C) N 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 55.6< c 2-26950 LIFT STATION #3 729 NORTHSTRE/ LIFT STATION #3 729 NORTHSTRE/ E 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 104.2E TU 2-28275 PLANTER IRRIGATION 1400 9TH AV PLANTER IRRIGATION 1400 9TH AV 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 73.2E E 2-29118 LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN / U LIFT STATION #2 702 MELODY LN / 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 55.6< Q 2-37180 SAM STAMM OVERLOOK / METER E SAM STAMM OVERLOOK / METER E 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 70.4� 4-34080 LIFT STATION #14 7909 211TH PL S' Page: 11 Packet Pg. 57 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 12 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237463 6/27/2019 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION (Continued) LIFT STATION #14 7909 211TH PL S' 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 55.6' >, Total: 470.5f a m 237464 6/27/2019 077132 ELLISON, RACHEL JUNE MILEAGE JUNE RANGER CLASSROOM VISIT 3 JUNE RANGER CLASSROOM VISIT 001.000.64.571.23.43.00 31.9( Total : 31.9( Y U 237465 6/27/2019 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD EDH855852 EBCC.RE-AD RFQ FOR CM SERVIC t EBCC.Re-Ad RFQ for CM Services U 112.000.68.542.30.41.00 109.4, •9 EBCC.Re-Ad RFQ for CM Services z 126.000.68.542.30.41.00 27.3; o EBCC.Re-Ad RFQ for CM Services 422.000.72.542.30.41.00 91.2, p EDH860554 LEGAL DESCP: PLN 20190024 a Legal Descp: PLN 20190024 Q 001.000.62.558.60.41.40 126.7( EDH860911 LEGAL DESCRIP: PLN 20190022 BI rn r. Legal Descrip: PLN 20190022 Brand N 001.000.62.558.60.41.40 57.9, co EDH860946 E4FE.INVITATION TO BID AD E4FE.Invitation to Bid Ad E 422.000.72.594.31.65.41 282.3E fd EDH8960537 LEGAL DESCRIP: PLN 20190026 RI U Legal Descrip: PLN 20190026 Ruber 001.000.62.558.60.41.40 86.8E E Total: 781.9: U m r 237466 6/27/2019 067113 FAST WATER HEATER COMPANY BLD2019-0727 BUILDING REFUND: PROJECTALF Q Building refund: project already 001.000.257.620 64.0( Total : 64.0( Page: 12 Packet Pg. 58 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 13 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237467 6/27/2019 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU54113 FLEET SHOP SUPPLIES r Fleet Shop Supplies c 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 11.5E >, 10.4% Sales Tax a 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 1.2( L WAMOU54241 FLEET SHOP SUPPLIES 3 Fleet Shop Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 92.9- 10.4% Sales Tax Y 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 9.6E (D WAMOU54363 STORM - SAFETY EYEWAER Storm - Safety Eyewaer E 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 25.1E n 10.4% Sales Tax ,U 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 2.6, O Total: 143.OS 0 L 237468 6/27/2019 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 7169608-1 PM: IRRIGATION SUPPLIES a PM: IRRIGATION SUPPLIES Q 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 1,202.1 £ M 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 122.6, N CM774728 PM: CREDIT FOR RETURNED IRRIC t° 0 PM: CREDIT FOR RETURNED IRRIC 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 -838.3E . 10.2% Sales Tax fd U 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 -85.5" +: Total: 400.9' (D E 237469 6/27/2019 077092 FOX, JAMES 6/21/19 GYMNASTICS 6/21/2019 GYMNASTICS GYM SET ( U 6/21/2019 GYMNASTICS GYM SET I, f° 001.000.64.571.28.41.00 36.0( Q Total: 36.0( 237470 6/27/2019 075208 FRALEY-MONILLAS, ADRIENNE 061919 EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT FOR Supplies/refreshments for Council Page: 13 Packet Pg. 59 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 14 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237470 6/27/2019 075208 FRALEY-MONILLAS, ADRIENNE (Continued) 001.000.11.511.60.31.00 56.0z m Total: 56.0' E, �a a 237471 6/27/2019 011900 FRONTIER 253-007-4989 SEAVIEW RESERVOIR TELEMETR) W SEAVIEW RESERVOIR TELEMETR) 3 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 31.1 , 253-012-9166 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES Y 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 162.7- u TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINES t 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 U 302.1, E 253-014-8062 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE M TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE z 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 19.8; o TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE R 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 36.9( o L 253-017-4360 TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE a TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE Q 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 47.0z rn TELEMETRY CIRCUIT LINE 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 87.3E N 425-712-8347 CIVIC CENTER ELEVATOR PHONE c CIVIC CENTER ELEVATOR PHONE N 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 73.2- . Total: 760.31, TU 237472 6/27/2019 074428 HAMILTON PRINTING SYSTEMS 1290 EXPO T-SHIRTS 2019 r- EXPO T-SHIRTS 2019 E E 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 1,575.0( U 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.22.31.00 163.8( Q Total: 1,738.8( 237473 6/27/2019 074804 HARLES, JANINE 527276 PHOTOGRAPHY - JUNE 2019 Photography for June 2019 Page: 14 Packet Pg. 60 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 15 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237473 6/27/2019 074804 HARLES, JANINE (Continued) 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 200.0( Total: 200.0( E, �a a 237474 6/27/2019 076333 HASA INC 643796 WWTP: SOD. HYPOCHLORITE aD SOD. HYPOCHLORITE 23 423.000.76.535.80.31.53 1,983.5£ 10.4% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.53 206.2£ Y Total: 2,189.81, u t 237475 6/27/2019 074966 HIATT CONSULTING LLC 2019-162 TOURISM PROMOTION AND MARKI U Tourism promotion and marketing for E 120.000.31.575.42.41.00 M 1,666.0( Z Tourism website maintenance for Jun o 120.000.31.575.42.41.00 200.0( R Total: 1,866.0( o L Q 237476 6/27/2019 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 1012166 PM SUPPLIES: MORTAR MIX, WED( Q PM SUPPLIES: MORTAR MIX, WED( v 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 65.9, 10.2% Sales Tax rz. 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 6.7' m 1054413 PM SUPPLIES: FLEX COLLAR, SCR PM SUPPLIES: FLEX COLLAR, SCR E 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 27.9 , .m 10.2% Sales Tax U 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 2.8E 2093728 PM SUPPLIES: CABLE TIES, COMBi m E PM SUPPLIES: CABLE TIES, COMBi 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 41.6E 10.2% Sales Tax Q 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 4.2E 25854 PM SUPPLIES: WATER STOP, THEF PM SUPPLIES: WATER STOP, THEF 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 69.6z Page: 15 Packet Pg. 61 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 16 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237476 6/27/2019 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued) 10.2% Sales Tax E, 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 7.1( 3013370 PM SUPPLIES: MASON LINE, BOLT f° a PM SUPPLIES: PIPE CLAMP, PVC A L 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 600 .3 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 c 6.1E 5073292 PM SUPPLIES: PIPE CLAMP, PVC A Y PM SUPPLIES: PIPE CLAMP, PVC A U 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 57.7� � 10.2% Sales Tax E 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 5.8E n 513731 PM SUPPLIES: BATTERIES, PRIMEI U PM SUPPLIES: BATTERIES, PRIMEI O 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 33.9, > 10.2% Sales Tax o 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 3.4E a 524237 PM SUPPLIES: PVC PIPE COUPLIN, Q PM SUPPLIES: PVC PIPE COUPLIN, rn 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 4.9E' 10.2% Sales Tax N 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 0.5" o 6084565 PM SUPPLIES: GLOVES N PM SUPPLIES: GLOVES E 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 30.0( Z 10.2% Sales Tax +% 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 3.0E 621125 PM SUPPLIES: PVC BUSHING E PM SUPPLIES: PVC BUSHING m 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 4.5( Q 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 0.4E 7093030 PM SUPPLIES: CLAMP METER, CIC PM SUPPLIES: CLAMP METER, CIC Page: 16 Packet Pg. 62 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account 237476 6/27/2019 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued) 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 8032782 PM SUPPLIES: RAKES, PRUNERS, PM SUPPLIES: RAKES, PRUNERS, 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 Total 237477 6/27/2019 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES 1014279 FAC MAINT SHOP SUPPLIES Fac Maint Shop Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 14429 FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES Fac Maint - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1612686 PS - SUPPLIES PS - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1625181 FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES Fac Maint - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2014031 SEWER - SUPPLIES Sewer - Supplies 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 10.2% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 4.5.c Page: 17 Amoun c 163.0( 16.6< a 3 426.8, �a 43.5, Y 1,087.11 y t E M 50.6E 0 5.1, 0 L a a 25.1 £ Q rn 2.51 ti N t0 0 33.& E 3.4E m 73.5- E m 7.5( Q 12.7, 1.3( Page: 17 Packet Pg. 63 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 237477 6/27/2019 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 18 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) r 2020199 FAC - SUPPLIES c FAC - Supplies E 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 23.9E a 10.2% Sales Tax L 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.41 '3 2023809 FAC MAINT - UNIT 42 - SUPPLIES Fac Maint - Unit 42 - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 44.9,1 Y 10.2% Sales Tax U 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 4.5E r- 2084574 TRAFFIC - SUPPLIES E Traffic - Supplies R 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 18.0( u 10.2% Sales Tax O 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 1.8z > 2084636 FAC MAINT - SHOP SUPPLIES o L Fac Maint - Shop Supplies a 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 161.3E Q 10.2% Sales Tax M 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 16.4E' 3011843 MCH - SUPPLIES N MCH - Supplies c 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 17.8, 10.2% Sales Tax E E 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1.8, U 3020155 FAC MAINT UNIT 42 - SUPPLIES Fac Maint Unit 42 - Supplies m 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 29.7< E 10.2% Sales Tax m 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 3.0< Q 3092194 WATER - SUPPLIES Water - Supplies 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 137.1 z 10.2% Sales Tax Page: 18 Packet Pg. 64 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 19 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237477 6/27/2019 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued) 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 13.9� 32841 CITY HALL - SUPPLIES City Hall - Supplies a 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 44.1( L 10.2% Sales Tax 3 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 4.4� -o 3612310 FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES Fac Maint - Supplies Y 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 62.6,1 u 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 6.3� E 4025167 CITY PARK SHOP SUPPLIES R City Park Shop Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 79.3, O 10.2% Sales Tax > 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 8.1( o 4624645 YOST POOL - SUPPLIES a Yost Pool - Supplies Q 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 35.2( 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 3.5� N 526125 FAC MAINT - SUPPLIES t° 0 Fac Maint - Supplies N 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 97.1 £ 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 9.9" +% 5523255 TRAFFIC - SUPPLIES (D Traffic - Supplies E 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 30.9, 10.2% Sales Tax Q 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 3.1 E 6085725 TRAFFIC - PAINT TRUCK SUPPLIES Traffic - Paint Truck Supplies 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 26.91' Page: 19 Packet Pg. 65 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 20 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237477 6/27/2019 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued) 10.2% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 2.7,>, 6524965 PW - SUPPLIES f° a PW - Supplies L 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 31.4, .3 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 c 3.2( 7014841 FAC - SUPPLIES Y FAC - Supplies U 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 44.9< � 10.2% Sales Tax E 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 4.5f n 7611597 CITY PARKS - SUPPLIES U City Parks - Supplies O 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 59.9z > 10.2% Sales Tax o 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 6.1 - a 7621688 SEWER - SUPPLIES Q Sewer - Supplies M 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 6.5E' 10.2% Sales Tax N 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 0.6 1 o 8026181 CITY PARK SHED PROJECT - SUPP N City Park Shed Project - Supplies E 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 68.5( Z 10.2% Sales Tax +% 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 6.9� 8026220 CITY PARK - SUPPLIES E E City Park - Supplies m 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 61.1 ' Q 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 6.2z 80640 ROADWAY - SUPPLIES Roadway - Supplies Page: 20 Packet Pg. 66 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account 237477 6/27/2019 067862 HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICES (Continued) 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 10.2% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 8524599 STORM - SUPPLIES Storm - Supplies 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 10.2% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.40.31.00 9010836 CITY PARK SHED PROJECT SUPPL City Park Shed Project Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 9020803 MCH - SUPPLIES MCH - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.2% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 9082442 SEWER - SUPPLIES Sewer - Supplies 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 10.2% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 9092867 TRAFFIC - SUPPLIES Traffic - Supplies 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 10.2% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 Total 237478 6/27/2019 060165 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC 29263 E7CD.TO 19-01.SERVICES THRU 4/ E7CD.TO 19-01.Services thru 4/30/1 126.000.68.595.70.65.41 29310 ESJB.SERVICES THRU 5/31/19 ESJB.Services thru 5/31/19 4.5.c Page: 21 Amoun c 23.9: E 2.41 a 3 14.4E �a 1.4E Y U m t U 327.7, E .ii 33.4< u 0 �a 79.9E o a a 8.1 E Q M ti 3.5' N m 0 0.3E 89.8E aD 9.11 E 2,002.61 m r Q 8,636.0( Page: 21 Packet Pg. 67 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 22 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237478 6/27/2019 060165 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC (Continued) 421.000.74.594.34.65.41 1,857.8, ESJB.Services thru 5/31/19 423.000.75.594.35.65.41 1,857.8, ESJB.Services thru 5/31/19 422.000.72.594.31.65.41 1,857.8, Total: 14,209.4E 237479 6/27/2019 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 3256147 DSD COPY PAPER DSD copy paper 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 334.8 , Tota I : 334.8 , 237480 6/27/2019 073518 INNOVYZE INC 190462894 INFOWATER & XPSWMM RENEWAI InfoWater & XPSWMM Renewal 421.000.74.534.80.49.20 2,787.6( InfoWater & XPSWMM Renewal 422.000.72.531.90.49.20 2,191.4z InfoWater & XPSWMM Renewal 423.000.75.535.80.49.20 2,191.4.E Tota I : 7,170.45 237481 6/27/2019 014940 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS 300-10058783 PM SUPPLIES: GLOVES, MOTOR TI PM SUPPLIES: GLOVES, MOTOR TI 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 149.1 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 15.5E Tota I : 164.6E 237482 6/27/2019 075356 JENNIFER ZIEGLER PUBLIC 048 STATE LOBBYIST FOR JUNE 2019 State lobbyist for June 2019 001.000.61.511.70.41.00 3,358.0( Total : 3,358.0( 237483 6/27/2019 075159 LIFE INSURANCE CO OF NO AMER July Cigna JULY CIGNA PREMIUMS July Cigna Premiums Page: 22 Packet Pg. 68 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 23 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237483 6/27/2019 075159 LIFE INSURANCE CO OF NO AMER (Continued) 811.000.231.550 12,627.41 Tota I : 12,627.4 , 237484 6/27/2019 072886 MACDONALD-MILLER FAC.SOLUTIONS SVC158087 PM: YOST POOL LABOR AND PART PM: YOST POOL LABOR AND PART 125.000.64.594.76.65.00 14,179.8z 10.4% Sales Tax 125.000.64.594.76.65.00 1,474.7( Total : 15,654.5z 237485 6/27/2019 075716 MALLORY PAINT STORE INC E0109135 FAC - PAINT FAC - Paint 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 26.9� Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.7( E0109159 FAC - PAINT Fac - Paint 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 26.9� Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 2.7( Total: 59.3f 237486 6/27/2019 067235 MARYS TOWING INC 77827 INV 77827 EDMONDS PD CASE 19- TOW SILVER FORD F250 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 189.0( 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 19.6E Total: 208.6E 237487 6/27/2019 072223 MILLER, DOUG 6/18-6/25 GYM MONITO 6/18-6/25/19 BASKETBALL GYM MO 6/18-6/25/19 BASKETBALL GYM MO 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 60.0( 6/5-6/19 GYM MONITOR 6/5-6/19/2019 BASKETBALL GYM M( 6/5-6/19/2019 BASKETBALL GYM M( 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 72.0( Page: 23 Packet Pg. 69 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 237487 6/27/2019 072223 072223 MILLER, DOUG (Continued) 237488 6/27/2019 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENTALL INC 306560 306625 306712 237489 6/27/2019 077136 NEUMAN, CASEY PLN20190027 237490 6/27/2019 025690 NOYES, KARIN 000 00 921 237491 6/27/2019 002203 OWEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY PO # Description/Account Total : PM: HEDGRETRIMMER, EDGER BL, PM: HEDGRETRIMMER, EDGER BL, 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 STREET - SUPPLIES, PARTS Street - Supplies, Parts 111.000.68.542.71.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.71.31.00 PM: BATTERY, CHARGER, BLOWEF PM: BATTERY, CHARGER, BLOWEF 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 Total PLANNING REFUND: APPLICANT V Planning Refund: Applicant withdrew 001.000.257.620 Total PLANNING BOARD MINUTES 6/12/1 Planning Board Minutes 6/12/19 001.000.62.558.60.41.00 Total 00092927 UNIT 66 - PARTS Unit 66 - Parts 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 4.5.c Page: 24 Amoun 132.0( m E �a a 24.7E m L 3 2.5, c ea 249.9E u t U 25.9� E v 503.8E o R 52.4( o L 859.51 a rn 2,720.0( N 2,720.0( m 0 E 277.5( 277.5( m E t U m r 2,464.5z Q 155.1 272.4E Page: 24 Packet Pg. 70 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # 237491 6/27/2019 002203 002203 OWEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY (Continued) 237492 6/27/2019 065051 PARAMETRIX INC 10749 237493 6/27/2019 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY V083563 V338712 V351404 V351612 V431443 4.5.c Page: 25 Description/Account Amoun Total : 2,892.1- m ESDB.SERVICES THRU 6/1/19 E ESDB.Services thru 6/1/19 sa 112.000.68.595.33.65.41 a 3,136.2< m Total: 3,136Z 3 WWTP: WRONG TX; CREDIT INV V; c WRONG TX as FRT not taxed; CREC ea N 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 612.0( Freight t 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 79.5" u 10.4% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 63.6E U WWTP: CWD CONN & PLUG, TY CF o CWD CONN & PLUG, TY CABLES R 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 403.1 £ o 10.4% Sales Tax a 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 41.9E WWTP: 6/12/19 CREDIT FOR INV. V CREDIT FOR INV. V083563-WRONC M 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 -612.0( N Freight w 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 -79.5" N 10.4% Sales Tax E 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 -63.6.' fd WWTP: VAPOR TIGHT 2XT8 LED 1: U VAPOR TIGHT 2XT8 LED 120-277V 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 612.0( E Freight 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 79.5" 10.4% Sales Tax Q 423.000.76.535.80.48.00 71.9, CITY PARKS BLDG - SUPPLIES City Parks Bldg - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 970.5E Page: 25 Packet Pg. 71 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 26 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237493 6/27/2019 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY (Continued) 10.4% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 100.9, Total: 2,280.01 237494 6/27/2019 071811 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR 1115611 STREET - SIEMENS PART SHIPPIN( Street - Siemens Part Shipping Fees 111.000.68.542.90.49.00 80.5: Total : 80.5: 237495 6/27/2019 074712 RAINIER ENVIRONMENTAL LAB 3343 WWTP: CERIODAPHNIA DUBIAACI CERIODAPHNIA DUBIAACUTE LAB 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 600.0( Tota I : 600.0( 237496 6/27/2019 031500 REID MIDDLETON & ASSOC INC 1904029 EDMONDS WATERFRONT REDEVE EDMONDS WATERFRONT REDEVE 001.000.64.571.21.41.00 7,485.0( Total: 7,485.0( 237497 6/27/2019 064769 ROMAINE ELECTRIC 5-023137 UNIT 66 - BATTERIES Unit 66 - Batteries 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 204.4, 10.4% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 21.2( Tota I : 225.61 237498 6/27/2019 077125 SANDS, LOGAN VOLLEYBALL ATTENDANT 6/10-6/24/2019 OUTDOOR VOLLEYE 6/10-6/24/2019 OUTDOOR VOLLEYE 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 144.0( Total : 144.0( 237499 6/27/2019 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 200202547 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 21930 95- PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 21930 95- 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 17.1, 200348233 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 84TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 84TH AVE W Page: 26 Packet Pg. 72 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 237499 6/27/2019 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 27 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun (Continued) r 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 c 40.9( 200468593 LIFT STATION #4 8311 TALBOT RD / LIFT STATION #4 8311 TALBOT RD / f° a 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 236.7E L 200493146 MAPLEWOOD PARK IRRIGATION M 3 MAPLEWOOD PARK IRRIGATION M 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 18.3, 200638609 OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON Y OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON y 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 181.5� u 200714038 SEAVIEW PARK E SEAVIEW PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 _M 18.8E 200739845 SEAVIEW RESERVOIR 18520 90TH O SEAVIEW RESERVOIR 18520 90TH 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 19.8z o 200865202 LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTRE a LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTRE Q 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 71.8E rn 201197084 SEAVIEW PARK r. SEAVIEW PARK N 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 25.7E c 201236825 FISHING PIER RESTROOMS FISHING PIER RESTROOMS 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 204.6( 12 201327111 PINE ST PARK PINE ST PARK (D 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 17.7z E 201551744 SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / � U SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / � 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 1,537.2� Q 201572898 TRAFFIC LIGHT 117 3RD AVE S / ME TRAFFIC LIGHT 117 3RD AVE S / ME 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 42.1, 201751476 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9932 220TH ST SW Page: 27 Packet Pg. 73 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 237499 6/27/2019 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 237500 237501 Voucher List City of Edmonds Invoice (Continued) 201942489 202291662 202439246 202807632 203097787 6/27/2019 037303 SO SNOHOMISH CO FIRE & RESCUE EDMS 2019-7 6/27/2019 074797 SUPER CHARGE MARKETING LLC 6070 4.5.c Page: 28 PO # Description/Account Amoun c TRAFFIC LIGHT 9932 220TH ST SW m E, 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 46.7 1 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; a PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; L 001.000.65.518.20.47.00 87.6( .3 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 111.000.68.542.90.47.00 c 332.8, PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH : Y 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 332.8 1 y PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 332.8 1 E PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH : 2 511.000.77.548.68.47.00 332.8 ' ,� PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; O 422.000.72.531.90.47.00 332.8E > CIVIC CENTER & FIRE STATION #1, o CIVIC CENTER & FIRE STATION #1, a 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 5,296.8� Q CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N / METER M CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N / METER ti 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 2,193.21 N TRAFFIC LIGHT 8429 196TH ST SW o TRAFFIC LIGHT 8429 196TH ST SW N 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 20.5" WWTP: 5/16-6/14/19 METER 10001� 5/16-6/14/19 200 2ND AVE S / METE +% 423.000.76.535.80.47.61 24,725.6( m Total: 36,467.9: E U JUL-2019 FIRE SERVICES CONTRA Jul-2019 Fire Services Contract Payn Q 001.000.39.522.20.41.50 614,893.1, Total : 614,893.1 , SOCIAL MEDIA SERVICES FOR JUI` Page: 28 Packet Pg. 74 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 29 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237501 6/27/2019 074797 SUPER CHARGE MARKETING LLC (Continued) Social media services for June 2019 E, 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 300.0( Total: 300.0( a m 237502 6/27/2019 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 18241234 FLEET SHOP SUPPLIES 3 Fleet Shop Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 14.4' 10.4% Sales Tax Y 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 1.5( u 18244406 ROADWAY - SPRAYER, UPSIDE DO Roadway - Sprayer, Upside Down Pa E 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 29.5( O Total: 329.0E 0 237503 6/27/2019 071666 TETRATECH INC 51447444 E8CC.SERVICES THRU 4/26/19 a E8CC.Services thru 4/26/19 Q 112.000.68.542.30.41.00 379.2� E8CC.Services thru 4/26/19 126.000.68.542.30.41.00 94.8, N E8CC.Services thru 4/26/19 W 422.000.72.542.30.41.00 0 6,357.3E N 51447552 E8CC.SERVICES THRU 5/24/19 E E8CC.Services thru 5/24/19 fd 112.000.68.542.30.41.00 U 763.2( E8CC.Services thru 5/24/19 aD 126.000.68.542.30.41.00 190.8( E E8CC.Services thru 5/24/19 U 422.000.72.542.30.41.00 789.2' Total : 8,574.61 Q 237504 6/27/2019 077139 UNITED FREIGHT LLC Bus License Refund LI Refund Cst #00339257 LI Refund Cst #00339257 001.000.257.310 100.0( Page: 29 Packet Pg. 75 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 30 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237504 6/27/2019 077139 077139 UNITED FREIGHT LLC (Continued) Total : 100.0( 237505 6/27/2019 077070 UNITED RECYCLING & CONTAINER 78600 STORM - DUMP FEES Storm - Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 216.4E Total : 216.4E 237506 6/27/2019 064214 USSSA WASHINGTON STATE 1082 SUMMER SOFTBALL TEAM REGIST SUMMER SOFTBALL TEAM REGIST 001.000.64.571.25.49.00 400.0( Tota I : 400.0( 237507 6/27/2019 044960 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOC CTR 9050151 UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 135.7E UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 135.7E UTILITIES UNDERGROUND LOCATI 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 139.8� Total: 411.4° 237508 6/27/2019 072172 VAUGHAN, ERIC EVAUGHAN6.2019 WWTP: PARKING FEE-GALLUP CLI 6th Avenue Garage - PARKING FEE-, 423.000.76.535.80.43.00 32.0( Tota I : 32.0( 237509 6/27/2019 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 9832029376 C/A 671247844-00001 Cell Service-Eng 001.000.67.518.21.42.00 18.6E Cell Service Fac-Maint 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 97.3z Cell Service-PD 001.000.41.521.22.42.00 294.5z Cell Service-PW Street/Storm 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 18.6E Cell Service-PW Street/Storm Page: 30 Packet Pg. 76 vchlist 06/27/2019 11:19:03AM Voucher List City of Edmonds 4.5.c Page: 31 Bank code : Voucher usbank Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun 237509 6/27/2019 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS (Continued) 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 18.6E Cell Service-PW Water >% 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 18.6E a Cell Service-PW Sewer L .3 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 55.9E Cell Service-WWTP 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 c 18.6E Total : 541.1( Y U 237510 6/27/2019 064800 WEHOP 641165 FLOWER PROGRAM: PLANTS FLOWER PROGRAM: PLANTS U E 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.4% Sales Tax 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 44.4� O Total: 472.31 0 237511 6/27/2019 063008 WSDOT RE 41 JZ0249 L006 E7JA.SERVICES THRU MAY 2019 a E7JA.Services thru May 2019 Q 421.000.74.594.34.65.41 322.2 Total: 322.2, r. ti 72 Vouchers for bank code : usbank Bank total : 840,940.71 0 72 Vouchers in this report Total vouchers : 840,940.71 M U m E t U m r Q Page: 31 Packet Pg. 77 4.5.d vchlist 06/27/2019 2:02:34PM Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 6272019 6/27/2019 076380 BETTER PROPERTIES METRO 1 Vouchers for bank code : usbank 1 Vouchers in this report Voucher List City of Edmonds Page 0 Invoice PO # Description/Account Amoun Jul 2019 ACCT #00397358 4TH AVE PARKIN( d 4th Avenue Parking Lot Rent - July 2( E 001.000.39.542.64.45.00 417.E 1 Total : 417.61 m L_ Bank total : 417.61 3 c Total vouchers : 417.6� f° N m t U E M U 4- 0 �a 0 L Q a ti N tD O d L 3 c CD E U a Page: 1 Packet Pg. 78 4.5.e PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number STM 174th St. & 71st Ave Storm Improvements c521 EBFB STM 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs c491 E61FE SWR 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 ESGA SWR 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project i013 E6GA WTR 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects i014 E6J13 y STM 2018 Lorian Woods Study s018 EBFA STR 2018 Minor Sidewalk Project i032 EBDA Q' a� L STR 2018 Overlay Program i030 EBCB 3 SWR 2018 Sewerline Overlays i035 EBCE SWR 2018 Sewerline Replacement Project c492 E6GC Y U STR 2018 Traffic Calming i027 EBAA WTR 2018 Waterline Overlays i034 EBCD E WTR 2018 Waterline Replacement Project c493 E6JC 2 U STIR 2019 Downtown Parking Study s021 E9AC 4- G STR 2019 Guardrail Install i039 E9AB c L STR 2019 Overlay Program i036 E9CA CL STR 2019 Pedestrian Safety Program i041 E9DB Q SWR 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project c516 EBGA rn ti STM 2019 Storm Maintenance Project c525 EBFC N co WTR 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement c523 EBJA N L STR 2019 Traffic Calming i038 E9AA M STR 2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades i045 E9AD Z UTILITIES 2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update s020 EBJB o WTR 2019 Waterline Overlay i043 E9CB m WTR 2019 Waterline Replacement c498 E7JA j 2, STR 2020 Overlay Program i042 EOCA STR 220th Adaptive i028 EBAB a� a STM 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements c486 E6FB i u_ STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC a� STR 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) c425 E3DD E t STR 238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps i037 EBDC STR 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) c423 E3DB Q STR 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) c485 E6DA STR 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements i029 EBCA STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA STR 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th i031 EBCC STR 89th PI W Retaining Wall i025 E7CD STR ADA Curb Ramps i033 EBDB STR ADA Transition Plan s016 E6DB Revised 6/27/2019 Packet Pg. 79 4.5.e PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Fundinq Project Title Number Number STR Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing i040 E9DA STR Audible Pedestrian Signals i024 E7AB STR Bikelink Project c474 E5DA SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II c488 E6GB STR Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements i026 E7DC STR Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion i015 E6AB WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) c482 E5J13 STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E4FE FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC STR Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector c478 E5DB WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating c473 E51KA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 E8MA STR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) c405 E2AD STR Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization s014 E6AA STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study s011 E5GB SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC STR Minor Sidewalk Program i017 E6DD STM Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive i011 E6FA STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 EYE STM NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) m013 E7FG STM OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization m105 E71FA STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 E5FD WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA UTILITIES Standard Details Updates solo E5NA STM Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW c495 E7FB STM Stormwater Comp Plan Update s017 E6FD STR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 ElDA STR Trackside Warning System c470 E5AA UTILITIES Utility Rate Update s013 E6JA PRK Veteran's Plaza c480 E6MA PRK Waterfront Restoration m103 E7MA STM Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 E5HA c m E M a� L 3 c M Y V N t E U 4- 0 0 L Q a i Revised 6/27/2019 Packet Pg. 80 4.5.e PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Protect Project Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title STR EOCA i042 2020 Overlay Program STIR E1CA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements STIR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) E2FC Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study STIR E3DB c423 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) ■ STIR E3DD c425 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) STM E3FE c410 Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive E4FC M" �illow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration STM E4FD c436 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects FEB Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station SWR E4GB c456 Citvwide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c461 Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study WWTP E4HA c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring E4MB Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab STIR ESAA c470 Trackside Warning System iSTIR ESDA Bikelink Project STIR ESDB c478 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector STM c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility SWR ESGA c469 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects SWR s011 Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study WWTP ESHA c481 WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) WTR ESKA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating andard Details Upda STIR E6AA s014 Hwv 99 Gatewav Revitalization Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion STIR E6DA c485 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) s016 ADA Transition Plan STIR E6DD i017 Minor Sidewalk Program 1 Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive STM E6FB c486 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements STM E61FE c491 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs SWR i013 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project SWR E6GB c488 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II SWR c492 2018 Sewerline Replacement Project UTILITIES E6JA s013 Utility Rate Update WTR i014 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects Revised 6/27/2019 Packet Pg. 81 4.5.e PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Protect Project Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title WTR E6JC c493 2018 Waterline Replacement Project PRK E6MA c480 Veteran's Plaza STIR E7AB i024 Audible Pedestrian Signals STIR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements STIR E7CD i025 89th PI W Retaining Wall m STIR i026 Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements �, STM E7FA m105 OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization M = a� L STM E7FB c495 Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW 3 STM E7FG m013 NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) M WTR E7JA c498 2019 Waterline Replacement Y PRK E7MA m103 Waterfront Restoration aUi t STIR E8AA i027 2018 Traffic Calming E STIR E8AB i028 220th Adaptive v STIR E8CA i029 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements c STIRE8CB i030 2018 Overlay Program > 0 STIR E8CC i031 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th Q WTR E8CD i034 2018 Waterline Overlays Q SWR E8CE i035 2018 Sewerline Overlays STIR E8DA i032 2018 Minor Sidewalk Project N STIR E8DB i033 ADA Curb Ramps o U) STIR E8DC i037 238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps STM E8FA s018 2018 Lorian Woods Study E STM E8FB c521 174th St. & 71st Ave Storm Improvements Z 0 L STM E8FC c525 2019 Storm Maintenance Project SWR E8GA c516 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project WTR E8JA c523 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement >' c UTILITIES E8J13 s020 2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update 0 PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor a i LL STIR E9AA i038 2019 Traffic Calming c STIR E9AB i039 2019 Guardrail Install E STIR E9AC s021 2019 Downtown Parking Study STIR HAD i045 2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades Q STIR E9CA i036 2019 Overlay Program WTR E9CB i043 2019 Waterline Overlay STIR E9DA i040 Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing STIR E9DB i041 2019 Pedestrian Safety Program Revised 6/27/2019 Packet Pg. 82 4.5.e PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Protect Project Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor STR E1DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements STR E1 CA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements STM E2FC c380 Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study STR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) m STM EYE c410 Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive E, M STR E3DB c423 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) = a� L STR E3DD c425 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) 3 STM E4FC c435 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration M STM E4FD c436 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects Y FAC E4MB c443 Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab t WWTP E4HA c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring E STM E4FE c455 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station v SWR E4GB c456 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase 1 c SWR E4GC c461 Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study > 0 SWR E5GA c469 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects a a STR E5AA c470 Trackside Warning System Q WTR E51KA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating a' STR E5DA c474 Bikelink Project N STR E5DB c478 Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector co c U) STM E5FD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility a� PRK E6MA c480 Veteran's Plaza E 0 WWTP E5HA c481 WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications Z 0 L WTR E5J13 c482 Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) STR E6DA c485 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) STM E6FB c486 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements c SWR E6GB c488 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase 11 a STM E6FE c491 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs i LL SWR E6GC c492 2018 Sewerline Replacement Project c WTR E6JC c493 2018 Waterline Replacement Project E STM E7FB c495 Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW 0 WTR E7JA c498 2019 Waterline Replacement Q SWR E8GA c516 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project STM E8FB c521 174th St. & 71st Ave Storm Improvements WTR E8JA c523 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement STM E8FC c525 2019 Storm Maintenance Project STR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements STM E6FA i011 Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive SWR E6GA i013 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project Revised 6/27/2019 Packet Pg. 83 4.5.e PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Protect Project Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title WTR E6JB i014 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects STR E6AB i015 Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion STR E6DD i017 Minor Sidewalk Program STR E7AB i024 Audible Pedestrian Signals STR E7CD i025 89th PI W Retaining Wall m STR E7DC i026 Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements �, STR EBAA i027 2018 Traffic Calming M = a� L STR EBAB i028 220th Adaptive 3 STR EBCA i029 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements M STR EBCB i030 2018 Overlay Program Y STR EBCC i031 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th t STR EBDA i032 2018 Minor Sidewalk Project E STR EBDB i033 ADA Curb Ramps U WTR EBCD i034 2018 Waterline Overlays c SWR EBCE i035 2018 Sewerline Overlays > 0 STR E9CA i036 2019 Overlay Program a a STR EBDC i037 238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps Q STR E9AA i038 2019 Traffic Calming a' STR E9AB i039 2019 Guardrail Install N STR E9DA i040 Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing co c STR E9DB i041 2019 Pedestrian Safety Program STR EOCA i042 2020 Overlay Program E WTR E9CB i043 2019 Waterline Overlay Z 0 L STR E9AD i045 2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades d STM E7FG m013 NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) PRK E7MA m103 Waterfront Restoration >' c STM E7FA m105 OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization UTILITIES ESNA solo Standard Details Updates a LL SWR ESGB s0l l Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study c UTILITIES E6JA s013 Utility Rate Update E STR E6AA s014 Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization STR E6DB s016 ADA Transition Plan Q STM E6FD s017 Stormwater Comp Plan Update STM EBFA s018 2018 Lorian Woods Study UTILITIES EBJB s020 2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update STR E9AC s021 2019 Downtown Parking Study Revised 6/27/2019 Packet Pg. 84 4.5.e PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Project Title Number Number FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 EBMA PRK Veteran's Plaza c480 E6MA PRK Waterfront Restoration m103 E7MA STM 174th St. & 71 st Ave Storm Improvements c521 EBFB STM 183rd PI SW Storm Repairs c491 E61FE STM 2018 Lorian Woods Study s018 EBFA STM 2019 Storm Maintenance Project c525 EBFC STM 224th & 98th Drainage Improvements c486 E6FB STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E41FE STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD STM Northstream Culvert Repair Under Puget Drive i011 E61FA STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 EYE STM NPDES (Students Saving Salmon) m013 E7FG STM OVD Slope Repair & Stabilization m105 E71FA STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 ESFD STM Storm Drain Improvements @ 9510 232nd St. SW c495 E7FB STM Stormwater Comp Plan Update s017 E6FD STM Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC STIR 2018 Minor Sidewalk Project i032 EBDA STIR 2018 Overlay Program i030 EBCB STIR 2018 Traffic Calming i027 EBAA STIR 2019 Downtown Parking Study s021 E9AC STIR 2019 Guardrail Install i039 E9AB STIR 2019 Overlay Program i036 E9CA STIR 2019 Pedestrian Safety Program i041 E9DB STIR 2019 Traffic Calming i038 E9AA STIR 2019 Traffic Signal Upgrades i045 E9AD STIR 2020 Overlay Program i042 EOCA STIR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STIR 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) c425 E3DD STIR 238th St. Island & Misc. Ramps i037 EBDC STIR 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) c423 E3DB STIR 238th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Hwy 99) c485 E6DA STIR 76th Ave W & 220th St. SW Intersection Improvements i029 EBCA STIR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA STIR 84th Ave W Overlay from 220th to 212th i031 EBCC STIR 89th PI W Retaining Wall i025 E7CD c m E M a� L 3 c M Y V a� t v E v 4- 0 0 L CL om i Revised 6/27/2019 Packet Pg. 85 4.5.e PROJECT NUMBERS (By Funding) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Project Title Number Number STIR ADA Curb Ramps i033 E8DB STIR ADA Transition Plan s016 E6DB STIR Admiral Way Pedestrian Crossing iO4o E9DA STIR Audible Pedestrian Signals i024 E7AB STIR Bikelink Project c474 E5DA STIR Citywide Pedestrian Crossing Enhancements i026 E7DC STIR Citywide Protected/Permissive Traffic Signal Conversion i015 E6AB STIR Edmonds Street Waterfront Connector c478 E5DB STIR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) c405 E2AD STIR Hwy 99 Gateway Revitalization s014 E6AA STIR Minor Sidewalk Program i017 E6DD STIR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1 DA STIR Trackside Warning System c470 E5AA STIR 220th Adaptive i028 E8AB SWR 2016 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 E5GA SWR 2017 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Project i013 E6GA SWR 2018 Sewerline Overlays i035 E8CE SWR 2018 Sewerline Replacement Project c492 E6GC SWR 2019 Sewerline Replacement Project c516 E8GA SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase II c488 E6GB SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study sol l E5GB SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC UTILITIES 2019 Utility Rate & GFC Update s02o E8JB UTILITIES Standard Details Updates solo E5NA UTILITIES Utility Rate Update s013 E6JA WTR 2017 Waterline Replacement Projects i014 E6JB WTR 2018 Waterline Overlays i034 E8CD WTR 2018 Waterline Replacement Project c493 E6JC WTR 2019 Swedish Waterline Replacement c523 E8JA WTR 2019 Waterline Overlay i043 E9CB WTR 2019 Waterline Replacement c498 E7JA WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) c482 E5J13 WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating c473 E51KA WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 E5HA c m E M a� L 3 c M Y V a� t v E v 4- 0 0 L CL om i Revised 6/27/2019 Packet Pg. 86 4.6 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 07/2/2019 Acknowledgment of Claim for Damages Staff Lead: WCIA Claims Department: City Clerk's Office Preparer: Nicholas Falk Background/History n/a Staff Recommendation Acknowledge receipt of Claims for Damages by minute entry. Narrative Tawn Kreider submitted a claim for damages in the amount of $700.46. Attachments: Tawn Kreider CFD Packet Pg. 87 CITY OF EDMONDS CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM 4.fi.a 1 "VVED J IN 21 2019 /ffjf//Jf�]�fJ 0.iDS CITY CLERK Date ciaim Farm R"ved by City Please take note that Cu.0 Yl K E r.f [:tom who currently resides at a&)b r-:%o4 �qe ��3q maiiing address f) bomyt phone #�j-o51w+?rk phone # , and who resided at C-CIA at the time of the occurrence and whose date of birth is is claiming damages against in the sum of$ y� arising out of the falklwling circumstances listed below. UATE OP OCCURRENCE; W _ I-)-19 - TIME; Q�-1 C(e)K _Ibc LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE. J ] Ay e- 6 • J* A LA vgoeiC� �, �L6 9 0 G DESCRIPTION: 1 _ Describe the con uct and circurnstance that brought about the injury or damage. Also describe the Injury or damag e, IAl,t_ lve.li- Tat A;n& x' e* LOLL Fif-rlo1 M I4de- �--w1G>1 . rA+r"o�A (attach an extra sheet for additional Information, If needed) to per- 2_ Provide a list of witnesses, if applicable, to the occurrence including names, ad imesas, and phone numbers. 3. Attach copies of all documentation relating to expenses, injuries, lasses, andlor estimates for repair. 4. Have you submitted a claim for damages to your insurance company? Yes X_ No If so, please provide the name of the insurance company: and the policy #: "* ADDITIONAL INFORMAUM REQUIRED FOR AUTOMOBILE GLAIM$ ONLY License Plate # Wk WO D Driver License # Type Auto;!— i (year) (make) (model) _ DRWER: � OWNER: r�A ki � 16l10 ._ 1 fe. A?r - Address: Address: - - - Phone#: Phone#: Passengers: f Name: A W 11 C� t _ _ Name: Address: a.�G ,� .-�- r -- Address: FormRehaW 09 W1A Page i of 2 Packet Pg. 88 4.6.a NOTE: THIS FORM MUST BE SIGNED AND NOTARIZED' i, A-W P4 K f e iGt- being first duly swom, depose and say that I am the claimant for the above described; that I have read the above claim, know the contents thereof and believe the same to be true. I further acknowledge that any information I provide as part of this claim may he considered a public record and may be Eject to disclosure pursuant to RCW 4156_ x Signature of Clalmant(s) State of Washington Countyof SflJy11AM1,54- I certify that t know or have satisfactory evidence that-IAktyY the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that (he/she) signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be (Wlher) free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the m5h-Uj rent. Date+v: & — .7 t— a0l ! 24-5igf�alur9-1 W Ak iille My appointment expires: Please present the completed claim form to: Fans Revised 05106r14 City Clerk's Office City of Edmonds 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA, 98020 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Page 2 uf'2 Packet Pg. 89 4.7 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 07/2/2019 Lynnwood Mazda Pedestrian Easement Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History On June 11, 2019, staff presented this item to the Parks & Public Works committee and it was forwarded to the June 18th consent agenda for full Council approval. Staff Recommendation Approve easement. Narrative The City of Edmonds is currently reviewing a proposed development project, the Mazda Showroom and Service Center, located at 22214 Highway 99. This property has frontage improvements along Highway 99 and 761" Ave W. In accordance with the Edmonds Community Development Code, 7-ft sidewalks will be constructed along the property frontage. In addition, street trees will be installed in tree grates along both property frontages. In order to provide all required frontage improvements, portions of the public sidewalk will encroach onto private property. This occurs in 5 sections on Highway 99 and in 5 sections on 76t" Ave W. Therefore, for these 10 sections of sidewalk, a public pedestrian easement shall be provided to the City. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map Attachment 2 - Mazda Site Plan with Easement Packet Pg. 90 4.7.a ............ z20TH STS►iU ,,- , II 1:-i n, Z21ST PLSw, •• II 1I=rn u � I I k�sgF�,k3atr� i� Ili a • I _ter � �d� ILL u I 01 Br- T,77;7� 2 2 3 RQ St SW �. , •'tom., �'� I -... I _ I -.1': 2 4 TKS T mil- i I L !I!II L .4 -s 19i 21.11,P. I � ._•13� d � � a7-��la-tt ctinr aiza� �IV IM A� da 51rxx�urngnn aM Svrh ix Ctr y- ZZZ�4 N�9hwo�y 9� a Packet Pg. 91 4.7.b 1 � Avoid planting in summer months. ----------------------------------------- Stake trees as necessary. @ 31 r l k architecture ( design 11.16.18 t Rubber Hose Guy wires - 3 per tree flogged for visibility 2"x2"x24" stokes Tree Planting Detail applies to shrubs as well no stoking necessary for shrubs Set crown 2" above finished grode Wood chip or bark mulch Form watering well Excavate 2x width of rootball' "remove burlap from top half of rootboll I ,-Q� Plant in 50-50 mix of topsoil and native soil \/ Tomped soil setting bed Existing soil 3 1 r I k architecture I design {f Plant Materials r�r :Y. Amenity Space Garden kp r a 1 Thuja plicata - Western Red Cedor / 4-5' ff Acer rubrum 'Red Sunset' - Red Mople / 2" cal. Prunus cerasifero 'Thundercloud' - Purple Plum / 2" cal. oa K OQ� 0 47 Potentillo fruiticoso 'Goldfinger' - Cinquefoil / 1 gal. 0000 s 34 Nondino dom. 'Gulf Stream' 2 gal. 81 Mohonio repens - Creeping Mohonio / 1 gol. 12 Mohonio oquifolium - Oregon Grape / 5 gal. Viburnum dovidii / 2 gal. rp Rubus pentolobus - Creeping Raspberry / 4" 0 2' o.c. FexAle�� I �l� WAY `i� l7eciC5}�'i OWE 4-�5 beh��d t7KcckT+reeS All perimeter buffers to be maintained. Amend oll plantings areas with 3" of compost Interior Landscape Calculations ' e.g. cedar groves compost or gro-co. Mazda Service Site --- Mulch oll planting beds with 3" wood or bark mulch. I ;Q Provide design/build irrigation (permit req.) for all plantings. - 19 stalls @ 17.5 sq.f t./stoll - 332.5 sq.ft. Fallow City of Edmonds Landscape code. i 400 sq.ft. provided i Provide sleeves for piping under paths to access oil planting areas. Plant substitutions ore o.k. if confirmed by landscope architect. �s l 0 7.5 15 30 60 r"liorm 265 Winslow Way East Suite 202D Bain bridge Island Washington 98110 telephone 206 842 1253 e-mail fronk03rkorchitec ture.com CONSULTANTS: O Z Odd Ld0 JOB O (r- i.¢._OC=� Sw w U �0 O � w � v TGLA,LLC Landscape Architect Q 0 N Q 0 O O W°' a Z w =o Z V C7 00 Q U) W LL M. WUv'i Q � Z 0 N 0 N LANDSCAPE PLAN SCALE: 1 "=30'-0" ISSUE DATE: 11.16.18 REVISIONS: 2/19/19 PERMIT REVISIONS PERMIT SET Ll m0 LDZ() I . I L4q Packet Pg. 92 4.8 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 07/2/2019 Wassall Pedestrian Easement at the NE corner of 639 2nd Ave Staff Lead: Rob English Department: Engineering Preparer: Megan Luttrell Background/History On June 11, 2019, staff presented this item to the Parks & Public Works committee and it was forwarded to the June 18th consent agenda for full Council approval. Staff Recommendation Approve the Pedestrian Easement. Narrative The City of Edmonds is currently reviewing a proposed development project, the Wassall Single Family Residence. The project consists of demolition of the existing single family home and constructing a new single family home at the southwest corner of 2nd and Caspers St. Concrete sidewalks will be constructed on both 2nd Ave and on Caspers St. Existing conditions, including a catch basin, a storm manhole, and a large asphalt island (to prevent traffic from entering 2nd) all contribute to making a traditional corner sidewalk ADA ramp impossible. To address this, the sidewalk on 2nd Ave will curve slightly across private property and meet up with the Caspers St sidewalk at a point behind the ADA ramp (refer to Attachment 2). As noted, a portion of the sidewalk will be located on private property and therefore, a public pedestrian easement shall be provided to the City. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Vicinity Map Attachment 2 - Wassall Pedestrian Easement Plan Packet Pg. 93 4.8.a � ` City of Edmonds neap Title 101 rL,,'''• 62,1 �r JAI c.J 620 616 6 6p8 623 "06 613 601 S7S 33 723 0 co 301 715 CLI > Q v 209 GASPERS ST N CASTERS ST I ' 300 314 32 651 �4 N I N I 652 654 656 632 621 � 625 631 627 615 I - GILTNER EN 614 626 628 630 632 Oil 608 611 615 617 607 SATERlN 602 604 110 �v CD 0 0 534 547 602 ON M 1:2,257 0 Notes Legend 94.04 188.1 Feet This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accu 3_1984_Web Mercator_Auxiliary—Sphere current, or otherwise reli ity of Edmonds THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCT Q Packet Pg. 94 SW 1/4, NW 1/4, SECTION 24, TOWNSHII . ........... CONCRETE CURB 3"4 WORK ZONE CB RIM=3 A7.79 ?hW=,36.92 DI(E)=35-32 IE 6 "' DI(S)=35-36 CA SPESS S T. IE 6" 01( W)=34-0 VRAMP TO EXISTING CURB IALKWAY YD RIM=37.38 1E 61) DI(N)=35.58 OFCONC. WALL 0.7'(E) 14'(S) OF' PROPERTY :-R o SITE IMPROVEMENT PLAN NOTES: 1. UTILITY PATCHES SHALL BE COMBINED AND FULL WIDTH OR HALF WIDTH OUT WILL BE REQUIRED DEPENDING ON THE EXTENT OF DISTURBANCE WHERE UTILITY PATCHES FALL ENTIRELY WITHIN ONE TRAVEL LANE THE OVERLAY SHALL EXTEND TO THE CENTERLINE OF ROADWAY. WHERE UTILITY PATCHES EXTEND INTO BOTH TRAVEL LANES A , FULL WIDTH OVERLAY IS At'QLAED- ' —A jj L iJ O DD - - - - - - - - - - - SECTION CHAIN LINK FE AND WOOD FENCE SOUTH OF PROPERTY LINE SECTION WOOD FENCE ?OPERTY CORNER FENCE END 0.8'(W) ANO OF- PROPERTY CORNER\ CAP ILLEGIBLE 1.2'(W) )F PROPERTY CORNER // WASHER ILLEGIBLE )OPERTY CORNER _,.. �_____ 3 NEW CURB, GUTTER, AND A - DEDICATE PROPERTY TO BACK OF SIDEWALK PROPOSED BUILDING FFE: 39.5 EX. HOUSE R33 SITE IMPROVEMENT PLAN SCALE: 1" = 107 N -CHIVE -GOV-L,,0T-2 SINGLE DIRECTION CURB RAMPS W/ DETECTABLEC 0 N C R E TL-----C4Vt? B WARNING SUOACE r4 5 L V FoNab,'ONC OM 3 BRASS 2 3 j NEV 3SSWAL;K1 17.53 I /m= IE 6 DI(NE) =34.73 IE 67 DI(0=34.73 IE 6' DI(1)=34.73 IE 8 RCP(S =34,58 50 NEW CURB, GUTTER, AND SIDEWALK r2 V —3 Cz) N� O rn F-r C) WORK ZONE ,/-3 4 TYPE V DRIVEWA!Y APPROACH ASPHALT PATCHI 2. �.C- S5 9 V I I -` UNIT 314 110N PIPE 0-2(�) PROPER TY "'ORNER IVI)OO FENCE .2 S) (F '(s) DR)OPERTY COR FIR fr 1706ND 4"X4' CONCI M( 4'RAMP TO 1/4 BRASS - 1- (JE 0 W EXISTING FEB UARY 18 10 0 5 10 20 R= M!E HOU, 1. 07Y It r= 2, FORMS ILL 1 EXPAN Jot C EXPAN Jot 5. EXPAN a J01 CoNCF 04 r- sw 7. FINISH CD v) L L I w CURB " 0" 1 E 9, REMOL r ;EPL DIRECI L-0 3Y 0 10. A 2—F LLj NIM1 z 11. CURBie G) rER 12, ALL V AL "Mom E U) m uj a. now y 2 S a. glplpqll E 0 (n m Lu (n a. (n (n E u E I Packet Pg. 95 1 4.9 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 07/2/2019 Postpone Public Hearing for 184th Street SW Street Vacation Staff Lead: Kernen Lien Department: Planning Division Preparer: Kernen Lien Background/History Manjinder Josan has submitted a petition to vacate a portion of 184th Street SW that lies between 80th Avenue West and Olympic View Drive . The City Council must consider street vacations in a public hearing that has been set by resolution. The City Council passed Resolution No. 1430 on May 21, 2019 setting a public hearing for the street vacation on July 16, 2019; however, more information regarding a proposed future development of the site is necessary before the public hearing to determine which portions of 184th Street SW should be vacated. Staff Recommendation Adopt the resolution in Exhibit 1 postponing the scheduled July 16, 2019 public hearing. Narrative A portion of 184th Street SW between 80th Avenue West and Olympic View Drive is the subject of this street vacation application. This section of right-of-way was created in 1942 with the Admiralty Acres plat. The right-of-way is 20 feet wide and the portion of this vacation request is approximately 230 feet in length. No City utilities are located within this section of unimproved right-of-way. Mr. Josan is the only owner of property that abuts this section of right-of-way. Pursuant to ECDC 20.70.070, the City Council is to consider the vacation request at a public hearing that has been set by resolution. City Council passed Resolution No. 1430 setting a public hearing on July 16, 2019. The subject street vacation request and associated street map amendment are being requested in preparation for a future development application at the subject property (see the site plan in Exhibit 7). A portion of the requested vacation would be located in a cul-de-sac of the contemplated development. This cul-de-sac and expanded right-of-way west to 801h Avenue West would be required to be dedicated to the City with the future subdivision. It does not make sense to vacate a portion of right-of-way now only to have it rededicated back to the City at some point in the future. The site plan in Exhibit 7 is a very preliminary site plan. In order to evaluate how much right-of-way would be appropriate for vacation, additional planning on the proposed subdivision is necessary. This additional planning cannot be completed by the scheduled July 16, 2019 public hearing. As a result, staff is requesting the public hearing be postponed to a date to be determined. Given that the public hearing was set via resolution, it was advised that the postponement of the public hearing should also Packet Pg. 96 4.9 occur via resolution. Exhibit 1 provides a draft resolution to postpone the public hearing. Once enough information is available to fully evaluate the proposal, another resolution will be provided to set a public hearing as required by ECDEC 20.70.070. Attachments: Exhibit 1: DRAFT Resolution Postponing Public Hearing Exhibit 2: Resolution No. 1430 Exhibit 3: Land Use Application Form Exhibit 4: Petition for Street Vacation Exhibit 5: Legal Description and Survey Exhibit 6: Location Map Exhibit 7: Site Plan Exhibit 8: May 21, 2019 City Council Mintues Excerpt Packet Pg. 97 4.9.a RESOLUTION NUMBER A RESOLUTION OF THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL POSTPONING A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF 184T" STREET SW BETWEEN 80TH AVENUE W AND OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE WHEREAS, RCW 35.79.010 and ECDC 20.70.050 authorizes a street vacation process to be initiated by the petition of the owners of more than two-thirds of property abutting the portion of the street or alley to be vacated; and WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds has received a petition from all of the property owners abutting the portion of 184th Street SW requested for vacation; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.79.010 and ECDC 20.70.070 requires the city council to fix a time by resolution for public hearing on any proposed street vacation; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.79.010 and ECDC 20.70.070 requires that such hearing occur no less than twenty days and no more than sixty days after the passage of the resolution fixing the hearing date; and WHEREAS, the City Council passed Resolution No. 1430 on May 21, 2019 to set a public hearing for the proposed vacation on July 16, 2019; and WHEREAS, potential future development of the subject property may affect which portion of 1841h Street SW should be vacated; and WHEREAS, additional planning is necessary on the future development plan to clearly identify which portion of 184th Street SW should be vacated; and WHEREAS, the additional planning will not be completed in time for review of the proposed vacation by July 16, 2019 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edmonds, Washington as follows: Section 1. A public hearing on the proposed street vacation scheduled for July 16, 2019 is hereby postponed to a future date to be determined. Section 2. The new public hearing date will be set via public hearing as required by RCW 35.79.010 and ECDC 20.70.070. RESOLVED this 2nd day of July, 2019. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: 1 APPROVED: MAYOR, DAVID O. EARLING Packet Pg. 98 4.9.a CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. 2 Packet Pg. 99 4.9.b RESOLUTION NUMBER 1430 A RESOLUTION OF THE EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL SETTING A DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF 184TH STREET SW BETWEEN 80TH AVENUE W AND OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE WHEREAS, RCW 35.79.010 and ECDC 20.70.050 authorizes a street vacation process to be initiated by the petition of the owners of more than two-thirds of property abutting the portion of the street or alley to be vacated; and WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds has received a petition from all of the property owners abutting the portion of 184th Street SW requested for vacation; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.79.010 and ECDC 20.70.070 requires the city council to fix a time by resolution for public hearing on any proposed street vacation; and WHEREAS, RCW 35.79.010 and ECDC 20.70.070 requires that such hearing occur no less than twenty days and no more than sixty days after the passage of the resolution fixing the hearing date; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Edmonds, Washington as follows: Section 1. A public hearing on the proposed street vacation shall be scheduled for July 16, 2019 at 7:00 p.m. before the Edmonds City Council. Section 2. The city clerk shall provide notice of the public hearing as required pursuant to RCW 35.79.020 and ECDC 20.70.090 to the extent that such notice requirements are applicable. RESOLVED this 21 day of May, 2019. APPROVED: t Le Z4��:L M YOR, DAVID EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED : CLERK, SGOTf PASSEY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: May 17, 2019 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: May 21, 2019 RESOLUTION NO. 1430 1 0 M Packet Pg. 100 I 4.9.c I City of Edmonds Land Use Application •' ivc -I 201S f- t _A11 NTERRMCES cou A i-i ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT L� - L CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FILE # fW ^w19061 ZONE " LZ F HOME OCCUPATION DATE } '�I �4 REC'D BY L FORMAL SUBDIVISION F SHORT SUBDIVISION FEE RECEIPT # LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT HEARING DATE PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT X OFFICIAL STREET MAP AMENDMENT L HE STAFF PB ADB { X STREET VACATION REZONE SHORELINE PERMIT VARIANCE / REASONABLE USE EXCEPTION J OTHER: • PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED WITHIN THE APPLICATION IS A PUBLIC RECORD • PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LOCATION . 7707 Olympic View Dr PROJECT NAME (IF APPLICABLE) MJ Edmonds Plat PROPERTY OWNER Manjinder Josan PHONE # 425-750-6606 ADDRESS 132 143rd St_ SW, Lynnwood WA 98087 E-MAIL mjosan@gmail.com FAX # n/a 00370800100900,00370800101000, TAX ACCOUNT # 00370800101100, 00434600010601 SEC. 18 TwP. 27N RNG. 5E DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT OR PROPOSED USE (ATTACH COVER LETTER AS NECESSARY) . Official street map amendment and stree vacation DESCRIBE HOW THE PROJECT MEETS APPLICABLE CODES (ATTACH COVER LETTER AS NECESSARY) as requested by City of Edmonds APPLICANT Manjinder Josan PHONE # 425-750-6606 ADDRESS 132 143rd St SW, Lynnwood WA 98087 E-MAIL mJosan mail.com FAX # n/a CONTACT PERSON/AGENT BRL Services LLC PHONE # 425-259-5556 ADDRESS 2221 Everett Ave ste# 203 E-MAIL brian@brlservicesllc.com FAX # n/a The undersigned applicant, and his/her/its heirs, and assigns, in consideration on the processing of the application agrees to release, indemnify, defend and hold the City of Edmonds harmless from any and all damages, including reasonable attorney's fees, arising from any action or infraction based in whole or part upon false, misleading, inaccurate or incomplete information furnished by the applicant, his/her/its agents or employees. By my signature, I certify that the information and exhibits herewith submitted are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and that I am authorized to file this application on the behalf of the owner as listed below. SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT/AGENT DATE 3/19/19 Property Owner's Authorization I, �A {3r,7p i ,..� O� S -�\ �.i _ , certify under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that the following is a true and correct statement: I have authorized the above Applicant/Agent to apply for the subject land use application, and grant my permission for the public officials and the staff of the City of Edmonds to enter the subject property for the purposes of inspection and posting attendant to this application. ` q SIGNATURE OF OWNER �� — DATE / % I If `7' '�f S - - Questions? Call (425) 771-0220. Revised on 8122112 B - Land Use Application Pag Packet Pg. 101 4.9.d PETITION FOR STREET OR ALLEY VACATION TO: THE HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON We, the undersigned owners of two-thirds of the al property abutting 'Pon public right-of-way described below, Pwsvarrt to RCW 35.79.010, re do hereby petition the City of Edmonds to vacate said public nght-of-way, described as follows: all situate in the City of Edmonds. County of Snohomish, State of Washington, and request that said City Camci . by Resoles 5z a uine and place when this Petition shall be heard and determmed by that authority, which time shad not be more than sixty (60) days nor +less than twenty (20) &ys after the passage of such Resolution These pages are a group of pages containing an identical text and prayer intended by the signers of this Petition to be presented and considezed as one Petition and may be filed with other pages eonmining additional agnahrres which emnulatively may be considered as a single Petition - WARNING: Every person who signs this petition with any other than his or her true name, or who knowingly signs move than me Of #here pe=Ons, or signs a peaum seeking an election whoa he or she a not a legal voter, or signs a petition when he or she is othmwise not qualified to sing, or who makes herein any false statement, shall be guilty of a misdmumnor. PRAYER OF PETITION: For the vacation of St � -1N4) 0 C )D we. Page.of MACPerncrn0WOV- e FL.ESV.%-" aWMLSC m n cr 0 rry -Z-i rn �m _o M Cn Packet Pg. 102 4.9.e RECEIVED MAR 21. 2019 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES LEGAL DESCRIPTION BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF TRACT 106, EDMONDS SEA VIEW TRACTS, ACCORDING TO PLAT THEREOF RECORDED /N VOLUME 3 OF PLATS, PAGE 76, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON, THENCE NORTH 0051'33" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 20.00 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF LOT 10, BLOCK 1, ADMIRALTY ACRES, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED /N VOLUME 12 OF PLATS, PAGE 48, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE SOUTH 88'49'04" EAST A DISTANCE OF 229.49 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT 10, ALSO BEING THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF OL YMPIC VIEW DRIVE,• THENCE ALONG SAID WEST RIGHT OF WA Y LINE SOUTH 08'39'16" EAST FOR A DISTANCE OF 20.30 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 106; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTH LINE NORTH 8849'04" WEST FOR A DISTANCE OF 232.85 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SI TUA TE /N THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STA TE OF WASH/NGTON. D. R. DOWNING LAND SURVEYING, PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS 4229 761h ST. N.E. SU17E 202 MARYSWLLE, WA., 98270 (J60) 65J-5385 INC DAIS- 0JI12119 SCALE: l '-200 JOB/ 17-065 SH / OF 1 Packet Pg. 103 4.9.e TE MAP r TAXJWJ70BLIOI01400 It,�� � WOdOSCREEK PLACE Tj----------- 1#0001 640 I I TAX,j'00370800101J00 i T" 00370$00101200 I l v I TAX100370800101IOO TAXPO3706001DIO O 2a 00' UNOPENED R/iy j S 88 49'04" E i l 184TH STRE T_ SW — _ L — — 229.49' -i2 ` OPEN R%W 1 17 `L 1 j S 884904" E 23285' o I i f ]� 20 00' UNOPENED R/W ta�t6� IL l ip I VACI7ON AREA , 4,62J SQ.FT I f noo i rfoo f TAx,VO4,i460001Oso1 j— l 0000 I Ir n° Spill I _ 100 Ile &ITir I t1l N.—] L_L_L 185TH PLACE SW OPEN RIB' r 1 a 200 1 "-- 200' LINE TABLE LINE BEARING LENGTH L I S 00'51 JJ* W 20. 00' L2 IV0839'16" W 20.J0' D. R. DOWNING LAND SURVEYING, �e PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYORS " 4229 76th ST N.E. SUITE 202 MARYSOLLE, WA., 98270 (J60) 65J-5J85 INC I OA X, 03/12/19 SCALE:- 1 "_00 "/ 17-065 SH 2 OF -L Packet Pg. 104 4.9.f 182ND PL SW OPENED R/W * 7914 18203 7822 # 81114 18208 * 18213 8115 * 18218 # 0 w z Li 8117 18226 * 0 18227 3 Li * 18335 8041 8001 # 184TH ST SW OPENED R/W 7821 * 7817 0 w z * 7809 a 47816 O 7810 * 3 w 5 U a * 18321 * 18305 0 vow 7704 OLYM P I C,o - VIEW DRIVE PARCEL # *040 00370800100900 18332 - oe 004v 95,230 SOFT 11po 8325 80TH/ 18408 79TH VENUE WEST AVENUE WEST ARCEL # 95,230 SOFT PARCEL # 0370800101100 00 0800101000 20,607 — 1841416 1618405 UNKNOWN ADDRESS PARCEL # 1841616 # 18415 00434600010601 18418 * 97,372 SOFT 418419 18426 16 1618427 VICINITY MAP 18212 # 18214 * 1 * 18216 18218 # 1822 183 GRAPHIC SCALE 150 0 75 150 18301 # 1 "=150' - VACATION UNOPENED R/W 2,727 SOFT w z w 7601 * a 3 Q 18401 1618432 1 18501 16 18508 * 1850� 106 * 8034 * * 3 7811 � - 7831 * # # # 7801 18512 7817 18516 w a 185TH PL SW OPENED R/W'$QQ 18510 '� 18521 101 18 o 18521 102 * *10 3 * 7802 7810# 18530 * 18521 1044 105 1 0- )1 # 7818 # 18521. BLDG * * 16 8035 790 * 118 18521 1074 0 7939 7925 7915 * * 7805 18596 * 18521 1091 7 186TH PL SW OPENED R/W 18521 110 18604 # # 18605 * 18601 18604 # 18603 BLDG 18603 1 f # _ � Ana (RECEIVED MAR 2 12019 DEVEWPIAENT SERVICES COUNTER Legend Parcel ID Snohomish Parcels Packet Pg. 105 4.9.g L I I ICI - ---- ;. US I I ,i N I 17 ( U I 18 Ii--------------� I i I z 0 J L '--) VV SEC 18, TWP 27N, RGE 5E, WM I � 1 it � -- - - - - - - - - - - - - Ii t I � II � { 1+ I Jan I 4 LLj 1 GRAPHIC SCALE i I 14 I 50 0 25 50 1 "=50' 0 i 4I i l I jI I i 1 ,k N89*67151°W I k_ ; I3o;oa` 1 i ! I 13410' 1 k LOTI 1 \ I 1. 1 \ \ S L LOT' 11O�t \ 12,387�Sq.F.iLOT 11 14 641--S ' � 158.0' iF,, 20 I / I BREAKDOWN OF IMPERVIOUS/PERVIOUS SURFACES Pre -developed Basin Area = 4.95 ac Existing Gravel Drive 3,600 sf = 0.08 ac Existing asphalt 184" 2,420 sf = 0.06 ac Existing 2nd growth forest = 4.61 ac Existing Buildings Two - SFR's 2,620 sf = 0.06 a.c (Lot 4 will retain ex SFR) Lawn and Landscape = 0.14 ac Total = 4.95 ac Developed Basin Area = 4.95 ac Proposed Cul-de-Sac Asphalt = 0.29 ac Fire Lane Tract 999 = 0.16 ac Driveways = 0.70 ac Sidewalks = 0.13 ac BuildingLots Buildings 14 total roofs = 0.84 ac Lawn and Landscape = 1,66 ac Lawn at Cul-de-Sac = 0.13 ac Retain Existing 2"d growth forest = 1.04 ac Total = 4.95 ac PROJECT APPLICANT: JOSAN MAJINDER 132 143RD STREET SW LYNNWOOD, WA 98087 425-750-6606 PROJECT REPRESENTATIVE: BRIAN R. LINDSAY 2221 EVERETT AVENUE, SUITE 203 EVERETT, WA 98201 425-259-5556 ZONING INFORMATION: CURRENT ZONING - R97-28 PROPOSED ZONING - R12 SITE AREAS: AREA 215,472 SQ FT = 4.95 AC 15 LOTS PROPOSED MIN. LOT SIZE = 12,002 S.F MAX. LOT SIZE = 14,544 S.F. EXISTING LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS: y sF O?� 180TH ST SW C> SITE z 184TH ST SW 88TH ST SW r` 7704 OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE PARCEL # 00370800100900 LOT 9, BLOCK 1 OF THE PLAT OF ADMIRALITY ACRES AS RECRODED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS, PAGE 48, UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 832826, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON. 18408 79TH AVENUE WEST PARCEL # 00370800101000 LOT 10, BLOCK 1 OF THE PLAT OF ADMIRALITY ACRES AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS, PAGE 48, UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 832826, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY , STATE OF WASHINGTON. 18325 80TH AVENUE WEST PARCEL # 00370800101100 LOT 11, BLOCK 1, OF THE PLAT OF ADMIRALITY ACRES AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS, PAGE 48, AS RCORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 832826, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON. NO ADDRESS PARCEL # 00434600010601 LOT 1, BLOCK 0, OF THE PLAT OF EDMONDS SEAVIEW TRACTS AS RECORDED IN VOLUME 3 OF PLATS, PAGE 75, UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 106003, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, STATE OF WASHINGTON. BEING A PORTION OF TRACT 106 LYING SOUTHWESTERLY OF BEVERLY PARK ROAD, LESS THE EAST 212 FEET AND LESS COUNTY ROAD. EXISTING SOIL: ALDER WOOD- EVERETT GRAVELLY SANDY LOAM EXISTING VEGETATION: TREES WITH SOME UNDERBRUSH WITH LAWN AND LANDSCAPE PROPOSED VEGETATION: 20% TO REMAIN FORESTED LAWN AND LANDSCAPING PROPOSED BUILDING COVERAGE: LOT SIZE: 12,407 SF AVERAGE DRIVEWAY: 800 SF = 0.02 AC BUILDING: 5,200 SF = 0.12 AC LAWN / LANDSCAPE: = 0.04 AC INFILTRATION / BIO-RETENTION AREA 30' x 10' x4' DEEP VICINITY MAP SCALE 1" = 2000' CERTIFIED EROSION CONTROL SPECIALIST BRIAN LINDSAY BRL SERVICES LLC 2221 EVERETT AVE, SUITE 203 EVERETT, WA 98201 425-259-5556 ENGINEER TED TREPANIER BRL SERVICES LLC 2221 EVERETT AVE, SUITE 203 EVERETT, WA 98201 425-259-5556 BENCH MARK - DATUM (NAVD 88) NGVD29=NAVD88-3.17 BENCHMARK: TOP OS SURFACE BRASS CAP PI MONUMENT 79THAVE WEST AND 79TH PLACE WEST. ELEVATION 343.68 CITY OF EDMONDS DATUM (MEAN LOWER LOW WATER) SHEET INDEX 1. SITE PLAN / EXISTING CONDITIONS 2. ROAD AND STORM DRAINAGE PLAN 3. STORM DRAINAGE PLAN 4. ROAD AND STORM NOTES AND DETAILS 5. GRADING PLAN 6. GRADING PLAN 7. SEWER AND WATER PLAN 8. SEWER AND WATER PLAN 9. SEWER PROFILES 10. SEWER AND WATER NOTES AND DETAILS 11. T.E.S.C. PLAN 12. T.E.S.C. PLAN 13. T.E.S.C. NOTES AND DETAILS 14, 20% VEGETATION AREAS APPROVED FOR CONSTRUCTION CITY OF EDMONDS DATE: 0 af 311111F. CN N N z 0 U VJ Q Q > Z 0 z a Q Z Z j:) 2 i Lj- W w3 0 7 H SHEET: 1 REV: a BY: CITY ENGINEER DIVISION or: w Copyright 2016 by Brian R. Lindsay, BR.0 SerViCES C.CC. Design, map, text and data may not be used, copied or reproduced in any way without express written permission of Brian R. Lindsay, BRL Services 11C. Packet Pg. 106 4.9.h COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO INCREASE THE SALARY RANGE FOR THE SAFETY & DISASTER COORDINATOR POSITION. MOTION CARRIED (5-1), COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON VOTING NO. 3. SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR 184TH STREET SW STREET VACATION Environmental Program Manager Kernen Lien reviewed: • Map of properties in Perrinville area • Big picture o Street Vacation ■ Portion of 184" dedicated in 1942 with Admiralty Acres Plat o Street Map amendment ■ Requires recommendation from Planning Board ■ Potential future right-of-way o Potential Future Subdivision ■ No application yet, plan to apply in future. o Review Processes — cannot be consolidated ■ Street vacation and street map amendment are Type V ■ Subdivision is Type III (quasi-judicial) o Street vacation and street map amendment do not evaluate whether subdivision is feasible • Review criteria o Street Vacation — ECDC 20.70.020 ■ Vacation is in public interest ■ No property will be denied direct access o Street Map Amendment — ECDC 20.65.010 ■ Purposes of the Comprehensive Plan ■ Purposes of the Comprehensive Street Plan ■ Purposes of the Official Street Map Set Public hearing o RCW 35.79.010 and ECDC 20.70.070 requires the City Council to fix a time by resolution for public hearing on any proposed street vacation o The hearing can occur no less than twenty day and no more than sixty days after the passage of the resolution o Resolution included in packet sets a public hearing date of July 16, 2019 o Street map amendment public hearing will occur same evening o A staff report on the street vacation and street map amendment proposal will be prepared for the public hearing Council President Fraley-Monillas asked if this property was next to the property with the slope where they were unable to build. Mr. Lien explained the City initiated a rezone on this property a few years ago. It used to be under a contract rezone, known as Anglers Crossing, and was zoned RS-8 under the contract rezone and required to be developed via a Planned Residential Development (PRD). These same processes occurred when that development began; the street vacation and street map amendments were conditioned upon this site being developed via the PRD. That PRD never happened and expired and because the zoning was no longer consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation, the City rezoned the property from the contract RS-8 back to RS-12, its current zoning. Council President Fraley-Monillas recalled the developer wasn't able to build on the site due to wildlife and/or slopes. Mr. Lien said this process does not evaluate the proposed subdivision, only the street vacation and the street map amendment based on the criteria. Council President Fraley-Monillas asked whether the street vacation goes through the area that was determined they could not build on. Mr. Lien referred to a contours map, identifying the portion of vacated right-of-way that is part of this petition. Council President Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 21, 2019 Page 14 Packet Pg. 107 4.9.h Fraley-Monillas asked if that was the area with the wildlife corridor. Mr. Lien said there are critical area on the site, slopes of greater than 40% which are potential landslide hazard area and slopes of 15-40% that are erosion hazards. The previous subdivision process also identified a small wetland. Council President Fraley- Monillas relayed her understanding the street vacation was not in the wetland. Mr. Lien answered it was not, it does pass through the steep slope, there would not be a straight road from Olympic View Drive. COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 1430, SETTING A DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE VACATION OF A PORTION OF 84TH STREET SW BETWEEN 80TH AVENUE W AND OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE FOR JULY 16, 2019. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. PRESENTATION OF THE TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE ANNUAL REPORT City Engineer Rob English reviewed: • 2018 Report Beginning Balance $$551,215 Impact Fees $201,348 Expenditures 220t' St Loan payment (1st loan paid off 2022 & 2' loan paid off 2024) ($40,515) 76'/212' Intersection ($43,878) 76t''/220t' Intersection $54,453 Ending Balance $613,717 • History of Traffic Im act Fees Year Impact Fees 2004-2009 $554,772 2010 $554,772 2011 $34,873 2012 $307,678 2013 $156,652 2014 $202,295 2015 $66,334 2016 $139,031 2017 $372,481 2018 4201,348 Total $2,055,430 Councilmember Tibbott inquired about the timeframe for spending the ending balance. Mr. English answered the funds must be spent five years from the time they are collected which is monitored by staff. This fund is often used to match federal grants such as the 76t''/220t' intersection or any of the other capacity - related projects used in the calculation of the TIP. Councilmember Tibbott summarized there would be no problem spending the $600,000. Mr. English answered no, he wished there was more. 5. APPROVAL OF RESOURCES FOR HOUSING COMMISSION Development Services Director Shane Hope reviewed: • Background o Housing Commission application process has begun ■ Received 90+ applications so far from every area of City o Looking for direction on resources to support Housing Commission work Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes May 21, 2019 Page 15 Packet Pg. 108 4.10 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 07/2/2019 Ordinance Land Use Permit Decision -Making and Quasi -Judicial Process Staff Lead: Kernen Lien Department: Planning Division Preparer: Kernen Lien Background/History As part of the overall update of the City of Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC), staff is reviewing the City's land use processes. This review has included discussions of the Councils role in quasi-judicial decisions as well as other code cleanup matters related to land use decisions and processes. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 1367 in 2016 expressing the intent to adopt revisions to the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) that transfers the quasi-judicial decision -making role from the City Council and other volunteer citizen boards to the hearing examiner, to the extent allowed by state law. The adopted resolution requests that city staff and the Planning Board prepare and forward to the City Council revisions to the ECDC that are consistent with this resolution. The Planning Board heard an introduction on this matter at its May 23, 2018 meeting and held a public hearing on July 25, 2018, after which the Board adopted a recommendation that was forwarded to the City Council. The City Council heard an introduction on this subject at the September 4, 2018 Council meeting and moved to hold a public hearing to receive public feed on the proposed amendments. The Council's hearing was held on October 2, 2018. On November 20, 2018, the City Council's meeting included consideration of potential amendments detailing a process where the Council would consider a request to file a judicial appeal on the November 20, 2018 Council meeting. The Council continued discussion on the potential amendments with the Council in a judicial appeal role at the March 5, 2019 Council meeting. At the April 23, 2019 City Council meeting, the City Council indicated a desire to remain sitting in a quasi-judicial capacity for certain permit applications, but not for larger design review projects or formal plats and planned residential developments. Staff presented a draft ordinance given the Council's direction at the June 18, 2019. Council moved to move the ordinance to a future consent agenda following the state Department of Commerce notice period. Commerce has approved an expedited review of the proposed code amendments which was completed on June 28, 2019. Staff Recommendation Adopt ordinance provided in Exhibit 1. INTRODUCTION As part of the overall update of the City of Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC), staff is reviewing the City's land use processes. This review has included discussions of the Councils role in quasi-judicial decisions as well as other code cleanup matters related to land use decisions and Packet Pg. 109 4.10 processes. The City Council adopted Resolution No. 1367 (Exhibit 1) in 2016 expressing the intent to adopt revisions to the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) that will move quasi-judicial decision -making responsibility from the City Council and other volunteer citizen boards and direct it to the hearing examiner to the extent allowed by state law. The adopted resolution requests that city staff and the Planning Board prepare and forward to the City Council revisions to the ECDC that are consistent with this resolution. TYPES OF CITY COUNCIL QUASI-JUDICIAL DECISIONS The city council currently holds quasi-judicial land use hearings on the following applications and appeals (see ECDC 20.01.003): Appeals (Type III-B): Essential public facilities; Design review (where a public hearing by the architectural design board is required); Conditional use permits (where a public hearing by the hearing examiner is required); Variances; Home occupation permit (where a public hearing by the hearing examiner is required); Preliminary formal plat; and Preliminary planned residential development. Applications (Type IV -A and IV-B): Final formal plats; Final planned residential development; and Site specific rezone. In addition to the Type IV applications and appeals of Type III-B, pursuant to ECDC 17.00.030.C, the City Council also sits in a quasi-judicial role for variance applications from public agencies. QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCESS CODE AMENDMENTS Most of the discussion around quasi-judicial decisions before City Council has focused on closed record appeals of Type III-B decisions (decisions issued by the Hearing Examiner or Architectural Design Board) to the City Council. At the April 23, 2019 Council meeting, the Council indicated a desire to retain its role in certain quasi-judicial decisions, but not for design review projects requiring a public hearing by the Architectural Design Board or for formal subdivisions and planned residential developments. The code amendments in Exhibit 2 reflect this guidance from the Council. Other related code amendments discussed below clarify public hearing and appeal proceedings, eliminate provisions that are not consistent with state law, and provide other clean up and clarifications related to decision processes. OTHER LAND USE PROCESS CODE AMENDMENTS Public Agency Variance When a public agency applies for a variance from provisions of the zoning ordinance, pursuant to ECDC 17.00.030.C, the Hearing Examiner makes a recommendation on the variance to the City Council. The City Council then holds a closed record hearing to consider the variance request. The recent Edmonds- Woodway High School Playfields Project reviewed by the Council is an example of this process. The criteria for public agency variances is the same criteria for other variance requests (see ECDC 20.85.010). Packet Pg. 110 4.10 Further review of public agency variances before the City Council seems to only result in additional process since the review criteria is the same. Zoning variances are Type III-B decisions which are appealable to the City Council. Therefore, requiring public agency variances to also be heard by the Council is proposed to be eliminated (Exhibit 5). Final Plat and Planned Residential Developments Final formal plats (subdivision of property into five or more lots) and Final Planned Residential Developments are currently Type IV -A quasi-judicial decisions made by the City Council. Subdivisions and Planned Residential Developments require multiple approvals and by the time the final subdivision or PRD is before the Council much of the construction related to the subdivision has already been completed. This can include the installation of roads, sidewalks, utilities stubs (water, sewer, power, gas, cable), and stormwater facilities. Often the only construction that has not been completed is the residences on the new lots since those permits cannot be issued until the subdivision has been finaled. There is little new input that can be provided by the Council at final subdivision or PRD review as the development has largely been completed. This situation has been recognized by the City Council during recent reviews of some final plats. Review of final plats by the legislative body used to be something that was required by state law (Chapter 58.17 RCW). In 2017, the state legislature passed SB 5674 which allows the legislative authorities to delegate final plat approval to administrative personnel. Exhibit 4 contains amendments to the City's subdivision regulations (Chapter 20.75 ECDC) which would delegate the Council's role in reviewing final formal subdivisions to see if they have met the requirements previously established. Similar amendments to the PRD chapter (Chapter 20.35 ECDC) are included in Exhibit 5. Related Code Amendments In reviewing the code to address quasi-judicial decision making by the City Council, other items were identified that logically should be addressed concurrently with this update. Chapter 20.06 ECDC - Open Record Public Hearing & Chapter 20.07 ECDC Closed Record Appeals The distinction is not clear between these chapters because appeals of Type II staff decisions reference Chapter 20.07 ECDC for the appeal process, but appeals of Type II decision are heard before the Hearing Examiner in an open record public hearing. As part of this amendment, Chapters 20.06 and 20.07 ECDC are proposed to be combined into a single chapter to remove this confusion (Exhibit 3). As part of this combination, detail on the appeal format and procedures before the hearing examiner are also being addressed. ECDC 20.100.040 Review of approved permits ECDC 20.100.040 - Review of approved permits is a problematic code section in that it is likely noncompliant with state law. See the City Attorney's memorandum in Exhibit 2 detailing potential legal issues with this section. Given these concerns, staff is proposing to delete ECDC 20.100.040 (Exhibit 5). To make clear that the City retains the right to suspend or revoke permits that fail to comply with conditions of approval or misrepresentations made in the application, a new section (ECDC 20.110.045) has been added to Chapter 20.110 ECDC - Civil Violation Enforcement Procedure (Exhibit 5). Packet Pg. 111 4.10 Development Agreements ECDC 20.01.003, currently identifies the approval process for development agreements (Chapter 20.08 ECDC) as a Type V legislative action. As part of this update, the proposal is to modify the approval process of development agreements to a Type IV process with an open record public hearing before the Planning Board, after which the Planning Board would make a recommendation to the City Council (Exhibit 2 and 5). The City Council would hear the development agreement proposal in a closed record hearing format. This change recognizes that under state law (Chapter 36.70B RCW), development agreements are not legislative and, in fact, must be consistent with the local development code. As a practical matter, the development agreement review process should be generally consistent with the review process for other project permit applications that would likely be processed in conjunction with the development agreement. The site -specific rezone is one type of project permit application that would likely be sought in conjunction with a development agreement. So, it makes sense to use a similar quasi-judicial process. It would only make sense to process development agreements as legislative if they are being processed in conjunction with a comprehensive plan amendment, which seems less likely. Attachments: Exhibit 1: Draft Ordinance Exhibit 2: Chapter 20.01 ECDC Draft Amendments Exhibit 3: Draft Revised Chapter 20.06 ECDC Exhibit 4: Draft Chapter 20.75 ECDC Amendments Exhibit 5: Related Draft ECDC Amendments Exhibit 6: June 18, 2019 City Council Minutes Excerpt Packet Pg. 112 4.10.a ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING VARIOUS PROCEDURES CONTAINED IN THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. WHEREAS, as part of the overall update of the City of Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC), staff is reviewing the City's land use processes; and WHEREAS, this review has included discussions of the Council's role in quasi-judicial decisions as well as other code cleanup matters related to land use decisions and processes; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 1367 in 2016 expressing the intent to adopt revisions to the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) that would transfer the quasi-judicial decision -making role from the City Council and other volunteer citizen boards to the hearing examiner, to the extent allowed by state law; and WHEREAS, the adopted resolution requests that city staff and the Planning Board prepare and forward to the City Council revisions to the ECDC that are consistent with that resolution; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board heard an introduction on this matter at its May 23, 2018 meeting and held a public hearing on July 25, 2018, after which the Board adopted a recommendation that was forwarded to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the City Council heard an introduction on this subject at the September 4, 2018 Council meeting and moved to hold a public hearing to receive public feed on the proposed amendments; and WHEREAS, the Council's public hearing was held on October 2, 2018; and WHEREAS, on November 20, 2018, the City Council's meeting included consideration of potential amendments detailing a process that contemplated the City Council filing a judicial appeal of a decision made by the City's hearing examiner as a party, rather than sitting as the appellate body; and Packet Pg. 113 4.10.a WHEREAS, the Council continued discussion on the potential amendments related to the Council's quasi-judicial appeal role at the March 5, 2019 Council meeting; and WHEREAS, at the April 23, 2019 City Council meeting, the City Council indicated a desire to remain sitting in a quasi-judicial capacity for certain permit applications and appeals, but not for larger design review projects or formal plats and planned residential developments; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Chapter 20.01 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Types of Development Project Permits," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment A hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in s4ile thfettgh). Section 2. Chapter 20.06 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Open Record Public Hearings," is hereby retitled as "Public Hearings and Appeals," and amended to read as shown on Attachment B hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; text moved from one location to another is shown in double underline where it was moved to, and shown in where it was moved from; deleted text is shown in stfike dffoug ). Section 3. Chapter 20.07 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Closed Record Appeals," is hereby repealed. Section 4. Chapter 20.75 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Subdivisions," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment C hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strike through). Section 5. Section 17.00.030 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Application of regulations," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in stile). Packet Pg. 114 4.10.a Section 6. Subsection F, entitled "Restoration," of Section 17.40.020, entitled "Nonconforming building and/or structure," of the Edmonds Community Development Code, is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in s4ike- thfough) Section 7. Section 17.40.025 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Vested nonconforming or illegal accessory dwelling units," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strike thfo g ). Section 8. Section 17.100.030 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Conditional use permits (CUP) — Community churches and schools requiring a CUP," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in st ike- through) Section 9. Subsection I of Section 19.00.025, entitled "International Building Code section amendments," of the Edmonds Community Development Code, is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strike thr-o g ). Section 10. a new Section 20.02.007 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Notice of final decision," is hereby added to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in stfike thfoug ). Section 11. Section 20.06.009 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Notice of final decision," is hereby repealed. Section 12. Section 20.05.020 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "General requirements," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in st-Fike through). Packet Pg. 115 4.10.a Section 13. Section 20.08.040 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Approval procedure for development agreements," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in s4il£e thfough). Section 14. Section 20.11.010 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Review procedure — General design review," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in s4ike thfettgh). Section 15. Section 20.12.010 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Applicability," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in st-Fike thr-ough). Section 16. Section 20.11.040 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Appeals," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strike through). Section 17. Section 20.12.080 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Appeals," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strike through). Section 18. Section 20.16.110 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Reconsideration and appeal," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in stile). Section 19. Section 20.16.130 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Building permit application," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in s4ike dffettgh). Packet Pg. 116 4.10.a Section 20. Section 20.35.080 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Review process," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strike through). Section 21. Section 20.45.050 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Review of changes to Edmonds register of historic places properties," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strip). Section 22. Section 20.60.015 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Design review procedures," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strip). Section 23. Section 20.85.020 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "General requirements," is hereby amended to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in st-Fike-through). Section 24. Section 20.100.040, entitled "Review of approved permits," is hereby repealed. Section 25. A new Section 20.110.045 of the Edmonds Community Development Code, entitled "Suspension or revocation of permit," is hereby added to read as shown on Attachment D hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strike through). Packet Pg. 117 4.10.a Section 26. 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 27. 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 DAVE EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Pg. 118 4.10.a SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2019, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING VARIOUS PROCEDURES CONTAINED IN THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of 12019. 4840-7251-8158,v. 1 7 CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Packet Pg. 119 4.10.b Edmonds Page 1/6 Sections: 20.01.000 Purpose and general provisions. 20.01.001 Types of actions. 20.01.002 Determination of proper procedure type. 20.01.003 Permit type and decision framework. 20.01.006 Legislative enactments not restricted. 20.01.007 Exempt projects. 20.01.000 Purpose and general provisions. A. The purpose of this chapter is to establish standard procedures, decision criteria, public notification, and timing for development project permit application decisions made by the city of Edmonds. These procedures are intended to: 1. Promote timely and informed public participation; 2. Eliminate redundancy in the application, permit review, and appeals processes; 3. Process permits equitably and expediently; 4. Balance the needs of permit applicants with neighbors; 5. Ensure that decisions are made consistently and predictably; and 6. Result in development that furthers city goals as set forth in the comprehensive plan. These procedures provide for an integrated and consolidated land use permit process. The procedures integrate the environmental review process with land use procedures, decisions, and consolidated appeal processes. B. The provisions of this title supersede all other procedural requirements that may exist in other sections of the city code. When interpreting and applying the standards of this title, its provisions shall be the minimum requirements. Where conflicts occur within provisions of this title and/or between this title and other city code provisions and regulations, the more restrictive provisions shall apply. Where conflict between the text of this title and the zoning map ensue, the text of this title shall prevail. C. Unless otherwise specified, all references to days shall be calendar days. Whenever the last day of a deadline falls on a Saturday, Sunday, legal holiday designated by RCW 1.16.050 or by a city ordinance, or any day when City Hall or the city's development services department is closed to the public by formal executive or legislative action the deadline shall run until the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday or closed day. [Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010]. 20.01.001 Types of actions. There are five main types of actions (or permits) that are reviewed under the provisions of this chapter. The types of actions are based on who makes the decision, the amount of discretion exercised by the decision making body, the level of impact associated with the decision, the amount and type of public input sought, and the type of appeal opportunity. A. Administrative Decisions. Type I and II decisions are administrative decisions made by the development services director or his/her designee (hereinafter the "director"). Type I permits are ministerial decisions are based on compliance with specific, nondiscretionary and/or technical standards that are clearly enumerated. Type II permits are administrative decisions where the director makes a decision based on standards and clearly identified criteria, but where public notice is required. Unless otherwise provided, appeals of Type II decisions shall be initiated as set forth in ECDC 20.07.00406.030.. B. Quasi -Judicial Decisions. Type III, Type IV and appeal of Type II and Type rrr (B only) decisions are quasi- judicial decisions that involve the use of discretionary judgment in the review of each specific application. Quasi- judicial decisions are made by the hearing examiner, the architectural design board, and/or the city council. The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 120 4.10.b Edmonds Page 2/6 C. Legislative Decisions. Type V actions are legislative decisions made by the city council under its authority to establish policies and regulations regarding future private and public developments, and management of public lands. 1. Planning Board. The planning board shall hold a public hearing and make recommendations to the city council on Type V actions, except that the city council may hold a public hearing itself on area -wide rezones to implement city policies, or amendments to zoning code text, development regulations or the zoning map. The public hearing shall be held in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 20.06 ECDC, RCW 36.70A.035 and all other applicable law. 2. City Council. The city council may consider the planning board's recommendation in a public hearing held in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 20.06 ECDC and RCW 36.70A.035 and all other applicable law. If the city council desires to hold a public hearing on area -wide rezones to implement city policies, or amendments to zoning code text, development regulations or the zoning map, it may do so without forwarding the proposed decision to the planning board for a hearing. 3. Public Notice. Notice of the public hearing or public meeting shall be provided to the public as set forth in Chapter 20.03 ECDC. 4. Implementation. City council Type V decision shall be by ordinance or resolution and shall become effective on the effective date of the ordinance or resolution. [Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010]. 20.01.002 Determination of proper procedure type. A. Determination by Director. The director shall determine the proper procedure for all project applications. Questions concerning the appropriate procedure shall be resolved in favor of the higher numbered procedure. B. Optional Consolidated Permit Processing. An application that involves two or more procedures may be processed collectively under the highest numbered procedure required for any part of the application or may be processed individually under each of the application procedures identified in ECDC 20.01.003. The applicant may determine whether the application will be processed collectively or individually. If the applications are processed individually, the highest numbered type procedure shall be undertaken first, followed by the other procedures in sequence from the highest numbered to the lowest. When Type III -A and Type III-B permits are consolidated under this subsection, the project shall proceed under the Type 111-A permit process. C. Decisionmaker(s). Applications processed in accordance with subsection (B) of this section which have the same procedure number, but are assigned to different hearing bodies, shall be heard collectively by the highest decisionmaker; the city council being the highest body, followed by the hearing examiner, architectural design board or planning board, as applicable, and then the director. Joint public hearings with other agencies shall be processed according to ECDC 20.06.041010. Concurrent public hearings held with the architectural design board and any other decisionmaker shall proceed with both decisionmakers present. [Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.01.003 Permit type and decision framework. A. Permit Types. The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 121 4.10.b Edmonds Page 3/6 TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE II-B TYPE III -A TYPE III-B Tin TYPE IV-B TYPE V Zoning compliance Accessory dwelling unit Contingent critical area Outdoor dining Essential public Fi....'�ats Site specific rezone Development letter review facilities agreements Lot line adjustment Formal interpretation of Shoreline substantial Technological Design review ( were Final planned Development Zoning text the text of the ECDC by development permit, impracticality waiver piAlie heafing by Fesidential de ,.laps. en4 agreements amendment; area -wide the director where public hearing for amateur radio ..rehite,.,. ral design zoning map not required per ECDC antennas bred) amendments 24.80.100 Critical area SEPA determinations Critical area variance Comprehensive plan determinations amendments Shoreline exemptions Preliminary short plat Contingent critical area Conditional use permits Annexations review if public hearing (where public hearing requested by hearing examiner is required) Minor amendments to Land clearing/grading Shoreline substantial Variances Development planned residential development permit, regulations development where public hearing is required per ECDC 24.80.100 Minor preliminary plat Revisions to shoreline Shoreline conditional Home oeetipation amendment management permits use hearing by hearing - °a) Staff design review, Administrative Shoreline variance Preliminary formal-pw including signs variances Final short plat Land use permit Design review (where Preliminavy planned - public hearing by extension requests residential developmen' architectural design board is required) Sales office/model Guest house Preliminary formal plat (ECDC 17.70.005) Final formal plats Innocent purchaser Preliminaa planned residential development determination Final planned residential development The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 122 Edmonds Page 4/6 4.10.b B. Decision Table. The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 123 4.10.b Edmonds Page 5/6 PROCEDURE FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PERMIT APPLICATIONS (TYPE I — IV) LEGISLATIVE TYPE I TYPE II -A TYPE 11-B TYPE 111-A TYPE III-B TVPE A' TYPE IV-B TYPE V Recommendation by: N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Planning board Planning board Final decision by: Director Director Director Hearing Hearing Gity e0uneil City council City council examiner/ADB examinerhkD-B Notice of application: No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Open record public No Only if appealed, (1) If director Yes, before hearing Yes, before hearing No Yes, before planning Yes, before planning hearing or open record open record hearing decision is appealed, examiner or board to examiner or board to board which makes board which makes appeal of a final before hearing open record hearing render final decision render final decision recommendation to recommendation to decision: examiner before hearing council council or council examiner could hold its own (2) If converted to hearing Type III -A process Closed record review: No No No No Yes, before the Ne Yes, before the council council Judicial appeal: Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes c v r.+ E L d a d N C R J N C R C 'a L O N rr C E C E Q w R L V V W r 0 0 N L d Q M �t V N r.+ t x w c d E s M r Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 124 4.10.b Edmonds Page 6/6 C. Any reference to "Type II" in the Edmonds Community Development Code without expressly being modified as "Type II-B" shall be construed to mean Type II -A for the purposes of this section unless the context clearly suggests otherwise. [Ord. 4072 § 7 (Att. G), 2017; Ord. 4026 § 4, 2016; Ord. 3982 § 4, 2014; Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3806 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3787 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3783 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3775 § 2, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.01.006 Legislative enactments not restricted. Nothing in this chapter or the permit processing procedures shall limit the authority of the city council to make changes to the city's comprehensive plan, or the city's development regulations as part of the annual revision process. [Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.01.007 Exempt projects. A. The following projects are specifically excluded from the procedures set forth in this chapter: historic register designations, building permits, street vacations, street use permits, encroachment permits, and other public works permits issued under ECDC Title 18. B. Pursuant to RCW 36.70B.140(2), lot line or boundary adjustments, building and/or other construction permits, or similar administrative approvals categorically exempt from environmental review under SEPA (Chapter 43.21 C RCW and the city's SEPA/environmental policy ordinance, Chapter 20.15A ECDC), or permits/approvals for which environmental review has been completed in connection with other project permits, are excluded from the requirements of RCW 36.70B.060 and 36.70B.110 through 36.70B.130, which includes the following procedures: 1. Notice of application (ECDC 20.03.002) unless an open record hearing is allowed on the permit decision; 2. Except as provided in RCW 36.70B.140, optional consolidated permit review processing (ECDC 20.01.002(B)); 3. Joint public hearings (ECDC 20.06.894010); 4. Single report stating all of the decisions and recommendations made as of the date of the report that do not require an open public record hearing (ECDC 20.06.002050(C)); and 5. Notice of decision (ECDC 20.06..00920.02.007). [Ord. 3817 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 125 4.10.c Edmonds Chapter 20.06 OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARINGS Chapter 20.06 OPEN RECO PUBLIC HEARINGS AND APPEALS Sections: 20.06 000 Genefal. 20.06.000 General 20.06.010 Joint public hearings 20.06.020 Standing to initiate an administrative appeal 20.06.030 Appeals of permit decisions or recommendations 20.06.040 Prehearing conference 20.06.050 Responsibility of director - Open record public hearing 20.06.060 Conflict of interest 20.06.070 Ex parte communications 20.06.080 Disqualification 20.06.090 Burden and nature of proof 20.06.100 Order of proceedings - Predecision open record public hearing 20.06.110 Procedure for an open record appeal hearing 20.06.120 Procedure for closed record decision/appeal 20.06.130 Decisions 20.06.140 Reconsideration of decision 20.06.150 Judicial appeals 20.06.000 General. Page 1115 A. An open record public hearing is a hearing conducted by an authorized body or officer that creates the ems - record upon which the outcome of a decision or appeal is based through testimony and the submission of documents and other evidence . A public hearing may be held prior to the city's decision on a a^vr project permit application; this is an "open record predecision hearing." A public hearing may be held on an appeal if no open record predecision hearing was held for the -a peniiAdecision on a project permit application; this is an "open record appeal hearing." B. Open record predecision hearings on all Type III and IV permit applications and open record appeal hearings on all appeals of Type II decision appeals shall be conducted in accordance with this chapter. Public hearings conducted by the city hearing examiner shall also be subject to the hearing examiner's rules. CA. "Closed record anneal" means an administrative anneal to the city council. Such appeals are decided based on the previously created record. i3ei:Fnit ai3i3liegiea when the While such appeal proceedings :s o the r-eeer- with Redo not allow new testimony, documents or other evidence ^r in f rmMie a4ew^a to be submitted. except as provided in ECDC 20.06-7.805120 B .- and enly appeal ar ents are allowed based Mon the record. shall be as allowed and described in the matrix set forth in ECDC 20.01.003. Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 126 4.10.c Edmonds Page 2/15 Chapter 20.06 OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARINGS E. In this chanter, unless the context clearlv indicates otherwise, the words "writing" and "written" shall include electronic writings and things written electronically.C. Unless other -wise provided, appeals of Type rr decisions shall N beinitiated as feFth inrECDC 20.07 nn N m 0 L an n� n02 Go„soledatpd ^ ..is_ d cc ("PS"). and I t i3e -mils and ^ als , —de - Error 20.01.007. swan be ^ side -ed teeethe - ; a eenselida4ed C� N 20.06.0017010 Joint public hearings. A. Decision to Hold Joint Hearing. The deyelopmar* se es d" feet^" of his,lbef designee (he+:^"'^f4^' the IM " crt may combine -jointly conduct an public hearing on a project permit application with an hearing that ��� Y inns J Y Y p g p j � pp � Y g may be held -conducted by another local, state, regional, federal, or other agency, on the proposed action, as long as the requirements of subsection (C) of this section are met. 0 B. Applicant's Request for a Joint Hearing. The applicant may request that the city conduct a joint public hearing with another agency, as described in subsection (A), above —on ^ pe ait appliea4i a be eambined as long as the joint � hearing schedule "^would allow a decision to be issued within the applicable time periods set forth in this ehaptefTitle 20. i the alte miN• If the joint hearing schedule would not allow a decision to be issued within the E applicable time periods, the applicant may agree in writing to ^ pa-14ie laf schedule if additional time is nee an a extension of the applicable time periods in order to ^amplete the hear:ngsallow a joint public hearingto be m conducted. y C. Prerequisites to Joint Public Hearing. A joint public hearing may be held with another local, state, regional, federal or other agency and the city, when: J m 1. The other agrneys Doin sg o is not expressly prohibited by statute from so; M c 2. Sufficient notice of the hearing is given to meet each of the agencfies' applicable notice 0 requirements as set rn4u ; sta44es e fd:ranees of nale^. .•, U 3. The agency has received the necessary information about the proposed project from the applicant in enough V time to hold its hearing at the same time as the city hearing; Brand w W R 4. The hearing is held within the geographic boundary of the city. [Ord. 3817 § 5, 2010]. N MAGA M6.020 Standing to initiate an administrative appeal, A. Standing Limited to Parties of Record. Only parties of record may file an administrative anneal. co t U B. Definition. The term "parties of record," for the purposes of this chapter, shall mean: a� 1. The applicant; plication: 2. Any person who testified at thean open record public hearing on the subject apcc L 3. Any person who j d:.,:d„^" ubffiitssubmitted written comments concerning the subject application -ate blie heafifte (of to stag if a ^ o^, ,.f ^ Tun,- rr PROVIDED THAT. RggM ns who +M+ have only signed a petitions are not "parties of record:" and/or z x 4. The city of Edmonds. [Ord. 3817 § 6, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. w 20.01a00406.030 Anneals ofyroiect permit decisions MpHdations. c ci An administrative a eals of a decision on a project permit de sienapplication_ t on a emit ^-B3liea4ia shall be governed by the following: cc Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 127 4.10.c Edmonds Page 3/15 Chapter 20.06 OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Standine. r,,,iy s rties o record have sta-nd ne t ^ ea -.e l,o.,rin 1 body's , ecisi reserved - B. Time to File. An anneal must be filed within 14 days after the issuance of the' eafing''eyLs written decision on N a project permit application. The anneal period for determinations of nonsi nificance shall be extended for an o additional seven days, if state or local rules adopted pursuant to Chapter 43.21C RCW allow public comment on a d determination of nonsignificance issued as Dart of the at in relation to the applicable project permit Fa deeisiet�a�plication. Appeals, including fees. must be received by the citv's development services department by 2 mail or by personal delivery at or before 4:00 p.m. on the last business day of the appeal period. Appeals received by mail after 4:00 p.m. on the last day of the appeal period will not be accepted, no matter when such appeals were mailed or postmarked. cNa C. Computation of Time. For the purposes of computing the time for filing an appeal, the day the hearing body's decision is issued shall not be counted. If the last day of the appeal is a Saturday. Sunday, legal holiday designated by RCW 1.16.050 or by a city ordinance, or any day when City Hall or the city's development services department a� is closed to the public by formal executive or legislative action, then the appeal may be filed on the next day that is Y not a Saturday. Sunday, holiday or closed day. `° 2 D. Content of Appeal. Appeals shall be in writing, be accompanied by the required appeal fee as set forth in the IL o city's adopted fee resolution, and contain the following information: T) 1. Appellant's name. address, email address, and phone number a� E 2. A statement describing appellant's standing to appeal: a 3. Identification of the application which is the subject of the appeal: 4. Appellant's statement of grounds for appeal and the facts upon which the appeal is based with c c references to the facts i the record; fC J N 5. The specific relief sought: c ca c 6. A statement that the appellant has read the appeal and believes the contents to be true, followed by the a pellant's signature. O 7. All written submittals should be tuned or electronically formatted on letter size paper (eight and one-half by 0 11 inches). with one -inch margins. using readable font tune (such as Times New Roman) and size no smaller U w than 12-point), single sided. w E. Effect. The timely filing of an anneal shall stay the hearing bo&'^ decision on the applicable project permit 0 N application, or portion thereof, until such time as the appeal is c�dresolved or withdrawn. +; a F. Notice of Appeal. The deve , igment se -vices director (-her-eina€ter- the Tshall provide re written notice of the appeal to all parties of record as defined in ECDC 20.07.00306.020. [Ord. 3817 & 6, 2010; Ord. 3736 & V 4 (Exh. A). 20091. y G. Multiple appeals. More than one appeal maybe filed concerning the same decision on a project permit application. 4= L 20.06.040 Prehearinu Conference ch A. The Hearing Examiner may on his or her own order, or at the request of the city, applicant or appellant, hold one or more conferences prior to the hearing to consider: K w 1. Identification, clarification, and simplification of the issues; c 2. Disclosure of witnesses to be called and exhibits to be presented, E t 3. MetionsThe scheduling or hearing of motions that any party would like to have considered; Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 128 4.10.c Edmonds Chapter 20.06 OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARINGS Page 4/15 4. Other matters deemed by the Hearing Examiner appropriate for orderly and expeditious disposition of the proceedings. B. Prehearine conferences may be held by telenhone conference C. The Hearing Examiner shall give notice to all parties of record of any prehearing conference to be held. Notice shall be in any written form. D. All parties of record shall participate atin any prehearing conference unless they granted by the Hearing Examiner not to participate. Failure to participate without such permission may result in that party's waiver of issues adjudicated during the prehearing conference and/or dismissal of the appeal.- E. Following the prehearing conference, the Hearing Examiner shall issue an order reciting the actions taken or ruling on motions made at the conference. 20.06.002050 Responsibility of director for hearing - Open Record Public Hearing. The director shall: A. Schedule project permit applications for review and public hearing; B. Verify compliance with notice requirements; C. Prepare the staff report on the application, which shall be a single report which sets forth all of the decisions made on the proposal as of the date of the report, including recommendations on project permit Vplicationss in the consolidated permit process that do not by themselves require an open record predecision hearing. The report shall also describe any mitigation required or proposed under the city's development regulations or SEPA authority. If the threshold determination, other than a determination of significance, has not been issued previously by the city, the report shall include or append this determination; D. Prepare the notice of decision, if required by the hearing body, and mail a copy of the notice of decision to those entitled by this chapter to receive the decision. [Ord. 3817 § 5, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.06.003060 Conflict of interest. The hearing body shall be subject to the code of ethics, prohibitions on conflict of interest and appearance of fairness doctrine as set forth in Chapter 42.23 RCW, and Chapter 42.36 RCW as the same now exists or may hereafter be amended. [Ord. 3817 § 5, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.06.004070 Ex parte communications. A. No member of the hearing body may communicate, directly or indirectly, regarding any issue in a proceeding before him or her, other than to participate in communications regarding procedural aspects necessary for maintaining an orderly process, unless he or she provides notice and opportunity for all parties to participate. Nothing herein shall prevent the hearing body from seeking legal advice from its legal counsel on any issue. B. If, before serving as -on the hearing body in a quasi-judicial proceeding, any member of the hearing body receives an ex parte communication of a type that could not properly be received while serving, the member of the hearing body, promptly after starting to serve, shall disclose the communication as described in subsection (C) of this section. C. If a member of the hearing body receives an ex parte communication in violation of this section, he or she shall place in the record: 1. All written communications received; 2. All written responses to the communications; 3. The substance of all oral communications received, and all responses made; and 4. The identity of each person from whom the member received any ex parte communication. The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 129 4.10.c Edmonds Chapter 20.06 OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARINGS Page 5115 The hearing body shall advise all parties that these matters have been placed on the record. Upon request made after notice of the ex parte communication, any party desiring to rebut the communication shall be allowed to place a rebuttal statement on the record. [Ord. 3817 § 5, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.06.0N080 Disqualification. A. Any member who is disqualified shall make full disclosure to the audience of the reason(s) for the disqualification, abstain from voting on the proposal, and physically leave the hearin rg oom. B. If enough members of the hearing body are disqualified so that a quorum cannot be achieved, then all members present, after stating their reasons for disqualification, shall be prequalified and deliberations shall proceed. [Ord. 3817 § 5, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.06.006090 Burden and nature of proof. A. Except for Type V actions and, appeals of Type 11 actions and elosea record appeal", the burden of proof is on the proponent. The development —project permit application must be supported by convincing proof -evidence in the record that it conforms to the applicable elements of the city's development regulations and eomprehensive plan (review criteria). The proponent must also prove that any significant adverse environmental impacts have been adequately mitigated. B. In an appeal of T5Te 11 ,.etions or elosed reeds appeal, the appellant has the burden of proof with respect to points raised on appeal. G. in a elosed reeord appeal of the arehiteetural design board, its deeision shall be given substantial deferenee ,., ing deeisie review within its o peftise and , „*mina : its deeisiens. [Ord. 3817 § 5, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.06.007100 Order of proceedings — Predecision Open Record Public Hearing. The order of proceedings for a hearing will depend in part on the nature of the hearing. The following shall be supplemented by administrative procedures and/or hearing examiner rules as appropriate. A. Before receiving testimony and other evidence on the issue, the following shall be determined: 1. Any objections on jurisdictional grounds shall be noted on the record and if there is objection, the hearing body may proceed or terminate the proceeding; 2. Any member disqualifications shall be determined. B. The presiding officer may take official notice of commonly known and accepted information, such as: 1. Ordinances, resolutions, rules, officially adopted development standards, and state and federal law; 2. Public records and facts judicially noticeable by law. C. Order of presentation. The order of presentation for predecision open record public hearings generally proceed as follows: The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 130 4.10.c Edmonds Chapter 20.06 OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Hearing Examiner's or hearing body's introductory statement; 2. Staff presentation; 3. Applicant's presentation; 4. Public testimony on proposal; 5. Response from staff (if any); 6. Rebuttal from applicant (if any); 7. Questions of staff, applicant, or other persons submitting testimony; 8. Deliberation by hearing body if applicable; Page 6/15 D. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection C, the order of hearing may be modified or a different order established if the hearing body deems necessary for the clear and fair presentation of evidence. The order of the hearing may also be modified as agreed upon by parties with the hearing body's approval. E. The order of presentation at hearing shall not alter or shift any burdens or presumptions(s) established by applicable law(s). EF. Information officially noticed need not be proved by submission of formal evidence to be considered by the hearing body. Parties requesting official notice of any information shall do so on the record. The hearing body, however, may take notice of matters listed in subsection (B) of this section at any time. Any information given official notice may be rebutted. 13G. The hearing body may view the proposed project site or planning area with or without notification to the parties, but shall put into the record a statement setting forth the time, manner and circumstances of the site visit and any relevant observations made during the visit. EH. Information shall be received from the staff and from proponents and opponents. The presiding officer may, in his or her discretion, permit persons a#endingparticipating in the hearing to ask questions of other participants. Unless the presiding officer specifies otherwise, approved -an. sy uch questions will be asked of per -sons submitting toby-through the presiding officer. liI. When the presiding officer has closed the public eaffiffiewtestimony portion of the hearing, the hearing body may openly discuss the issue and may further question the staff or any person submitting testimony. An opportunity to present rebuttal testimony shall be provided if new information is presented irthrough the questioning. When all evidence has been presented and all questioning and rebuttal completed, the presiding officer shall officially close the record and end the hearing. [Ord. 3817 § 5, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 131 4.10.c Edmonds Page 7/15 Chapter 20.06 OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARINGS 20.06.110 Procedure for open record appeal hearing. in A. Appeal hearings shall have a structured format and shall be conducted in a manner deemed by the Hearing_ o Examiner to make the relevant evidence most readily and efficiently available to the Hearing Examiner and to d provide the parties a fair opportunity for hearing. B. Where the code provides that the appellant has the burden of proof to overcome the City decision being_ 2 appealed, the order of hearing is generally as follows: 1. Hearing Examiner's introductory statement; U) 2. Parties' opening statements (if allowed by hearing examiner); (1 3. Appelant's presentation of evidence and ar ument; 4. Department's presentation of evidence and argument; Y 5. Applicant's presentation of evidence and argument(if applicant is not the appellant); 0 6. Appelant's presentation of rebuttal evidence and argument; 0 7. Closing argument of parties (if allowed by hearing examiner); U C. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsection B, the order of hearing may be modified or a different order a) established if the Hearing Examiner deems necessary for the clear and fair presentation of evidence. The order of the hearing may also be modified as a rg eed upon by the parties with the Hearing Examiner's approval. a) d D. The order of presentation at hearing shall not alter or shift any burden(s) or presumptions(s) established by a� applicable law(s). w E. Information shall be received from the staff and from proponents and opponents. The presiding officer may, in his or her discretion, permit persons participating in the hearing to ask questions of other participants. Unless the presiding officer specifies otherwise, questions will be asked through the presiding officer. a) c ca c 2R&6.1207" Procedure for closed record decision/an_oea4hearings. A. Closed record aalshearings shall be argued and decided based on the record established at the oven record 0 hearing before the he -ifte bad- �a ffieo . ,.,hase deeis on is appeflW, which shall include the written V deeisieerecommendation of the hearing body/officer, conies of any exhibits admitted into the record, and official o transcript, minutes or tape recording of the proceedings. V w w 1. At his/her own expense, a party te4 of record may have the official tape recording of the open - - record hearing transcribed: however. to be admitted in4e the receraconsidered during the closed record hearing, o N L the transcription must be ^pMbmiedprepared and certified by a court reporter or a transcriber that is Pre - approved by the city. In addition, the ^transcription must be received by the city directly from the transcriber at least 16 working days before the date scheduled for the closed record shearing. It shall be V each party of record's responsibility to obtain a copy of the transcription from the city. a� 2. The director shall maintain a list of pre -approved transcribers t-hm are eetH4 appf yed; and if needed, shall coordinate with parties te4h^ %mealof record so that no more than one official transcripts is ^am "^a into g1we d Aaced before the city council_. L B. No new testimony or other evidence will be accepted by the city council except: (1) new information required to rebut the substance of any written or oral ex parte communication iqr-e 'idedthat is placed on the record during an +� a pearance of fairness disclosure: and (24 relev pA inf -matron # a. in the eiginion e fthe eity ^ ei exeluded bv the heafine bad ffieer, X w irk:L•f'� .nJi Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 132 4.10.c Edmonds Page 8/15 Chapter 20.06 OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. T,. deter-mi..;,,.e ..:1 ,,. the in f «.....,tion be the t whether- should admitted. eity a side ma-Y reauest otherBar-ties of ...1....� ,....rt «mot; t,.to o,.t:..« the ro ..r,l the initial ..1 ro opt tL,..t tL,o :..F r.�,.. t;,... be the In of made of shall,. ao of d scaffie. O L a C. Parties of record may present written arguments to the city council. Arguments shall a^�n � Fa n rtie l.,r ^rr^rs committed by the , ecis;^ w ,,v^raddress the applicable decision criteria, with specific references to 2 the administrative record. The ^ oella t hall bear the l.twde to demonstrate str.,te that the decision ; ,.1^ady a ^,o^„� � eiven the r or.l s .N D. While written argument itten arguments no later than 12 working days before the date scheduled for the closed record r-evieruheariU. Parties of recorder CY 'D for- the ,.ppelln may submit hk nr- her -written arguments or respond in writing to „„ 'Eopenin�ents no later than seven working days before the closed record r-eviehearin alltparties may rebut in writing to a� responses submitted by parties of record no later than four working days before the closed record revie heari� Y ,3lic ,r.t : of the ., nellant ,31;,.a t , a-Y s„1.mi ., F pal s ffeb ,tt.,l ; ";tine to „ i3ell ,,,tI reb tt.,l no later M than two wer-kine days be. re the closed reeord-review, E. Written arguments, responses. and rebuttals and suffer... als must be received by the city's development services y department by mail or personal delivery at or before 4:30 p.m. of the date due. Late submittals shall not be accepted. Submittals received by mail after 4:30 p.m. on the last day of the appeal period will not be accented, no matter when such submittals were mailed or postmarked. it shall be the ro sib l;ty of the ...,..ties i iye t^ obtain F r heif � L d a m F. All written submittals should be typed or electronically formatted on letter size paper (eight and one-half by 111, rn with one -inch margins, using readable font type (such as Times New Roman) and size (no smaller than 121. single sided. double spaced and without exceeding 12 pages in length, including exhibits, if any. Exhibits that are not M already in the record shall not be allowed. J m G. The review shall commence with the resolution of appearance of fairness issues, if any, followed by the c�a opportunity for oral presentations by the director and other parties of records. including the appellant. After the � presentations, the city council may ask clarifying questions on disputed issues to parties of record, with an opportunity for the director, appellant and/or applicant, respectively, to rebut to the response. The city council shall `-' not request information outside the administrative record. If the city council believes that it needs information not V contained in the record to make a proper decision on the application, it may remand the application to have the V record reopened for that limited purpose. w co 0 If information outside the administrative record is offered (in written submittals or oral presentation) by a party of o N record, it shall be the responsibility of other parties of record opposing the same to timely object and provide justification in support of the objection. Objections to information outside the administrative record shall be brought Q. before the city council begins deliberations. The party offering_ the information shall have the opportunity_ to show z where in the record said information is contained. V H. The city council shall ,rote,. ae whet1 or t' ^ dereview the eiaienrecommendation by the hearing body/officer is- a� N elear-ly effesleetisde novo gjymbased on the evidence in the record. The e4v eetineil shall a ffir-. edify ^ o e 0 � reauirement for a decision within the time o ^as set forth i RCW 36.70B.080. as all -wed by D!''W i 36.703'. theAs it deems necessary, theThe city council may remand the deeisio -application with instructions to the hearing body to reopen the hearing to obtainfer additional information on a subject that is relevant to the decision criteria. - z x 1. Nefiee of Final Peeision On Closed Reeefd A-m3eal. Th difeeter- shall issue a fiefiee of final deeision an elesed w o..l in the .,., o of F rth and to two i3er-seas ;., >JQ—PQ 20 06 00902 997 [Ofd 3917 $ 6 2010: . C 3736 R n ( x n) 20nni N E t t� cc r r Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 133 4.10.c Edmonds Page 9/15 Chapter 20.06 OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARINGS 20.06.008130 Decision. A. Following the hearing procedure described in ECDC 20.06.047100, or-ECDC 20.06.110, or ECDC 20.06.120, the n hearing body shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application. If the hearing is an appeal, the hearing m body shall affirm, reverse or; 0 rokibition " * * "�n record he -i remand the decision for additional information. a B. The hearing body's written decision shall be issued within 10 working days after the close of record of the 2 hearing and within 90 days of the opening of the hearing, unless a longer period is agreed to by the parties. Where the record is voluminous, the hearing body may inform the parties during the hearing that more than 10 working days will be necessary to render a decision. M CI C. The city shall provide a notice of decision as provided in ECDC 20.0602.0097. c c� D. If the city is unable to issue its final decision on an application within the time limits provided for in this section, aM it shall provide written notice of this fact to the project applicant. The notice shall include a statement of reasons Y why the time limits have not been met and an estimated date for issuance of the notice of decision. [Ord. 3817 § 5, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 0 20.06�.009 Notiee of final deeisimt-. [RELOCATE TO ECDC 20.02.0071 y A. The difeetef shall issue a natiee ef Anal deeision within 120 days of t4e issuanee of the detefmination of m on a preliminary plat shall be 90 days, for a final plat 30 days, and a final short plat 30 days. The notiee shall inelud-e the SEPA threshold determination for the proposal and a deseription of any available administrative appeals. For completeness pursuant to ECDC 20.02.003; provided, that the time period for issuance of a notice of final deeision -W L d Type 11, M and 1V permits, the notice shall contain the requiremen4s set forth in ECDC 20.06.002(C) and explain that affected property owners may request a change in pro er-ty tax valuation notwithstanding any program of revaluation. c M J d C1 C County - assessor. M 2. Notiee of the deeision shall be provided to the publie by any means deemed reasonable by the direet L O I!a VL ran UTMIMINo. .T.S2�S-'T.S:SC:LfrRS�S'..5'.�Si.T-S'.f.'rTSrSRS'.fL�-SST.rS:1T.SCiF1: a irpm whiek shall be fiet fnafe than 90 days fef epen feeofd appeals and 60 days fer elesed feeofd appeals, K W d E M 0 C. The time limits established in this titledo not aoo'��»e t-aim3ne-atien �° Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 134 4.10.c Edmonds Chapter 20.06 OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARINGS Page 10115 20.06.048140 Reconsideration of decision. A. General. Any person identified in ECDC 20.07.00306.020 as having standing to file an administrative appeal may request reconsideration of a decision of the hearing examiner which issues immediately after the open record public hearing on a permit application described in this chapter. (There shall be no reconsideration of a decision of the director (staff), ADB or city council.) Reconsideration is not a condition precedent to any appeal. Reconsideration shall be limited to: 1. Error(s) of procedure; 2. Error(s) of law or fact; 3. Error(s) of judgment; and/or 4. The discovery of new evidence that was not known and could not, in the exercise of reasonable diligence, have been discovered. B. Time to File. A request for reconsideration, including reconsideration fee, must be filed with the director within 10 calendar days of the issuance of the hearing examiner's written decision. Such requests shall be delivered to the director before 4:00 p.m. on the last business day of the reconsideration period. Requests for reconsideration that are received by mail after 4:00 p.m. on the last day of this reconsideration period will not be accepted, no matter when such requests were sent, mailed or postmarked. C. Computation of Time. For the purposes of computing the time for filing a request for reconsideration, the day the hearing examiner's decision is issued shall not be counted. If the last day of the reconsideration is a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday designated by RCW 1.16.050, or by a city ordinance, then the reconsideration may be filed on the next business day. D. Content of Request for Reconsideration. Requests for reconsideration shall be in writing, be accompanied by the required reconsideration fee, and contain the following information: 1. The name, address, email address, and phone number of the requestor; 2. Identification of the application and final decision which is the subject of the request for reconsideration; 3. Requestor's statement of grounds for reconsideration and the facts upon which the request is based; 4. The specific relief requested; 5. A statement that the requestor believes the contents of the request to be true, followed by his/her signature. 6. All written submittals should be typed or electronically formatted on letter size paper (eight and one-half by 11), with one -inch margins, using readable font type (such as Times New Roman) and size (no smaller than 12), single sided. E. Effect. The timely filing of a request for reconsideration shall stay the hearing examiner's decision on the applicable project permit application, or portion thereof, until such time as the hearing examiner issues a decision on reconsideration. F. Notice of Request for Reconsideration. The director shall provide ma4e4-witten notice that a request for reconsideration has been filed to all parties of record as defined in ECDC 20.07.0036.020. The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 135 4.10.c Edmonds Chapter 20.06 OPEN RECORD PUBLIC HEARINGS Page 11115 G. Hearing Examiner's Action on Request. The hearing examiner shall consider the request for reconsideration without a hearing, but may solicit written arguments from parties of record. A decision on the request for reconsideration shall be issued within 10 business days after receipt of the request for reconsideration by the city 1. The time period for appeal shall recommence and be the same for all parties of record, regardless of whether a party filed a motion for reconsideration. 2. Only one request for reconsideration may be made by a party of record. Any ground not stated in the initial motion is waived. 3. A decision on reconsideration or a matter that is remanded to the hearing examiner by the city council is not subject to a motion for reconsideration. H. Limitations on Hearing Examiner's Reconsideration. The hearing examiner shall consider the request for reconsideration based on the administrative record compiled on the application up to and including the date of the hearing examiner's decision. The hearing examiner may require or permit corrections of ministerial errors or inadvertent omissions in the preparation of the record and the hearing examiner's decision. The reconsideration decision issued by the hearing examiner may modify, affirm or reverse the hearing examiner's decision. I. Notice of Final Decision on Reconsideration. The director shall issue a notice of final decision on reconsideration in the manner set forth and to the persons identified in ECDC 20.062.OW007. 20AGM*06.150 Judicial ap e -THavine exhausted anv available administrative anneals. the citv's final decision on an application may be annealed reeer- ,A4t . st ad-ing t by f4ecommencing a land use petition in Snohomish County superior court. Such petition must be f4edcommenced within 21 days after issu -nee of the deei iep as provided in Chanter 36.70C RCW. [Ord. 3817 & 6, 2010; Ord. 3736 & 4 (Exh. A). 20091. The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 136 4.10.c Edmonds Chapter 20.07 CLOSED RECORD APPEALS 20.07.001 Appeals of decisions. appeal" me following an Page 12/15 12 xi— right of appeal for all permit applications and Type V land ..141 deeisinnq qhAll h t I- --t-I . [Ord. 3817 § 6, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 137 4.10.c Edmonds Page 13/15 Chapter 20.07 CLOSED RECORD APPEALS The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 138 4.10.c Edmonds Page 14/15 Chapter 20.07 CLOSED RECORD APPEALS Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 139 4.10.c Edmonds Chapter 20.07 CLOSED RECORD APPEALS 1 �� .. Page 15115 The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 140 4.10.d Edmonds Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS Sections: 20.75.010 Citation of chapter. 20.75.020 Purposes. 20.75.025 Scope. 20.75.030 Subdivision defined. 20.75.035 Compliance required. 20.75.040 Application. 20.75.045 Unit lot subdivision. 20.75.050 Lot line adjustment — Application. 20.75.055 Lot combination. 20.75.060 Required information on preliminary plats. 20.75.065 Preliminary review. 20.75.070 Formal subdivision — Time limit. 20.75.075 Modifications. 20.75.080 General findings. 20.75.085 Review criteria. 20.75.090 Park land dedication. 20.75.100 Preliminary approval — Time limit. 20.75.105 Repealed. 20.75.107 Preliminary approval — Time limit extension for previously approved short plats. 20.75.110 Changes. 20.75.120 Review of improvement plans. 20.75.130 Installation of improvements. 20.75.135 Preparation of final plat. 20.75.140 Final plat — Required certificates. 20.75.145 Final plat — Accompanying material. 20.75.150 Waiver of survey. 20.75.155 Review of final plat. 20.75.158 Short plat — Staff review. 20.75.160 Final plat — Filing for record. 20.75.165 Effect of rezones. 20.75.170 Further division — Short subdivisions. 20.75.175 Court review. 20.75.180 Development of lots not divided according to this chapter. 20.75.185 Penalties. Page 1/14 20.75.010 Citation of chapter. This chapter may be cited as the City of Edmonds Subdivision Ordinance and shall supplement and implement the state regulations of plats, subdivisions and dedications found in Chapter 58.17 RCW. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. 20.75.020 Purposes. The purposes of this chapter are: A. To regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the public health, safety and general welfare in accordance with state standards to prevent overcrowding of land; B. To lessen congestion in the streets and highways; C. To facilitate adequate provisions for water, utilities, sewerage, storm drainage, parks and recreation areas, sites for schools and playgrounds, and other public requirements; Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 141 4.10.d Edmonds Page 2/14 Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS D. To provide for proper ingress and egress, while minimizing impervious surfaces; E. To require uniform monumenting of subdivisions and accurate legal descriptions of subdivided lots; F. To promote the preservation of critical areas and encourage low impact development; G. To encourage site design that can make the best use of renewable energy resources including solar and geothermal; H. To encourage low impact development (LID) practices when providing for streets and sidewalks. [Ord. 4085 § 18 (Exh. A), 2017; Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. 20.75.025 Scope. This chapter shall apply to all divisions of land for any purpose except those set forth in RCW 58.17.040, including but not limited to: A. Divisions for cemetery plots or other burial plots; B. Divisions made by testamentary provisions, or by the laws of descent; C. Divisions for the purpose of lease when no residential structure other than mobile homes or travel trailers are permitted to be placed upon the land and the city of Edmonds has approved a binding site plan for the use of the land in accordance with this chapter. Divisions under subsections (A) and (B) of this section will not be recognized as lots for building purposes unless all applicable requirements of this chapter are met. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. 20.75.030 Subdivision defined. A. "Subdivision" means a division of land into lots of any size for the purpose of sale. The term subdivision includes all resubdivisions of land, short subdivisions, and formal subdivisions. The term "lot" includes tracts, parcels, sites and divisions. The term "sale" includes lease gift or development or any purpose not excepted in this section. When reference to "subdivision" is made in this code, it is intended to refer to both "formal subdivision" and "short subdivision" unless one or the other is specified. B. "Formal subdivision" means a subdivision of five or more lots. C. "Short subdivision" means a subdivision of four or fewer lots. D. "Unit lot subdivision" means a subdivision or short subdivision of land under ECDC 20.75.045 where compliance with the development standards is evaluated with respect to the parent lot, not the unit lot. E. "Parent lot' means the lot with legal lot status which establishes the exterior boundary of a unit lot subdivision. F. "Unit lot' means a portion of a parent lot, the fee of which may be independently transferred upon recording of a unit lot subdivision. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. 20.75.035 Compliance required. Any person wishing to create a subdivision or lot line adjustment must first comply with this chapter. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. 20.75.040 Application. 4 Applications for subdivisions shall be made to the eewwwaity development services director on forms provided by }' the eenmnunivy development services department. A subdivision application will be processed concurrently with any applications for rezones, variances, planned unit developments, site plan approvals and other similar approvals, that x w relate to the proposed subdivision, unless the applicant expressly requests sequential processing. The application }; shall contain the following items in addition to those specified in ECDC 20.02.002: m E t Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 142 4.10.d Edmonds Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS Page 3/14 A. A reproducible copy of the preliminary plat and the number of prints required by the eommunivy development_ services department; B. Title report; C. A survey map, if required by the sty development services director, of the exterior boundaries of the land to be subdivided, prepared by, and bearing the seal and signature of, a professional land surveyor registered in the state of Washington. This map can be combined with the preliminary ECDC 20.75.050 plat at the applicant's option; D. The application fee as set in Chapter 15.00 ECDC; E. A proposal for dedication of park land rather than payment of in -lieu fees, if desired by the applicant; F. Source of water supply and name of supplier; G. Method of sewage disposal, and name of municipal system if applicable. Percolation rates and other information required by the public works department shall be submitted if septic tanks are to be used; H. Other information that may be required by the sty development services director in order to properly review the proposed subdivision, including information needed to determine the environmental impact of the proposal. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3736 § 62, 2009; Ord. 2379 § 1, 1983]. 20.75.045 Unit lot subdivision. A. Purpose. The unit lot subdivision process provides opportunities for dividing fee simple ownership of land to create townhouses, rowhouses and similar fee -owned dwelling units as an alternative to both condominium ownership and traditional single-family detached subdivision. Unit lot subdivisions determine compliance with the relevant dimensional standards of ECDC Title 16 by analyzing whether the parent lot complies, but not requiring that each newly created lot within the unit lot subdivision (the unit lot) complies, with those dimensional standards. A unit lot subdivision does not permit uses or densities that are not otherwise allowed in the zoning district in which the unit lot subdivision is proposed. B. Applicability. The provisions of this section apply exclusively to the subdivision of land for single-family dwelling units, townhouse, and rowhouses and may be applied only in the following zones: multiple residential, general commercial, and Westgate mixed -use. A single lot within a unit lot subdivision may contain multiple dwelling units when the unit lot contains all such dwelling units within one building. Flats are permitted as an element of a unit lot subdivision only when a single lot within a unit lot subdivision contains the entire building in which flats are located. C. Association with Site Development — Application Timing. In the case of a vacant lot or a redevelopment site, a preliminary unit lot subdivision can only be submitted in conjunction with or subsequent to a development site plan as required by Chapter 20.10, 20.11, or 20.12 ECDC, or in the case described in ECDC 20.10.020(B)(3) submitted in conjunction with or subsequent to a building permit. D. Conformance with Standards of the Parent Lot. The parent lot must comply with and is vested to the applicable development standards (ECDC 20.75.030(E)) in effect at the time a complete application for preliminary unit lot subdivision is submitted. As a result of the unit lot subdivision, the individual unit lots within the subdivision may be nonconforming with respect to the bulk and dimensional standards required by ECDC Title 16. As with dimensional standards, compliance with access standards, including but not limited to fire lanes, drive p aisles, turn-arounds, and access of/to the parent lot from/to the street will be evaluated based on the parent lot's compliance with such requirements, and not based on whether individual unit lots meet such standards. E. Future Additions and Modifications. Subsequent platting actions, additions or modifications to the structure(s) may not create or increase any nonconformity of the parcel lot. Changes requiring permitting that affect only the w interior of building units will be evaluated for compliance with the requirements only for that unit. Any exterior changes will be evaluated for compliance by considering whether the parent lot would still comply with applicable development standards. Any application for such external changes will require authorization of all owners of affected unit lots or approval of the HOA where changes to commonly owned tracts are proposed. Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 143 4.10.d Edmonds Page 4/14 Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS F. Homeowners' Association Ownership of Common Areas. Any commonly used areas or facilities within a unit lot subdivision, including but not limited to common access, garage or parking areas, common open space or recreation space, common courtyards, commonly used stormwater facilities or side sewers and other similar features, must be owned and maintained by a homeowners' association with the right to assess the individual unit lot owners as necessary to properly maintain and repair such areas. Appropriate documentation regarding the rights of the homeowners association must be submitted for recording with the final plat. G. Maintenance Agreements for Building Exteriors. Maintenance agreements must be executed and recorded as an element of the final unit subdivision plat or short plat for maintenance of all building exteriors except in cases where all dwelling units are detached. The maintenance agreement must require equal participation by all owners within any one building and must be recorded on the final unit lot plat. The requirement does not apply to detached single family dwelling units. Common wall construction must meet currently adopted building codes. H. Parking on Different Unit Lots Allowed. Within the parent lot, required parking for a dwelling unit may be provided on a different unit lot than the lot with the dwelling unit as long as the right to use that parking is formalized by an easement on the final plat. I. Notice of Unit Lot on the Final Plat. The fact that the unit lot is not a separate buildable lot and that additional development of the individual unit lots may be limited as a result of the application of development standards to the parent lot must be noted on the final plat. J. An application for final unit lot plat will not be accepted until all foundations, including common wall foundations, are installed and located on the face of the final plat by the land surveyor of record. K. Review. Unit lot subdivisions of four or fewer lots are processed and reviewed as short subdivisions while five or more lots are formal subdivisions pursuant to Chapter 20.01 ECDC and the requirements of this chapter. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. 20.75.050 Lot line adjustment — Application. A. Lot Line Adjustment Defined. A lot line adjustment is an alteration of lot lines between platted or unplatted lots or both, which does not create any additional lot, tract, parcel, site or division. B. Lot Line Adjustment Exempt from Subdivision Review. Except as otherwise provided in this section, lot adjustments shall not be subject to the provisions of this chapter. C. Lot Line Adjustment Review. All proposals for lot line adjustments shall be submitted to the Edmonds planning manager or his/her designee for approval. The Edmonds planning manager or his/her designee shall approve the proposed lot line adjustment unless the manager or his/her designee certifies in writing that the proposed adjustment will: 1. Create a new lot, tract, parcel, site or division; 2. Reduce the setbacks of existing structures below the minimum required by code or make existing nonconforming setbacks of existing structures more nonconforming than before; 3. Reduce the lot width or lot size below the minimum required for the applicable zone; 4. Transform a nonbuildable lot, tract, parcel, site or division into a buildable lot, tract, parcel, site or division; 5. Would otherwise result in a lot which is in violation of any requirement of the ECDC. D. Application. A lot line adjustment application shall be submitted on forms provided by the city and shall at a minimum contain the following information: x w 1. One copy of dimensioned plans on the official city of Edmonds lot line adjustment form. The dimensioned plans shall be prepared and stamped by a professional land surveyor registered in the state of Washington and E shall conform to city of Edmonds survey requirements, as promulgated by the Edmonds planning division. t Information on the plans shall include the following: 0 M Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 144 4.10.d Edmonds Page 5/14 Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS a. Legal descriptions of the existing lots and proposed lot line adjustment(s); b. The location of all existing structures on the subject parcel(s), including dimensioned setback information from all existing and proposed lot lines and ingress/egress easements; c. Locations of all existing ingress/egress and utility easements; d. Gross lot area for the original parcels and the proposed parcels (gross lot area does not include any lot area devoted to vehicular ingress/egress easements); e. The existing zoning of the subject parcel(s); f. Location of all existing driveways on the subject parcel(s); and g. The lot lines of adjoining properties for a distance of at least 50 feet. 2. A title company certification which is not more than 30 calendar days old containing: a. A legal description of the total parcel(s) sought to be adjusted; b. A list of those individuals, corporations, or other entities holding an ownership interest in the parcel(s); c. Any easements or restrictions affecting the property(ies) with a description, purpose and reference by auditor's file number and/or recording number; d. Any encumbrances on the property; and e. Any delinquent taxes or assessments on the property. E. Fee. The application fee shall be as set in Chapter 15.00 ECDC. F. Expiration. An application for a lot line adjustment shall expire one year after a complete application has been filed with the city. An extension up to an additional year may be granted by the Edmonds planning manager or his/her designee upon a showing by the application of reasonable cause. G. Review. A certified determination of the planning manager or his/her designee may be appealed to the hearing examiner as a Type II decision as set forth in Chapter 20.06 ECDC. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3736 § 63, 2009; Ord. 3211 § 1, 1998]. 20.75.055 Lot combination. A. Lot Combination Defined. A lot combination is the combination of two or more legal, illegal, or nonconforming lots into one or more lots, all of which comply with the provisions of this code in effect at the time of said combination. B. An application for lot combination shall be signed for by all individuals or entities owning an interest in the property. The application fee shall be the same as the fee established for lot line adjustments. C. Lot combinations shall be approved as a matter of right unless the development services director finds that the combination of lots would: 1. Not result in legal conforming lot; and/or 2. Not be in compliance with the goals and objectives of the city's comprehensive plan. The director shall, as a part of his decision, determine whether or not the lots, as combined, negatively impact compliance with the x city's urban density requirements as established pursuant to the State Growth Management Act, comprehensive w plan and the Snohomish County planning policies. c m D. The director's decision shall be issued in writing and shall be mailed to all properties within 300 feet of the site. Appeal may be taken from the director's decision within 10 working days of mailing of the decision and posting M Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 145 4.10.d Edmonds Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS Page 6/14 thereof in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 20.06 ECDC. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3736 § 64, 2009; Ord. 3296 § 2, 2000]. 20.75.060 Required information on preliminary plats. A preliminary plat is a neat and approximate drawing to scale of a proposed division of land, showing the existing conditions and the general proposed layouts of streets, lots and other information needed to properly review the proposal. The preliminary plat of a short subdivision may be referred to as a short plat. A preliminary plat shall be prepared by a professional land surveyor registered in the state of Washington. The scale used shall be sufficient to show clearly all details of the proposal. A scale of 50 feet to the inch is preferred; other engineering scales may be used, if necessary. Preliminary plats for formal subdivisions shall not exceed a size of 24 inches by 36 inches. Short plats shall be on an 8-1/2-by- 11 -inch page. The following information shall be shown on the plat: A. The name, if any, of the proposed subdivision; B. Sufficient description to define the location and boundaries of the proposed subdivision; C. Name, address, seal and signature of the land surveyor who prepared the map; D. A vicinity sketch; E. Date prepared or revised, scale, north point, quarter section, section, township and range number; F. Total acreage of the land to be divided, and area in square feet of each proposed lot; G. Existing zoning, and zoning boundaries, if any; H. Lot dimensions and numbers; I. Setback lines required by the existing or proposed zoning, if the proposed lot has an unusual shape, steep topography, or other unusual limitations on its building site; J. Any existing property lines within, or adjacent to, the proposed subdivision, and the names of the owners of adjacent property; K. Contour lines in areas to be developed shall be at five-foot intervals, or as specified by the eonurtunity development services director. Ten -foot intervals may be used in areas not to be developed. All contour lines shall be extended into adjacent property a sufficient distance to show the topographical relationship of adjacent property to the proposed subdivision; L. The location, name and width of all existing and proposed street rights -of -way, or easements within or adjacent to the proposed subdivision, the grade or proposed streets and the pavement location of existing and proposed streets; M. The location of all existing structures within the proposed subdivision and within 25 feet of the proposed subdivision. Public area or areas to be owned in common by the lot owners, if any; N. The location of tree -covered areas, with the location of individual trees over eight inches in diameter in areas as requested by the planning development services director; O. A preliminary grading plan or profile of proposed roads if more than 500 cubic yards of earth is to be removed; P. A preliminary drainage proposal as specified in Chapter 18.30 ECDC, showing existing and proposed drainage facilities for the site and the adjacent areas; Q. A statement of improvements to be installed; R. The location of known or suspected soil or geological hazard areas, water bodies, creeks and areas subject to flooding; Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 146 4.10.d Edmonds Page 7/14 Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS S. Possible future lot lines if any is large enough to allow future division; T. Location of existing underground utility lines, sewer and water mains adjacent to or within the proposed subdivision; U. Other information that may be required by the community development services director in order to properly review the proposed subdivision, including information needed to determine the environmental impact of the proposal. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3296 § 1, 2000. Formerly 20.75.055.]. 20.75.065 Preliminary review. A. Responsibility for Review. The eawAntmity development services director, or a designated planning staff member, is in charge of administering the preliminary review of all subdivisions. The public works director and the fire department, and other departments if needed, shall participate in preliminary review by appropriate recommendations on subjects within their respective areas of expertise. B. Notice of Hearing. 1. When the director of development services has accepted a subdivision for filing, he shall set a date of hearing, and give notice of the hearing as provided in ECDC 20.03.003, and by the following for a formal subdivision: a. One publication in a newspaper of general circulation within Snohomish County pursuant to Chapter 1.03 ECC and posting notice in three conspicuous places within 300 feet of any portion of the boundary of the proposed formal subdivision not less than 10 working days prior to the hearing. b. Mailing to a city if a proposed formal subdivision is adjacent or within one mile of the city's boundary, or the proposed subdivision would use the utilities of the city. c. Mailing to the county if a proposed formal subdivision is adjacent to the city -county boundary. d. Mailing to the State Department of Highways if a proposed formal subdivision is adjacent to a state highway right-of-way. e. The notice must include a legal description and either a vicinity location sketch or a location description in nonlegal language. C. Time Limits for Staff Review. Staff review shall be completed within 120 days from the date of filing. D. Formal Subdivision Review. The hearing examiner shall review a formal subdivision as a Type III -A decision in accordance with provisions of Chapter 20.06 ECDC. E. Short Subdivisions — Staff Review. The director of development services shall review a short subdivision as a Type II decision (Staff decision — Notice required). F. Appeal of Staff Decision. Any person may appeal to the hearing examiner a Type II decision of the eemffmaity� development services director on a short subdivision under the procedure set forth in Chapter 20.06 ECDC. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3817 § 12, 2010; Ord. 3783 § 12, 2010; Ord. 3775 § 12, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 65, 2009; Ord. 3211 §§ 4, 5, 1998; Ord. 3112 §§ 17, 18, 19, 1996; Ord. 2379 § 2, 1983]. 20.75.070 Formal subdivision — Time limit. The city council shall make its final decision on a proposed formal subdivision within 90 days of the date of filing, 4 unless the applicant agrees to extend the time. Where applicable, additional time needed to prepare and circulate an environmental impact statement shall not be included within said 90 days. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3783 § 13, 2010; Ord. 3775 § 13, 2010]. w 20.75.075 Modifications. m A. Request. Request for a modification to a requirement of this chapter shall be made on the regular subdivision E t application form. The applicant shall state reasons to support the approval of the requested modification. Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 147 4.10.d Edmonds Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS Page 8/14 B. Notice. The notice of the public hearing at which the applicant's proposed subdivision will be considered shall contain a description of the proposed modification. C. Consideration. The proposed modification shall be considered in the same manner as the proposed subdivision. The modification may be approved, or recommended for approval, only if all of the required findings set forth in Chapter 20.85 ECDC (Variances) can be made. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3211 § 6, 1998]. 20.75.080 General findings. A proposed subdivision may be approved only if all of the following general findings can be made for the proposal, as approved or as conditionally approved: A. Subdivision Ordinance. The proposal is consistent with the purposes of this chapter (as listed in ECDC 20.75.020) and meets all requirements of this chapter. B. Comprehensive Plan. The proposal is consistent with the provisions of the Edmonds Comprehensive Plan, or other adopted city policy, and is in the public interest. C. Zoning Ordinance. The proposal meets all requirements of the zoning ordinance, or a modification has been approved as provided for in this chapter. D. Floodplain Management. The proposal meets all requirements of the Edmonds Community Development Code relating to floodplain management. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 2466, 1984]. 20.75.085 Review criteria. The following criteria shall be used to review proposed subdivisions: A. Environmental. 1. Where environmental resources exist, such as trees, streams, ravines or wildlife habitats, the proposal shall be designed to minimize significant adverse impacts to the resources. Permanent restrictions may be imposed on the proposal to avoid impact. 2. The proposal shall be designed to minimize grading by using shared driveways and by relating street, house site and lot placement to the existing topography. 3. Where conditions exist which could be hazardous to the future residents of the land to be divided, or to nearby residents or property, such as floodplains, steep slopes or unstable soil or geologic conditions, a subdivision of the hazardous land shall be denied unless the condition can be permanently corrected, consistent with subsections (A)(1) and (2) of this section. 4. The proposal shall be designed to minimize off -site impacts on drainage, views and so forth. B. Lot and Street Layout. 1. Lots shall be designed to contain a usable building area. If the building area would be difficult to develop, the lot shall be redesigned or eliminated, unless special conditions can be imposed on the approval which will ensure that the lot is developed properly. 2. Lots shall not front on highways, arterials or collector streets unless there is no other feasible access. Special access provisions, such as shared driveways, turnarounds or frontage streets may be required to minimize traffic hazards. 3. Each lot shall meet the applicable dimensional requirements of the zoning ordinance. 4. Pedestrian walks or bicycle paths shall be provided to serve schools, parks, public facilities, shorelines and streams where street access is not adequate. C. Dedications. Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 148 4.10.d Edmonds Page 9/14 Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS 1. The city eottnei1-may require dedication of land in the proposed subdivision for public use. 2. Only the city council may approve a dedication of park land to satisfy the requirements of ECDC 20.75.090. The council may request a review and written recommendation from the planning advisory board. 3. Any approval of a subdivision shall be conditioned on appropriate dedication of land for streets, including those on the official street map and the preliminary plat. D. Improvements. 1. Improvements which may be required, but are not limited to, streets, curbs, pedestrian walks and bicycle paths, sidewalks, street landscaping, water lines, sewage systems, drainage systems and underground utilities 2. The person or body approving a subdivision shall determine the improvements necessary to meet the purposes and requirements of this chapter, and the requirements of: a. ECDC Title 18, Public Works Requirements; b. Chapter 19.25 ECDC, Fire Code, as to fire hydrants, water supply and access. This determination shall be based on the recommendations of the eommunity development services director, the public works director, and the fire chief. 3. The use of septic systems may be approved if all of the following conditions are met: a. It is more than 200 feet, multiplied by the number of lots in the proposed subdivision, from the nearest public sewer main to the nearest boundary of the land to be divided. b. The land to be divided is zoned RS-20. c. The public works director and city health officer determine that soil, drainage and slope conditions are satisfactory for septic use and that all requirements of WAC 248-96-090 are met. E. Floodplain Management. All subdivision proposals shall comply with the criteria set forth in the Edmonds Community Development Code for floodplain management. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3211 § 7, 1998; Ord. 2466, 1984]. 20.75.090 Park land dedication. A. Dedication or In -Lieu of Fee Required. Before or concurrent with the approval of the final plat of any subdivision, the subdivider shall dedicate land, pay a fee in -lieu of dedication, or do a combination of both, for park and recreational purposes. B. Proposal of Dedication. Either the applicant or the city may propose dedication of a portion of the land to be divided in order to meet the regulations of this section. Payment of in -lieu fees is required unless dedication is proposed and approved. C. Review of Dedications. Dedication proposals shall be reviewed at the same time as the subdivision proposal. Any short subdivision containing a dedication proposal shall be reviewed as if it were a formal subdivision. D. Factors for Review. Dedication proposals shall be reviewed for consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, the Comprehensive Parks and Recreation Plan, and the Recreational Walks Plan. Other factors to be considered include size, usability and accessibility of the land proposed for dedication, and the possibility of coordinating dedication by }' owners of adjacent land. x w E. In -Lieu Fee. In -lieu park fees shall be as set in Chapter 15.00 ECDC. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. +; c m E t Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 149 4.10.d Edmonds Page 10/14 Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS 20.75.100 Preliminary approval — Time limit. w N A. Approval of a preliminary plat shall expire and have no further validity at the end of the time period established under RCW 58.17.140, unless the applicant has acquired final plat approval prior to the expiration date established o under RCW 58.17.140. The time period for subdivisions shall commence upon the date of preliminary plat approval d by the issuance of a written decision by the Edmonds hearing examiner. In the event that the decision of the hearing M examiner is appealed to the Edmends eitt, ,.,.,,. ei anEWT Snohomish County superior court, the time period shall commence upon the date of final confirmation of the preliminary plat decision by the ^i r-judiciary. B. Approval of a short plat shall expire and have no further validity at the end of seven five years ifpreliminary is issued before December 31, 2013, five if is 3 short plat approval on or and years prelimi val Cl issued on or after Tana^ y' 'n' ^, unless the applicant has acquired final short plat approval within the specified c time period. The time period for short plats shall commence upon the issuance of a final, written staff decision. In M the event that the decision of staff is appealed to the Edmonds hearing examiner and/or Snohomish County superior c court, the time period shall commence upon the date of final confirmation of the preliminary short plat decision by the hearing examiner or judiciary. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3925 § 1, 2013]. 20.75.105 Extensions of time. c g A Repealed by Ord. 3190. [Ord. 2379 § 4, 1983]. U 20.75.107 PFelifHiHHFY HPPFOVal Time limit extension fOF pFeviousty appFoved shOFt plats. .r L date the in this ha-ve their- d effeetive of or-difia-fiee eedified seetion shall pr-elifninar-y appr-evals autema4ieally extead a as have further the from the date sueh short plats shall expire and no validity at end oftwo years eff-eetive ofthe in this the has final the ordinance codified seetion, unless applicant aequired short plat approval within speeified time Notice the two from the date the in this M period. of year extension effective of ordinance eodified seetion shall J be to the 4070 1 1), provided parties ofreeord of such preliminary short plats. [Ord. § (Exh. > , N M C 20.75.110 Changes. T A. Preliminary Plats. The eaffwmaityLdevelopment services director may approve as a Type Il-decision (Sta€ O decision Notice required) minor changes to an approved preliminary plat, or its conditions of approval. If the N proposal involves additional lots, rearrangements of lots or roads, additional impacts to surrounding property, or other major changes, the proposal shall be reviewed in the same manner as the original application. Application fees shall be as set in Chapter 15.00 ECDC. m B. Recorded Final Plats. An application to change a final plat that has been filed for record shall be processed in the E aV same manner as a new application. This section does not apply to affidavits of correction. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3736 § 66, 2009]. V w 20.75.120 Review of improvement plans. 0 A. Timing. If improvements are required as a condition of preliminary approval of a subdivision, the applicant shall c submit the improvement plan to the director of public works for review and approval, allowing sufficient time for N L proper review before expiration of the preliminary plat approval. a M B. Engineered Design. All improvement plans shall be prepared, dated, signed and sealed by a licensed engineer z V registered in the state of Washington, unless the public works director determines that engineer plans are not necessary. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. C 20.75.130 Installation of improvements. A. Timing and Inspection Fee. The applicant shall not begin installation of improvements until the public works director has approved the improvement plans, the public works director and the applicant have agreed in writing on z a time schedule for installation of the improvements, and the applicant has paid an inspection fee, as set in Chapter i j 15.00 ECDC. c m B. Completion — Bonding. The applicant shall either complete the improvements before the final plat is submitted for city council approval, or the applicant shall post a bond or other suitable surety to guarantee the completion of Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 150 4.10.d Edmonds Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS Page 11/14 the improvements within one year of the approval of the final plat. The bond or surety shall be based on the construction cost of the improvement as determined by the director of public works, and shall be processed as provided in Chapter 17.10 ECDC. C. Acceptance — Maintenance Bond. The director of public works shall not accept the improvements for the city of Edmonds until the improvements have been inspected and found satisfactory, and the applicant has posted a bond or surety for 15 percent of the construction cost to guarantee against defects of workmanship and materials for two years from the date of acceptance. D. Short Subdivision — Deferred Installation. If the eamffvdnity development services director determines that installation of improvements will not be needed at the time of the approval of the final plat of the short subdivision, the improvements shall be installed or guaranteed by bond before issuance of any development permit for any lot shown on the preliminary plat. This condition shall be stated on the final plat, and shall be binding on all later owners of lots created by the subdivision. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. 20.75.135 Preparation of final plat. A final plat is a final, precise drawing of a subdivision which conforms to the approved preliminary plat, and meets all conditions of the preliminary approval and all requirements of this chapter. It shall be prepared in accordance with the following: A. Surveyor. A professional land surveyor registered in the state of Washington shall prepare, or supervise the preparation of, the final plat. B. Survey. The surveyor shall survey the land to be divided, and as much of the section(s) in which the land is located as is needed to properly orient the land within the section(s). C. Monuments. The surveyor shall set monuments at street intersections, lot and block corners, boundary angle points, points of curbs in streets, controlling corners on the boundaries of the land, and other points as required by the public works director. The type of monuments and the method of setting shall be as specified by the public works director. D. Standards. The public works director shall set standards for the preparation of final plats. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. 20.75.140 Final plat — Required certificates. The following certificates shall be shown on the final plat. Subsections (A) through (G) of this section shall be signed by the indicated person before the final plat is submitted for review. Subsection (G) of this section is required for formal subdivision only. A. Surveyor. The surveyor shall place his seal and signature on the plat along with: 1. A statement certifying that the plat was prepared by him, or under his supervision; 2. A statement certifying that the plat is a true and correct representation of the land surveyed; 3. A full and correct description of the land to be divided. B. Owner. The owner shall certify that the subdivision has been made with his free consent and according to his desires. Owners of other interests shown on the title report shall certify that they have notice of the subdivision. C. Dedications. A certificate of dedication by the owner for all areas to be dedicated to the public, acknowledged by a notary. D. Waiver of Claims. A statement by the owner waiving all claims for damages against any governmental authority which may arise from the construction, drainage and maintenance of required improvements. E. Waiver of Access. If required by the conditions of the preliminary approval, a waiver by the owner of direct access to any street from any property. Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 151 4.10.d Edmonds Page 12/14 Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS F. Roads Not Dedicated. A statement or other clear indication by the owner if any street is not to be dedicated to the public. G. Health Officer. A statement by the city of Edmonds health officer certifying that the proposed means of sewage disposal and water supply are adequate. H. Director of Public Works. The following statements to be signed by the director of public works: 1. A statement approving the survey date, the layout of streets, alleys and other rights -of -way, design of bridges, sewage and water system and other structures; and approving the final plat or short subdivision. r. .resrzre!eves�� rsre,�e!�crsseesstisrse�n:ees:rsre saw sear�ese rs� I. Development Services Director. The following statements to be signed by the lunit}� development services director: 1. A statement that the final plat conforms to the approved preliminary plat and all conditions of the preliminary approval; and approving the final plat or shore subdivision. j. City Approval. A statement to be signed by the mayor and eity clerk that the eity council has approved the final plat of a formal subdivision or a short subdivision with a dedioation. K. Taxes. A statement to be signed by the county treasurer that all taxes and delinquent assessments for which the land to be divided may be liable as of the date of the signing of the statement have been paid. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. 20.75.145 Final plat — Accompanying material. The following material shall be submitted to the director of public works with the final plat: A. Review Fee. A review fee for the final plat as set in Chapter 15.00 ECDC shall be paid for each check or recheck of the final plat. B. Survey Notes. Complete field and computation notes of the plat survey showing the original or reestablished corners with descriptions and the actual traverse showing error of closure and method of balancing. A sketch showing all distances, angles and calculations required to determine corners and distances of the plat shall accompany this data. The allowable error of closure shall not exceed one foot in 5,000 feet. C. Title Report. A title report showing that ownership and other interests in the land described and shown on the final plat is in the name of the person signing the owner's certificate. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. 20.75.150 Waiver of survey. The director of public works may waive the requirement of a survey for the final plat in the following circumstances if there will be no adverse effect on the public interest: if the boundaries of the lot proposed for short subdivision have sufficient existing monuments to define the proposed lot lines. If the director of public works waives the survey requirements, the applicant shall prepare a final plat that meets all other requirements of this chapter and which contains legal descriptions of each proposed lot. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 14 1), 2017; Ord. 3211 § 9, 1998]. z 20.75.155 Review of final plat. i j A. Submission. The applicant may not file the final plat for review until the required improvement plans have been submitted for approval to the director of public works. m E t Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 152 4.10.d Edmonds Page 13/14 Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS B. Time Limit. A final plat shall be approved, disapproved or returned to the applicant for correction within 30 days of its official filing with the director of public works for review, unless the applicant agrees to extend the time limit. This time period shall not include required environmental review. C. Staff Review. The director of public works and the development services director shall conduct an administrative review the final plat of ^ formal subdivisio^and either sign the statements required by ECDC 20.75.140, if all requirements of this chapter have been met, or disapprove such action, stating their reasons in writing. Such administrative action shall be final subject onlright of appeal to the Snohomish County superior court. They shall then forward the final plat to the city council for a Type Al A decision after having signed statements required by EGDG 20.75.140 or attaching their recommendation for disapproval. ED. Acceptance of Dedication. Dedication of any interest in property contained in an approval of the formal subdivision shall be forwarded to the city council for formal acceptance on its consent agent; provided, however, that such acceptance shall not stay any approval, time period for appeal or the effective date of the formal subdivision. City eouneil approval of the final plat constitutes acceptance of all dedication shown on the final plat. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3736 § 67, 2009; Ord. 2991 § 1, 1994]. antic;ram=v�:e+ss+� �s:vzs� �. PAIL ,. ._ 20.75.160 Final plat — Filing for record. The city clerk shall file the final plat or short plat for record with the county auditor, and arrange for a reproducible copy to be sent to the public works department and the applicant and a paper copy to be sent to the county assessor and the een%+ffi*4y development services department. The plat or short plat shall not be considered "approved" until so filed with the county auditor. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. 20.75.165 Effect of rezones. The owner of any lot in a final plat filed for record shall be entitled to use the lot for the purposes allowed under the zoning in effect at the time of filing for five years from the date of filing the final plat for record, even if the property is rezoned; provided, that all requirements of the community development code, other than lot area, are met. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 20171. 20.75.170 Further division — Short subdivisions. LA M A further division of any lot created by a short subdivision shall be reviewed as and meet the requirements of this z V chapter for formal subdivision if the further division is proposed within five years from the date the final plat was filed for record; provided, however, that when a short plat contains fewer than four parcels, nothing in this section C shall be interpreted to prevent the owner who filed the original short plat, from filing a revision thereof within the five-year period in order to create up to a total of four lots within the original short subdivision boundaries. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 2623 § 1, 1987]. z 20.75.175 Court review. j i Any decision approving or disapproving any plat or short plat shall be reviewable for unlawful, arbitrary, capricious or corrupt action or nonaction by writ of review before the Superior Court of Snohomish County. The action may be E brought by any property owner in the city, who deems himself or herself aggrieved thereby; provided, that t application for a writ of review shall be made to the court within 30 days from any decision so to be reviewed. The Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 153 4.10.d Edmonds Chapter 20.75 SUBDIVISIONS Page 14/14 cost of transcription of all records ordered certified by the court for such review shall be borne by the appellant. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. 20.75.180 Development of lots not divided according to this chapter. No building permit, septic tank permit or other development permit shall be issued for any lot unless: (1) the subject property is a lot of record as defined in ECDC 21.55.015; or (2) the property owner is determined to be an innocent purchaser in accordance with subsection (A) of this section. Where this section authorizes a lot to be developed even though such lot does not meet the definition for "lot of record" in ECDC 21.55.015, any development on said lot shall comply with the city's development regulations, including any applicable development regulations regarding nonconforming lots. A. "Lot of Record" Status for Innocent Purchasers. An owner of property may obtain "lot of record" status for a parcel that does not meet the "lot of record" definition. To obtain this status, the applicant must submit an affidavit with sufficient supporting documentation to demonstrate that: 1. The applicant did not have actual notice regarding the subdivision of the property in question. If the applicant had knowledge of the subdivision (e.g., knowledge that two parcels in question were once part of the same parcel), but not of its illegality, the innocent purchase status may not be granted; 2. The purchase price of the parcel is consistent with an arm's length transaction; 3. The owner did not purchase the property from a relative; 4. At the time of purchase, there was some existing deed, record or survey showing the subject parcel as a separate lot; and 5. The parcel had a separate tax ID parcel number prior to the purchase of the property by the applicant. B. The innocent purchaser status may be approved subject to conditions of approval requiring the applicant to make improvements to the property that would likely have been required by the city had the property been properly subdivided, unless it is determined that such improvements have already been constructed. C. An affirmative determination of innocent purchaser and "lot of record" status shall be recorded with the county auditor. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017; Ord. 3982 § 3, 2014]. 20.75.185 Penalties. Any person who violates any provision of this chapter relating to the sale, offer for sale, lease or transfer of any lot is guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to the penalties of ECC 5.50.020. Each sale, offer for sale, lease or transfer of each separate lot in violation of any provision of this chapter shall be deemed a separate and distinct offense. In addition to these criminal sanctions, the city shall have the right to bring an action to restrain and enjoin any subdivision, sale or transfer, compel compliance with the provisions of this chapter and obtain other injunctive relief. The costs of such action shall be paid by the violator and shall include the city attorney's fees. [Ord. 4070 § 1 (Exh. 1), 2017]. Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 154 4.10.e Edmonds Page 1/12 17.00.030 Application of regulations. A. Code Compliance Required. All land in the city shall be used, and all buildings shall be built, structurally altered, or moved onto a site, only in compliance with all regulations of this zoning ordinance. B. Setbacks — Density. 1. Any setback, yard, minimum lot size, or open space required by this zoning ordinance for one use may not be used to meet minimum requirements of this zoning ordinance for any other use. 2. When an existing lot is subdivided, or is the subject of a lot line adjustment, the new lot lines will not make any existing improvements nonconforming to the regulations of this zoning ordinance. C. Public Structures and Uses. All public structures and uses built or altered by the city or any other public agency shall comply with this zoning ordinance. Where it is a public necessity to build, or alter, a structure or use in a location or in a manner not complying with this zoning ordinance, a variance may be considered. it this ease, the aetien of the hearing examiner- shall be a r-eeeffffneada4ion to the eit-y eetmeil. 17.40.020 Nonconforming building and/or structure. F. Restoration. If a nonconforming building or structure is destroyed or is damaged in an amount equal to 75 percent or more of its replacement cost at the time of destruction, said building shall not be reconstructed except in full conformance with the provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code. Determination of replacement costs and the level of destruction shall be made by the building official and shall be appealable as a Type II staff decision under the provisions of Chapter 20.06 ECDC. Damage of less than 75 percent of replacement costs may be repaired, and the building returned to its former size, shape and lot location as existed before the damage occurred, if, but only if, such repair is initiated by the filing of an application for a building permit which vests as provided in ECDC 19.00.025(G) et seq. within 18 months of the date such damage occurred. The director may grant a one-time extension of up to 180 days if a written extension request has been received from the applicant prior to the expiration of the initial 18 months. 2. Residential Buildings. Existing nonconforming buildings in commercial zones in use solely for residential purposes, or structures attendant to such residential use, may be reconstructed without regard to the limitations of subsections (E) and (F) of this section, if, but only if, the following conditions are met: a. If a nonconforming multifamily residential building or a mixed use building containing multiple residential units is damaged in excess of 75 percent of its replacement cost at the time of destruction, the building may be restored to the same density, height, setbacks or coverage as existing before the destruction or damage occurred if, but only if, an application for a building permit which vests as provided in ECDC 19.00.025(G) et seq. is filed within 18 months of the date the damage occurred. The director may grant a one-time extension of up to 180 days if a written extension request has been received from the applicant prior to the expiration of the initial 18 months. b. All provisions of the State Building and Electrical Codes can be complied with entirely on the site. No nonconforming residential building may be remodeled or reconstructed if, by so doing, the full use under state law or city ordinance of a conforming neighboring lot or building would be limited by such remodel or reconstruction. c. These provisions shall apply only to the primary residential use on site and shall not apply to nonconforming accessory buildings or structures. t d. A nonconforming residential single-family building may be rebuilt within the defined building w envelope if it is rebuilt with materials and design which are substantially similar to the original style and structure after complying with current codes. Substantial compliance shall be determined by the m city as a Type II staff decision_, exeept thm any appeal of the stag deeisie shall be to the Ar-ehiteetwal E Design Board (APB) ..a4he,. than to the hearing examine . The decision of the 4 DR hearing examiner shall be final and appealable only as provided in ECDC 24.47-.08620.06.160. Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 155 4.10.e Edmonds Page 2/12 3. The right of restoration shall not apply if. a. The building or structure was damaged or destroyed due to the unlawful act of the owner or the owner's agent; b. The building is damaged or destroyed due to the ongoing neglect or gross negligence of the owner or owner's agents; or c. The building was demolished for the purpose of redevelopment 17.40.025 Vested nonconforming or illegal accessory dwelling units. A. Illegal or nonconforming accessory dwelling units which registered with the city during the registration period which ended October 16, 2000, at 5:00 p.m. are hereby declared to be legal nonconforming detached and attached accessory dwelling units (ADU). Accessory dwelling unit (ADU) is defined in Chapter 20.21 ECDC. B. Once registered, a formerly illegal or nonconforming ADU shall enjoy all the protections and privileges afforded to a nonconforming building under the provisions of ECDC 17.40.020; provided, however, that sueh ADU T shall be - subject impose additional eonditions on the confinued use and eecupaney of the formerly illegal ADU if it is found to constitute a ' . sent a hazardous condition, or to revoke sueh registration and permit if a hazardous condition relating to the ADU is not abate . C. Legal nonconforming units which received a permit certificate confirming such status and listing the physical dimensions and other characteristics of the structure may be continued in accordance with such permit certificate, provided, however-, that the registration and permit of a formerly illegal ADU may be revoked and/or conditioned in accordance with the provisions of ECDC 20.100.040. D. Failure to register a structure within the time period established by the provisions of this section shall be considered to be presumptive proof that such a unit is an illegal unit and subject to abatement. The owner of such structure may overcome such a presumption only by presentation of substantial and competent evidence which establishes the legal nonconforming nature of such building by clear and convincing evidence that the structure was permitted by Snohomish County or the city of Edmonds, was permitted by such agency and was in complete compliance with the applicable provisions of state law and county or city ordinance, at the dates such construction was initiated and was completed. [Ord. 3696 § 1, 2008]. 17.100.030 Conditional use permits (CUP) — Community churches and schools requiring a CUP. A. All new churches and schools and any nonconforming church or school whose review has been triggered pursuant to ECDC 17.40.050 shall register with the staff on a form developed for its use. The staff shall determine which churches qualify as neighborhood churches; churches failing to register shall be presumed to be community churches. B. Decisions to approve, condition, or deny a CUP; to review a CUP; or decline to renew a CUP shall be a Type III- t-B decision. [Ord. 3783 § 6, 2010; Ord. 3775 § 6, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 23, 2009; Ord. 3353 § 12, 2001]. 19.00.025 International Building Code section amendments. I. Section 105.5, Permit expiration and extension, is amended to read: 1. Every permit issued under ECDC Title 19 shall expire by limitation 360 days after issuance, except as provided in ECDC 19.00.025I(2). Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 156 Edmonds Page 3/12 4.10.e 2. The following permits shall expire by limitation, 180 days after issuance and may not be extended, unless they are associated with a primary building permit for a larger construction project, in which case they may run with the life of the primary permit: Demolition permits; Permits for Moving Buildings required by Chapter 19.60 ECDC; Mechanical permits; Tank removal, tank fill, or tank placement permits; Grading, excavation and fill permits; Water service line permits; Plumbing permits; Gas piping permits; Deck and dock permits; Fence permits; Re -roof permits; Retaining wall permits; Swimming pool, hot tub and spa permits; Sign permits; Shoring permits; Foundation permits. 3. Prior to expiration of an active permit the applicant may request in writing an extension for an additional year. Provided there has been at least one (1) required progress inspection conducted by the city building inspector prior to the extension, the permit shall be extended. Permit fees shall be charged at a rate of one quarter the original building permit fee to extend the permit. 4. If the applicant cannot complete work issued under an extended permit within a total period of two (2) years, the applicant may request in writing, prior to the second year expiration, an extension for a third and final year. Provided there has been at least one (1) required progress inspection conducted by the city building inspector after the previous extension, the permit shall be extended. Permit fees shall be charged at a rate of one quarter the original building permit fee to extend the permit. 5. The maximum amount of time any building permit may be extended shall be a total of three 6 (3) years. At the end of any three (3) year period starting from the original date of permit issuance, the permit shall become null and void and a new building permit shall be required, with full permit fees, in order for the applicant to complete work. The voiding of the prior x w permit shall negate all previous vesting of zoning or Building codes. Whenever an appeal is }; filed and a necessary development approval is stayed in accordance with ECDC 20.07.00420.06.040 the time limit periods imposed under this section shall also be stayed E until final decision. Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 157 4.10.e Edmonds Page 4/12 6. The building official may reject requests for permit extension where he determines that modifications or amendments to the applicable zoning and Building codes have occurred w since the original issuance of the permit and/or modifications or amendments would d significantly promote public health and safety if applied to the project through the issuance of c a new permit. a 16 20.02.007 Notice of final decision. (MOVED FROM ECDC 20.06.009) .2 A. The director shall issue a notice of final decision within 120 days of the issuance of the determination of completeness pursuant to ECDC 20.02.003; provided, that the time period for issuance of a notice of final decision on a preliminaU plat shall be 90 days, for a final plat 30 days, and a final short plat 30 days. The notice shall include the SEPA threshold determination for the proposal and a description of any available administrative appeals. For CI Type II, III and IV permits, the notice shall contain the requirements set forth in ECDC 20.06.060(C) and explain that affected property owners may request a change in property tax valuation notwithstandine any program of revaluation. c 1. The notice of final decision shall be mailed or otherwise delivered to the applicant, to any person who submitted comments on the application or requested a copy of the decision, and to the Snohomish Counter assessor. c An 2. Notice of the decision shall be provided to the public by any means deemed reasonable by the director. C B. In calculating the 120-day period for issuance of the notice of final decision, or other decision period specified in r E subsection (A) of this section, the following periods shall be excluded: `m IL 1. Any period during which the applicant has been requested by the director to correct plans, perform required LO studies, or provide additional required information. The period shall be calculated from the date the director notifies the applicant of the need for additional information until the earlier of the dates the director determines that the additional information provided satisfies the request for information, or 14 days after the date the additional information is provided to the city; c 2. If the director determines that the information submitted is insufficient, the applicant shall be informed of the deficiencies and the procedures set forth in subsection (B)(1) of this section for calculating the exclusion period shall apply; O 3. Any period during which an environmental impact statement (EIS) is being prepared pursuant to Chapter 43.21 C RCW and Chapter 20.15A ECDC. The time period for preparation of an EIS shall be governed by d E Chapter 20.15A ECDC; c d 4. Any period for consideration and issuance of a decision for administrative appeals of development project Q permits, which shall be not more than 90 dayspen record appeals and 60 days for closed record appeals, C unless a longer period is agreed to by the director and the applicant; V w 5. Any extension of time mutually greed to by the director and the applicant in writing_ L C. The time limits established in this title do not apply if a permit application: d 1. Requires an amendment to the comprehensive plan or a development regulation; r 2. Requires siting approval of an essential public facility as provided in RCW 36.70A.200; or 3. Is a Type IV permit process identified in ECDC 20.01.003.A. z x 4. Is substantially revised by the applicant, in which case the time period shall start from the date that a w determination of completeness for the revised application is issued by the director pursuant to ECDC 20.02.003 and RCW 36.70B.070. [Ord. 3817 § 5, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 20091. E z Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 158 4.10.e Edmonds Page 5/12 20.05.020 General requirements. A. Review. The hearing examiner shall review and decide on conditional use permit applications as Type III-A-B decisions as set forth in ECDC 20.01.003. B. Appeals. The hearing examiner decisions on conditional use permit shall be appealable to the city council in accordance with Chapter 20.06 ECDC. A-^ Ig shallSnohomish be to the County s accordance ourt i ..it the Land Use Petition Act. C. Time Limit. Unless the owner obtains a building permit or, if no building permit is required, substantially commences the use allowed within one year from the date of approval, the conditional use permit shall expire and be null and void, unless the owner files an application for an extension of time before the expiration date. D. Review of Extension Application. An application for any extension of time shall be reviewed by the community development director as a Type II decision. E. Location. A conditional use permit applies only to the property for which it has been approved and may not be transferred to any other property. F. Denial. A conditional use permit application may be denied if the proposal cannot be conditioned so that the required findings can be made. [Ord. 3783 § 7, 2010; Ord. 3775 § 7, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 37, 2009; Ord. 2270 § 1, 1982]. 20.08.040 Approval procedure for development agreements. A development agreement is a Type IV development project permit application and shall be processed in accordance with the procedures established in this title. A development agreement shall be approved by the Edmonds city council after a public hearing. [Ord. 3817 § 7, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 4 (Exh. A), 2009]. 20.11.010 Review procedure — General design review. A. Review. The architectural design board (ADB) shall review all proposed developments that require a threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). All other developments may be approved by staff as a Type I decision. When design review is required by the ADB, proposed development shall be processed as a Type III-B-A decision. The role of the ADB shall be dependent upon the nature of the application as follows: 1. The ADB shall conduct a public hearing for the following types of applications: a. Applications that are not consolidated as set forth in ECDC 20.01.002(B). b. Applications that are consolidated as set forth in ECDC 20.01.002(B) but in which the ADB serves as the sole decision -making authority. c. Applications that are consolidated as set forth in ECDC 20.01.002(B) but in which all decision -making authority is exercised both by staff, pursuant to this chapter and Chapter 20.13 ECDC, and by the ADB. The ADB shall act in the place of the staff for these types of applications. 2. The ADB shall review proposed developments at public meetings without a public hearing and make recommendations to the hearing examiner to approve, conditionally approve, or deny proposals for developments that, although consolidated as set forth in ECDC 20.01.002(B), are not subject to a public hearing by the ADB under subsection (A)(1) of this section. The hearing examiner shall subsequently hold a public hearing on the proposal. t k 3. The ADB under subsection (A)(1) of this section and the hearing examiner under subsection (A)(2) of this w section shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny the proposal. The ADB or hearing examiner may continue its public hearing on the proposal to allow changes to the proposal, or to obtain information needed to properly review the proposal. See ECC 3.13.090 regarding exemptions from review required by this chapter. Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 159 4.10.e Edmonds Page 6/12 4. Notwithstanding any contrary requirement, for a development in which the city is the applicant, the action of the ADB under subsection (A)(1) of this section and the hearing examiner under subsection (A)(2) of this section shall be a recommendation to the city council. B. Notice. Public notice by mail, posting or newspaper publication shall only be required for applications that are subject to environmental review under Chapter 43.21C RCW, in which case notice of the hearing shall be provided in accordance with Chapter 20.03 ECDC. [Ord. 3736 § 39, 2009; Ord. 3636 § 2, 2007]. 20.12.010 Applicability. The architectural design board (ADB) shall review all proposed developments that require a threshold determination under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) using the process set forth in ECDC 20.12.020. All other developments may be approved by staff as a Type I decision using the process set forth in ECDC 20.12.030. When design review is required by the ADB under ECDC 20.12.020, the application shall be processed as a Type III-B-A decision. [Ord. 3736 § 42, 2009; Ord. 3636 § 3, 2007]. 20.11.040 Appeals. All design review decisions of the hearing examiner or the ADB are appealable to superior court in accordance with Chapter 36.70C RCW. appealable to the eity eetmeil as :a^a in Chapter- 29n7EGDC [Ord. 3736 § 40, 2009; Ord. 3636 § 2, 2007]. 20.12.080 Appeals. A. Design review decisions by the ADB pursuant to ECDC 20.12.020(B) are appealable to superior court in accordance with Chapter 36.70C RCW.appealable to the city council as ide i Chapter 20.07 Errs These are the only decisions by the ADB in this chapter that are appealable. B. All design review decisions of the hearing examiner are appealable- to superior court in accordance with Chapter 36.70C RCW.te the eity eouneil as ided in Chapter- 20.07 Error C. Design review decisions by staff under the provisions of ECDC 20.12.030 are only appealable to the extent that the applicable building permit or development approval is an appealable decision under the provisions of the ECDC. Design review by staff is not in itself an appealable decision. [Ord. 3736 § 45, 2009; Ord. 3636 § 3, 2007]. 20.16.110 Reconsideration and appeal. Reconsideration of the hearing examiner's ruling shall be governed by ECDC 20.06.848150. Appeal of the hearing examiner's ruling shall be governed by Chapter 20.8-7-06 ECDC. [Ord. 3736 § 48, 2009; Ord. 3572 § 1, 2005; Ord. 3474 § 1, 2003]. 20.16.130 Building permit application. C A. Any building permit for an EPF approved under this chapter shall comply with all conditions of approval in the conditional use permit. In the event a building permit for an EPF is denied, suspended or revoked due to a failure to Ui comply, the department shall submit in writing the reasons for denial to the project sponsor. L B. No construction permits may be applied for prior to conditional use approval of the EPF unless the applicant signs a written release acknowledging that such approval is neither guaranteed nor implied by the department's M acceptance of the construction permit applications. The applicant shall expressly accept all financial risk associated with preparing and submitting construction plans before the final decision is made under this chapter. C. Building permits for an EPF which fail to comply with the conditions of approval shall be suspended and a report made to the director. The director shall institute a proceeding before the hearing examiner to permit the EPF's z x sponsor a hearing at which to show cause why its conditional use permit should not be revoked or further w conditioned. Such hearing shall be conducted as if it were a Type III-A-B decision in accordance with Chapter 20.06 ECDC. [Ord. 3736 § 49, 2009; Ord. 3572 § 1, 2005; Ord. 3474 § 1, 2003]. z 20.35.080 Review process. A. An application for a PRD has two stages. The first stage, the preliminary PRD, includes the following: Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 160 4.10.e Edmonds Page 7/12 1. Pre -Application Staff Review. The preliminary plans of the proposal shall be submitted to the planning manager for review and comment. This provides an opportunity for the developer to work with the city staff to design a total plan which best meets the goals of the city and the needs of the developer. Such potential problems as drainage, topography, circulation, site design and neighborhood impact should be identified and addressed before the proposal is submitted for formal review. 2. Pre -Application Neighborhood Meeting. The applicant shall host a public pre -application neighborhood meeting to discuss and receive public comment on the conceptual proposal. The applicant shall provide notice of this meeting to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject site by depositing written notice in the U.S. Mail postage paid at least 14 calendar days in advance of the meeting to all persons and entities shown as having an ownership interest in the land records of Snohomish County. An affidavit of mailing shall be provided to the city by the applicant attaching its mailing list. While this meeting will allow immediate public response to the proposal in its conceptual form, comments submitted during this meeting are not binding to the applicant or staff. However, staff may make general recommendations to the applicant as part of the formal application based on the input from this meeting to the extent that said comments are consistent with the adopted provisions of the Edmonds Community Development Code and the comprehensive plan. As a courtesy, the applicant shall provide summary minutes of the meeting to all of those in attendance within two weeks of the date of the meeting. 3. Review by the Architectural Design Board. The design board will review the project for compliance with the urban design guidelines, landscaping, and/or the single-family design criteria in ECDC 20.35.060 and forward their recommendation of the site and building design on to the hearing examiner for his consideration. Their review will be at one of their regularly scheduled meetings, but will not include a public hearing or the ability for the public to comment on the project. 4. The Public Hearing with the Hearing Examiner. The hearing examiner shall review the proposed PRD for compliance with this section as a Type III-B-A decision. If, after all appeals are exhausted, the proposal is denied, a similar plan for the site may not be submitted to the development services department for one year. A new plan which varies substantially from the denied proposal, as determined by the development services director, or one that satisfies the objections stated by the final decision -maker may be submitted at any time. An applicant who intends to subdivide the land for sale as part of the project shall obtain subdivision approval in accordance with Chapter 20.75 ECDC before any building permit or authorization to begin construction is issued, and before sale of any portion of the property. The preferred method is for the applicant to process the subdivision application concurrently with the planned residential development proposal. B. The second stage of the PRD process, the final PRD, consists of the city's review of the final plans for consistency with the preliminary PRD as approved. The decision at this stage will be made by city staff ••� plat.final PRD is submit4ed as a eanselida4ed appliemieff with a per-ff�t that requir-es eity eeidneil review, i.e., a formal subdivision The final PRD will be subject to the following review: 1. The applicant shall submit the final development plan to the development services director, conforming to 3 the preliminary plan as approved, and all applicable conditions of that approval. The planning manager shall M review the plan along with the city engineer and make a final decision. The plan shall contain final, precise drawings of all the information required by ECDC 20.35.030. The applicant shall also submit all covenants, homeowners' association papers, maintenance agreements, and other relevant legal documents. `O 2. If city staff finds that the final development plan conforms to the preliminary approval, and to all applicable conditions, staff shall approve the plan and its accompanying conditions as a covenant which touches and w concerns the subject property, incorporating by reference all maps, drawings and exhibits required to specify the precise land use authorized. A file shall be maintained by the development services department containing all maps and other documents or exhibits referred to in the approval. The approval shall also contain a legal z description of the boundary of the proposal. The covenant shall be recorded with the county auditor if no subdivision plat is to be recorded. Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 161 4.10.e Edmonds Page 8/12 3. The provisions of approval shall be restrictions on the development of the site. Revocation of approval or abandonment as provided in this chapter shall eliminate all requirements imposed under the planned residential development plan, such as alternative bulk development standards, and shall cause the old underlying bulk development standards to be in full force and effect. [Ord. 3822 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3787 § 3, 2010; Ord. 3465 § 1, 2003]. 20.45.050 Review of changes to Edmonds register of historic places properties. A. Review Required. No person shall change the use, construct any new building or structure, or reconstruct, alter, restore, remodel, repair, move or demolish any existing property on the Edmonds register of historic places or within a historic district on the Edmonds register of historic places without review by the commission and without receipt of a certificate of appropriateness, or in the case of demolition, a waiver, as a result of the review. The review shall apply to all features of the property, interior and exterior, that contribute to its designation and are listed on the nomination form. Information required by the commission to review the proposed changes are established in rules. B. Exemptions. The following activities do not require a certificate of appropriateness or review by the commission: ordinary repair and maintenance which includes painting or emergency measures defined in ECDC 20.45.000 (K). C. Review Process. 1. Requests for Review and Issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness or Waiver. The building or zoning official shall report any application for a permit to work on a designated Edmonds register property or in an Edmonds register historic district to the commission. If the activity is not exempt from review, the commission shall notify the applicant of the review requirements. The building or zoning official shall not issue any such permit until a certificate of appropriateness or a waiver is received from the commission but shall work with the commission in considering building and fire code requirements. 2. Commission Review. The owner or his/her agent (architect, contractor, lessee, etc.) shall apply to the commission for a review of proposed changes on an Edmonds register property and request a certificate of appropriateness or, in the case of demolition, a waiver. Each application for review of proposed changes shall be accompanied by such information as is required by the commission established in its rules for the proper review of the proposed project. The commission shall meet with the applicant and review the proposed work according to the design review criteria established in rules. Unless legally required, there shall be no notice, posting or publication requirements for action on the application, but all such actions shall be made at regular meetings of the commission. The commission shall complete its review and make its recommendations within 30 days of the date of receipt of the application. If the commission is unable to process the request, the commission may ask for an extension of time. The commission's recommendations shall be in writing and shall state the findings of fact and reasons relied upon in reaching its decision. Any conditions agreed to by the applicant in this review process shall become conditions of approval of the permits granted. If the owner agrees to the commission's recommendations, a certificate of appropriateness shall be awarded by the commission according to standards established in the commission's rules. The commission's recommendations and, if awarded, the certificate of appropriateness, shall be transmitted to the building or zoning official. If a certificate of appropriateness is awarded, the building or zoning official may then issue the permit. 3. Demolition. A waiver of the certificate of appropriateness is required before a permit may be issued to allow whole or partial demolition of a designated Edmonds register property or in an Edmonds register historical z district. The owner or his/her agent shall apply to the commission for a review of the proposed demolition and j L request a waiver. The applicant shall meet with the commission in an attempt to find alternatives to demolition. These negotiations may last no longer than 45 days from the initial meeting of the commission, unless either E party requests an extension. If no request for an extension is made and no alternative to demolition has been E agreed to, the commission shall act and advise the official in charge of issuing a demolition permit of the 0 commission's decision on the waiver of a certificate of appropriateness. Conditions in the case of granting a Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 162 4.10.e Edmonds Page 9/12 demolition permit may include allowing the commission up to 45 additional days to develop alternatives to demolition. When issuing a waiver the commission may require the owner to mitigate the loss of the Edmonds register property by means determined by the commission at the meeting. Any conditions agreed to by the applicant in this review process shall become conditions of approval of the permits granted. After the property is demolished, the commission shall initiate removal of the property from the register. 4. Appeal of the Commission's Decision on a Waiver of a Certificate of Appropriateness. The commission's decision regarding a waiver of a certificate of appropriateness shall be appealable to the hearing examiner pursuant to Chapter 20.06 ECDC „ ay*^ pHeal^a o h ei ^^ ^�within 14 calendar days. The appeal must state the grounds upon which the appeal is based. The appeal shall be ^ ,^a by the eeufleil only en the ro eras of the ^ . Appeal of hearing examiner's decision regarding a waiver of a certificate of appropriateness may be appealed to superior court. [Ord. 3397 § 1, 2002]. 20.60.015 Design review procedures. A. Staff Approval. Except as referred to the architectural design board pursuant to subsection (A)(1) of this section, and except as provided in subsection (B) of this section, the planning manager, or designee, shall review all applications for design review under this chapter, and shall approve, conditionally approve or deny the application in accordance with the policies of ECDC 20.10.000 and the standards and requirements of this chapter; provided, that for murals and artwork the planning manager or designee shall review the application in accordance with the criteria set forth in subsection (C) of this section. The decision of the planning manager on any sign permit application shall be final except that signs reviewed by the architectural design board are appealable to the hearing examiner. 1. The planning manager or designee may refer design review applications to the architectural design board for the types of signs listed below, where the planning manager determines that the proposed sign has the potential for significant adverse impacts on community aesthetics or traffic safety: a. Any sign application for an identification structure as defined by this chapter; b. Any sign application for a wall graphic as defined by this chapter; c. Any proposed sign that the planning manager determines to be obtrusive, garish or otherwise not consistent with the architectural features of the surrounding neighborhood. B. Review by Architectural Design Board. The architectural design board shall review those signs listed in subsection (13)(1) of this section and any sign permit referred by the planning manager pursuant to subsection (A)(1) of this section. 1. The ADB shall review any sign permit application that requests a modification to any of the standards o V prescribed by this chapter. The ADB shall only approve modification requests that arise from one of the w following two situations: L a. The request is for signage on a site that has a unique configuration, such as frontage on more than two streets, or has an unusual geometric shape or topography; m b. The request is for signage on a building that has unique architectural elements or features or details that substantially restrict the placement or size of signage relative to other buildings in the vicinity. 2. The ADB may approve the requested modification only if it meets the following criteria: z x a. The design of the proposed signage must be compatible in its use of materials, colors, design and w proportions with development throughout the site and with similar signage in the vicinity; E b. In no event shall the modification result in signage which exceeds the maximum normally allowed by more than 50 percent. Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 163 4.10.e Edmonds Page 10/12 C. Staff Review of Murals and Artwork. When a proposed wall graphic is proposed as a mural or artwork, the planning manager or designee shall review and approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application in accordance with the following criteria. While a separate sign permit is required for each wall graphic, the staff may make a single design review decision on wall graphics that consist of related murals or artwork. Related murals or artwork may include multiple proposals for sites within reasonable proximity to each other that are related by theme, style, materials used, and/or context. The decision of the staff on any design review application containing a mural or art as a wall graphic may be appealed to the ^' e4hearing examiner pursuant to the procedure established in Chapter 20.06 ECDC. 1. Art, like other exercises of First Amendment rights, may be limited by reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions. In this case, these criteria will be utilized to enhance the aesthetics of the city and to ensure quality and maintenance standards are observed. No recommendation shall be based upon the content or message expressed by an artist or in a work of art. Applicants are encouraged to coordinate their artwork with the design or architectural elements of the building and the historic and pedestrian -oriented character of the downtown area. 2. Specific submission requirements for design review include, but are not limited to: a. Site sketch showing locations of artwork; b. Minimum one -fourth -inch scale color drawings of the art concept or art component; c. Material/color samples; d. Written Proposal. A written proposal in eight-and-one-half-inch-by-ll-inch format to include a description and summary of a final design proposal for the artwork; detailed maintenance requirements; a schedule for development, fabrication, and completion; artist's resume; and evidence of assumption of liability by applicant or designee; and e. When required pursuant to ECDC 20.45.050, a certificate of appropriateness shall be obtained from the historic preservation commission for murals on designated historic structures or within a designated historic district. 3. Review Criteria. Review criteria for the design review include: a. Quality of the materials used to create the artwork. Materials should be resistant to fading; no fluorescent paints; b. Durability and permanence, including ability to withstand age, vandalism, and weathering. Consideration should be given to anti -graffiti coating; and c. Compatibility of the artwork with architectural elements, other elements of the street, and adjacent structures. Compatibility shall be determined by relationships of the elements of form, proportion, scale, color, materials, surface treatment, and size and style of lettering. Lettering shall be minimized, but may be considered for inclusion when necessary to the artistic content. D. Notwithstanding the provisions of subsections (A), (B), and (C) of this section, sign permit applications shall not be referred to or reviewed by the architectural design board if the proposed sign constitutes a modification to an existing sign and involves no significant alteration or modification to the size, height, design, lighting or color of the existing sign. Sign permit applications for such sign modifications shall be processed and subject to review in the same manner as provided for staff review in subsection (A) of this section. [Ord. 4064 § 1 (Att. A), 2017; Ord. 4039 t § 1 (Att. A), 2016; Ord. 3800 § 1, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 60, 2009; Ord. 3461 § 2, 2003]. w m 20.85.020 General requirements. E A. Review. The hearing examiner shall review variances as Type III-A-B decisions in accordance with provisions of Chapter 20.06 ECDC. Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 164 4.10.e Edmonds Page 11/12 B. Appeals. ors he hearing examiner decisions on variance shall be to the Snohomish County superior ,.otu4 appealable to the city council in accordance with Chapter 20.06 ECDC..as providedin ECDC20.07.00. y C. Time Limit. The approved variance must be acted on by the owner within one year from the date of approval or rn d c the variance shall expire and be null and void, unless the owner files an application for an extension of time before a the expiration and the city approves the application. 6 .2 D. Review of Extension Application. An application for an extension of time shall be reviewed by the community 3 development director as a Type II decision (Staff decision - Notice required). E. Location. A variance applies only to the property for which it has been approved and may not be transferred to .y M CY any other property. [Ord. 3783 § 14, 2010; Ord. 3775 § 14, 2010; Ord. 3736 § 70, 2009]. c a� c 2 A. Scope. Any by the the development be this c permit approved eity under community code may reviewed under if the the being the the Edmonds being 0 section conditions of permit are not met, requirements of eity eode of are not - the hazardous A ineludes met, or permitted activit uisance or- eondition. permit any eity approval d under the community development oode. B. laitiation of o,,: v., A review under this seetion may be initiated by: r •E 1. The community development direetor; a) fA 2. An appreved motion of the eitt, eotmeil; C 3. An by the fee in Chapter 15.00 ECDC, three li i i J application, aeoompanied application set of persons dwellings leeated 300 feet the the th oelioeff tn- how the d C) separate within of site of allowed activity stating -As C subsection A of this section have been met. C C. Review Pr-eeedufe. Q 1. The director the in that the is being list the- (n of community serviees shall notify permittee vffiting permit reviewed, C d E 2. if the the defieieneies, but fails to do the time, the director C pefmittee eeuld feasenably eeFfeet so within speeified E the ,. nd tions of the permit-. Q V 3. if the to the defleieneies for the to the only reasonable ways eorreet are per-mittee eease permitted , the to impose the the director the <.i LU city new or ehanged conditions on permit, of eommunity servioes shall refer matte+ to the hear -in examiner for M L , required for the ofiginal pe tnit a -a ..,,l seetio A of this seetion. M ++ the permitted aetivity, the hearing examiner may revoke the permit. The hearing examiner's action shall be d appealable to the city eminc-iltmder- ECDC 20.1 00.0l10. t V Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 165 4.10.e Edmonds Page 12/12 7. if the permit is revoked, the permit shall be ntill and void, and all aetivivy allowed by the permit shall eease. . 3112 § 29 i ootii NEW SECTION 20.110.045 Suspension or revocation of permit. The city shall retain the right to suspend or revoke a permit issued under this development code that fails to comply with any conditions of approval of said permit, or which operates in a manner inconsistent with representation made in the application. The suspension or revocation of a permit maeappealed to the Hearing Examiner under Chapter 20.06. ECDC. Upon receipt of a timely appeal under Chapter 20.06 ECDC, suspension or revocation shall by stayed pending decision on the appeal; provided that such a stay shall affect any stop work order issued by the Director. Q The Edmonds City Code and Community Development Code are current through Ordinance 4098, passed February 20, 2018. Packet Pg. 166 4.10.f lot of geese, is the presence of dogs will disrupt their nesting. Councilmember Tibbott commented there is a park in his neighborhood where it is difficult to tell where the sports fields end and the park begins. He assumed that would be left to the owners discretion. He supported putting up signs in parks prohibiting smoking, vaping, etc. Councilmember Teitzel agreed with doing this on trial basis. He has two dogs so may be somewhat biased. He agreed people are more responsible although it was not 100%. He inquire about the fine if someone did not pick up after their dog. Ms. Hite said it was in a different chapter and she could provide it to Council. Councilmember Teitzel asked who is authorized to ticket someone not picking up after their dog. Ms. Hite answered the animal control officer and police officers. The Parks crews are the eyes in the park and can encourage/discourage behaviors but cannot write tickets. Councilmember Teitzel asked the cost of providing dog waste bags in additional locations. Ms. Hite estimated $5,000-$6,000. Council President Fraley-Monillas referred to 5.23.020, motor vehicle prohibited in City Parks, and the statement regarding battery operated vehicles, relaying when she thinks of a battery operated vehicle, she thinks of a Tesla. Ms. Hite recalled the Planning Board discussed battery operated uniwheels, scooters, etc. and their interest in keeping them on designated roadways not paths. Council President Fraley-Monillas suggested "battery operated devices." Council President Fraley-Monillas observed horses are not allowed in parks. Ms. Hite said the current language in the code does not allow horses and "unless used for ADA purposes" was added. Council President Fraley-Monillas recalled riding her horse from Woodway to City Park as a kid. She noted pigs had been added to the list of animals not allowed in parks unless utilized for ADA purposes. Ms. Hite said someone had pig in a park recently. Councilmember Nelson said these are common sense updates. Park hours sunrise to sunset is very common, he was surprised the City did not have something in the code prohibiting smoking, it will prohibit feeding wildlife on beaches and will alleviate confusion about where dogs are allowed. He supported making the change on a trial basis. Councilmember Mesaros relayed there are now battery powered bicycles. Ms. Hite said they are allowed everywhere bicycles are allowed. COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS TO APPROVE THE CHANGES AND PLACE AN ORDINANCE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL. MOTION CARRIED (6-0-1), COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS ABSTAINING. 7. ACTION ITEMS 1. LAND USE PERMIT DECISION -MAKING AND QUASI-JUDICIAL PROCESS Environmental Program Manager Kernen Lien advised he will provide an overview of the proposed code amendments. A packet includes a draft ordinance; he recommended approval on Consent following Department of Commerce's review. He reviewed: • ECDC 20.01.003 — Permit Type and Decision Framework Type I TypeII Type II-B TYPE III -A Type III-B Type IV Type V Zoning Compliance Letter Accessory dwelling unit Contingent critical area review Outdoor dining Essential public facilities :Final f4mFA plat Site specific rezone Development agreements Lot line adjustment Formal I interpretation of Shoreline 1 substantial Technical I impracticality ew i. Fiplal Plamwd Development Zoning text I amendment; area I agreements Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q June 18, 2019 Page 17 Packet Pg. 167 4.10.f the text of the development waiver for hearing b residential wide zoning map ECDC by the permit, where amateur radio areh eetu-al-al development amendments director public hearing antennas design eard not required is feqtlkft� per ECDC 24.80.100 Critical area SEPA Critical area Comprehensive determinations determinations variance lap amendments Shoreline Preliminary Contingent Conditional Annexations exemptions short plat critical area use permits review if (where public public hearing hearing by requested hearing examiner is required) Minor Land Shoreline Variances Development amendments to clearing/grading substantial regulations planned development residential permit where development public hearing is required per ECDC 24.80.100 Minor Revisions to Shoreline 149me preliminary plat shoreline conditional eeeupAien amendment management use pef ffli r-e permits publie hearing by heafing e�an3iner�s Staff design Administrative Shoreline pr�i review, including variances variance f4mal-plat signs Final short plat Land use permit Design Pr -el i ^,,.warp extension review planned requests where esi ial ublic dev hearing by architectural design board Lis required) Sales Guest house Preliminary office/model lap nned (ECDC residential 17.70.005) development Final formal Innocent plats purchaser determination Final planned residential development B. Optional Consolidated Permit Processing. An application that involves two or more procedures may be processed collectively under the highest numbered procedure required for any part of the application or may be processed individually under each of the application procedures identified in ECDC 20.01.003. The applicant may determine whether the application will be processed collectively or individually. If the applications are processed individually, the highest numbered type procedure shall be undertaken first, followed by the other procedures in sequence from the highest numbered to the lowest. When Type III -A and Type III-B permits are consolidated under this subsection, the proiect shall proceed under the Type III -A permit process. • Type IV -A: Subdivisions and PRDs o City Council approves final formal subdivisions and Planned Residential Developments Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q June 18, 2019 Page 18 Packet Pg. 168 4.10.f o All requirements of preliminary approval of been met o Often all of the subdivision improvements are installed prior to application for final approval o Senate Bill 5674 allows legislative authority to be delegated to administrative personnel o Amendments to ECDC 20.75 and ECDC 20.35 delegate City Council's role in reviewing final formal subdivisions ECDC 170.00.030 - Public Agency Variances o C. Public Structures and Uses. All public structures and uses built or altered by the city or any other public agency shall comply with this zoning ordinance. Where it is a public necessity to build, or alter, a structure or use in a location or in a manner not complying with this zoning ordinance, a variance may be considered. In this case, the action of the hearing examiner shall be a recommendation to the city council. ECDC 20.100.040 Review of Approved Permits o Conflicts with state law ■ Regulatory Reform Act, Chapter 36.70B RCW - One open record public hearing - ECDC 20.100.040 could result in endless public hearings ■ Land Use Petition Act, Chapter 36.70C RCW - "Finality" - Once a land use permit has been approved and no appeal has been timely filed, the land use permit can no longer by judicially appealed even if it did not comply with permitting criteria when approved (Chelan County v. Nykreim) - Habitat Watch v. Skagit County - Projects cannot be collaterally attacked through another administrative permit review process ■ New section ECDC 20.110.045 added to code enforcement chapter that all the City to suspend or revoke a permit that fails to comply with conditions of approval or which operates in a manner inconsistent with the representations made in the application ECDC 20.06 Open Record Public Hearings and 20.07 Closed Recording Public Hearings o Confusing cross references regarding appeals o Combine into a single chapter o Added some language for prehearing conferences o Added some details regarding briefing order, rebuttals and questions during hearings Development Agreements o Change Development Agreement from Type V legislative decision to a Type IV quasi-judicial decision with recommendation from the Planning Board to City Council o Council considers development agreement in closed record review o Likely process in conjunction with site specific rezone ... Councilmember Buckshnis thanked Mr. Lien for the recap, summarizing there will still be quasi-judicial review but not for large projects. Mr. Lien answered essentially yes, there are three type of permits appealable to the Council: essential public facilities, conditional use permits, and variances. Councilmember Buckshnis asked why Department of Commerce approval was required. Mr. Lien answered it is a change to a development regulation that requires notice to Commerce. For Councilmember Buckshnis, Mr. Lien described the combination of 20.06 and 20.07. Councilmember Tibbott asked how conflicts between the RCWs and ECDC were rectified. Mr. Lien answered 21.00.040 was deleted. Recognizing the City still wants the ability to suspend or revoke a permit that is not complying with conditions of approval or was achieved under false information, a new section, 20.110.045, was added to recognize the City's ability revoke a permit in certain situations. Councilmember Tibbott observed a development agreement was similar to a site specific rezone. It was his understanding there would not be a closed record review on development agreements; the Planning Board would provide a recommendation to the City Council. Mr. Lien explained currently development Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q June 18, 2019 Page 19 Packet Pg. 169 4.10.f agreements are a Type V legislative process which allows an open record hearing at the Planning Board and at the City Council. Moving it to a Type IV, the open record occurs at the Planning Board and a closed record review occurs at the City Council. Councilmember Tibbott asked about advantage of a closed record review. City Attorney Jeff Taraday referred to other Type V actions in the table such as zoning, text amendments, area wide zoning map amendments, comprehensive plan amendments, all things that are not one parcel and are appropriately Type V. Development agreements will usually have one applicant similar to a site specific rezone. It sets up a proponent -applicant situation and the Type IV process is more appropriate because of the site specific nature and the likelihood that one person will have a vested interest in lobbying for their application. Councilmember Tibbott assumed disclosures, potential disagreements with neighbors, etc. would be addressed during the Planning Board hearing but the City Council would not have opportunity to discover additional information. Mr. Taraday said if Council approved that change, the typical quasi-judicial limitations would apply to the development agreement such as no ex parte communication, no evidence outside the record, etc. Councilmember Tibbott asked how that is handled in other cities. Development Services Director Shane Hope answered it is mixed, one of the reason other cities have gone to a quasi-judicial process rather than a legislative was because at one time people thought of development agreements as a rezone opportunity specific to one property. Under state law an applicant for a development agreement cannot rezone the property. Councilmember Tibbott summarized development agreements have more limited use now. Councilmember Buckshnis said the City has not had any development agreements in the last 9 years. She agreed with having it be quasi-judicial and asked if a development agreement could be used as an incentive for a developer. She recalled Mr. Taraday saying development agreements were used in Seattle to encourage escalators. Mr. Taraday said the discussion Councilmember Buckshnis recalled pertained to incentive zoning rather than development agreements. Escalators can be incentivized via the zoning code. He said Ms. Hope was correct in saying that under state law development agreement have to be consistent with development regulations; an applicant cannot use a development agreement to create exceptions to development regulations. Where a development agreement was most likely to occur in Edmonds was an applicant proposing a site specific rezone combined with a development agreement that limits the use of the property to a particular use. In the past that was called a concomitant agreement, it is now called a development agreement. This would allow those two things to proceed together using the same Type IV process so the site specific rezone and the development agreement could be considered on a parallel track. For Councilmember Buckshnis, Mr. Lien explained a site specific rezone and development agreement would go to the Planning Board and then to the Council and any subsequent development would follow the appropriate process. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO MOVE THE ORDINANCE PROVIDED IN EXHIBIT 1 TO A FUTURE CONSENT AGENDA TO BE ADOPTED FOLLOWING THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOTICE PERIOD. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO EXTEND THE MEETING UNTIL 10:05 P.M. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS (Con't) 2. UTILITY RATE ANALYSIS & FUTURE ADOPTION OF A UTILITY RATE ORDINANCE Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes Q June 18, 2019 Page 20 Packet Pg. 170 6.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 07/2/2019 Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Discussion Staff Lead: Scott James Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Scott James Background/History Staff presented the draft Fund Balance Reserve Policy to the Full Council on May 7th to solicit feedback and suggested changes to the draft policy. During the meeting Council requested that the policy include additional information regarding the reserve replenishment plan. The draft policy has been updated to include to address this request as follows: 1) A timeline for when the replenishment plan would be presented to Council. 2) Who is responsible to preparing and presenting the plan. 3) Amount of reserves used. 4) Whether it is anticipated additional reserves will be needed in the following budget cycle, and 5) If no additional reserves are needed, then the report to Council must include a plan to replenish the used reserves. The City Council Finance Committee convened on June 11, 2019 to review attached draft of the Fund Balance / Reserve Policy that incorporated Council suggested changes noted above. The Finance Committee voted to bring the amended policy to Council tonight for approval. Here are the key takeaways from past Committee discussions: Finance Committee has the opinion that the Risk Management Reserve can be discontinued and balance of the Risk Management Reserve can be combined with the General Fund. The chart below shows use of Risk Management funds over the past five years. Ultimately, after Council discusses this as a study item, it will need to be brought back to Council for a formal vote to either keep or discontinue the fund. Prior Fn e Year of Risk Management Fund Expenditure History Year Expenditures 2018 so 2017 S81,277 2016 so 2015 S71,528 2014 so Description of Use None Expended Clain Settlement None Expended Claim Settlement None Expended % of General Fund Revenue Budget 0.0% 0.2% 0.0% 0.2% 0.0% Packet Pg. 171 6.1 There was consensus we need clearer financial policies to guide us as we move forward, especially with regard to fund balance and reserves. MRSC recommends reserves of at least 16% of operating expenses. There is currently a fairly wide range of reserve levels in nearby cities. Each city needs to consider how much risk they are willing to take as they establish reserve levels. Those that have stable revenue streams are prone to take more risk by maintaining reserve levels below 16% while those with greater revenue volatility have a more conservative approach and maintain reserves higher than that level. Attached to this Agenda Memo is a Fund Balance Reserve Policy Summary From Other Cities. There was agreement we need to keep our policies as simple as possible, recognizing there is a need for at enough detail to inform future administrators and Councilmembers of terminology and the need for certain reserve funds. The Committee agreed our policies should strive to maintain sufficient reserve levels to sustain city operations during economic downturns or natural disasters while not being excessive, as we don't want to create a "dead money" situation. The essential thing here is for Council to come to agree on what we believe is "sufficient" for reserve levels. The updated draft policy now calls for a total combined fund reserves not to exceed 20% of the Adopted General Fund Operating Revenue Budget. The 20% fund balance target shall 1) not exceed the limitations set forth by RCW 35A.33.145, which sets the statutory maximum at $0.375 per $1,000 of assessed valuation and 2) when combined with the General Fund Operating Reserve, the two fund balance reserves shall not exceed 20% of the General Fund's Adopted Annual Revenue Operating Budget. In other words, if the General Fund Operating Reserve balance equals 16% of operating budget, then the Contingent Reserve Fund balance cannot exceed 4% of the operating budget The current Fund Balance policy does not incorporate Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Pronouncement No.54. This pronouncement mandates the inclusion of Fund Balance Classifications in the City's Annual Financial Report (CAFR). The attachment includes a summary of this Pronouncement. Please see attachment: GASB 54 Fund Balance Classifications Summary. Staff Recommendation Review Amended policy and motion to approve Resolution adopting the Fund Balance / Reserve Policy. Narrative During the May 7, 2019 City Council meeting, Council requested that the Fund Balance / Reserve Policy be modified to include the following information regarding the reserve replenishment plan. The attached draft policy has been updated to include: 1) A timeline for when the replenishment plan would be presented to Council. 2) Who is responsible to preparing and presenting the plan. 3) Amount of reserves used. 4) Whether it is anticipated additional reserves will be needed in the following budget cycle, and 5) If no additional reserves are needed, then the report to Council must include a plan to replenish the used reserves. Attachments: 2019 July 2nd Fund Balance Presentation Resolution XXXX for Fund Balance Reserve Policy Draft City of Edmonds Reserve Management Policy For July 2019 GASB 54 Fund Balance Classifications Summary Packet Pg. 172 6.1 RCW 35A.33.145 Contingency Reserve Fund Limitations GFOA Fund Balance Guidelines for the General Fund Reserve Policy Fund Balance Reserve Policy Summary From Other Cities Which Finance Policies Work Best It Depends Packet Pg. 173 .FPC. 1 g9v 6.1.a Fund Balance / Reserve Policy T Purpose of Fund Balance /Reserve Policy a N d d t) C cC m "It is the of the Cityof Edmonds to policy O provide for the continuity of City-W d a` government by planning ahead for m economic uncertainties and unforeseen or N J ma unplanned major expenditures." CD p N Q Packet Pg. 174 Fund Balance / Reserve Policy .FPC. 1 g9v ➢ Review fund balance history ➢ Brief overview of policy ➢ Review draft amendments proposed by Council on May 7th Q &A ➢ Approve Resolution No. XXXX Adopting the Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Packet Pg. 175 `4e. ]Sy., $12, 000,0 00 $10, 000, 0 00 $8, 000,00 0 O 00 00 -1 00 00 M 000 00 O M $4,000,000 � N N Ln rl � t/} Lf) A/)- 00 rSI rl rl � $2,000,000 L00n N M $0 2007 2008 2009 6.1.a Fund Balance / Reserve Policy General Fund - Fund Balance Reserve History a d N d d t) C N ,Zt m n ^ n 7 0) 00 O O C 00 00 Ol Ll1 00 N 00 � G1 Lr i � �� o Lo 1O0 � a O Izt O 00 O 00 N d O lMD ^ rl lD LO AA- C �0 00 M 00 ^ O lD' Q1 M t/} In Lr Ln N i/? L(1 N M N C Vl M LL t/? C N 3 7 CD I C N C 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 t Fund Balance New Policy Fund Balance ■ Assigned Fund Balance Q Packet Pg. 176 ``Ic I S9 V $6,000,00 0 $5,000,00 0 $4, 000,00 0 $3,000,00 0 $2,000,00 0 $1,000,00 0 $0 6.1.a Fund Balance / Reserve Policy,,, Contingency Reserve Fund - Fund Balance Reserve History a m m m U c � o � m L6 v cl rn m 0 v 11 Lr; "� O r L Lr Ln V Lr)"' (Y) o � c N i cn a N cn k.0 Ln � rn O 00 00 i� i4 N 01 lU O N O ^ N i/► L IM n f V O (q V)- in C (V as 0 N CD E 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 ■ Fund Balance RCW Limited Fund Balance Q Packet Pg. 177 rPC. 18`)" Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Review Proposed Policy O IL m d N d d t) ➢ Article I introduces the purpose and objectives m ➢ Article II discusses criteria that should considered and include: 1. Volatility 2. Fund size 3. Purpose of reserve 4. Bond Ratings be C m c m LL N 0 CD Tmm Q Packet Pg. 178 rnC. 1 g9v Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Review Current Policy / Recommendations 0 N d N N ➢ Article III establishes the General Fund Operating 4 Reserve at 16% of General Fund Adopted Operating Expenditure Budget ➢ Limitations of Fund Use ➢ Reserve replenishment Q Packet Pg. 179 Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Review Current Policy / Recommendations O a m d N d ➢ Article IV establishes the reserve target for Contingency Reserve Fund rPC. 18`)" m ➢ The reserve balance cannot exceed RCW mandated limits of 0 $0.375 / $1,000 of assessed property values in the city, OR ➢ 4% of the General Fund Adopted Operating Expenditure Budget m ➢ Limitations of Fund Use ➢ Reserve replenishment N ➢ Article V establishes reporting criteriaCD 0 N Q Packet Pg. 180 rnC. 1 g9v Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Draft Policy Updates 0 N d N N N V Duringthe May ThCouncil Meetin , Council re uested th( Yg q following additions to the Replenishment Report to Council: N 1) Must include a discussion of how the reserves were used m 2) Whether it is anticipated additional reserves will be needed or not needed in the following budget cycle 0 N C N E L V Q Packet Pg. 181 Fund Balance / Reserve Policy Draft Policy Approval rnC. 1 g9v ➢ Questions and Answers ➢ Motion to Approve Resolution No. XXXX Fund Balance /Reserve Policy. 0 adopting the "" N L V C m m U- '0 N 7 7 OD O N 4+ C N E L V Q Packet Pg. 182 6.1.b RESOLUTION NO. XXXX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING THE FUND BALANCE / RESERVE POLICY AS ATTACHED HERTO. WHEREAS, the City Council heard a detailed introduction to the City's Fund Balance / Reserve Policy at the May 7, 2019 council meeting; and WHEREAS, the May 7, 2019 introduction focused on amending the Fund Balance / Reserve Policy to incorporate the Governmental Accounting Standards Board Pronouncement No. 54 Fund Balance Deporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions, and WHEREAS, the May 7, 2019 introduction focused on amending the Fund Balance / Reserve Policy for the City Contingency Reserve Fund to incorporate Washington State Revised Code of Washington Chapter 35A.33.145, setting statutory limitations at $0.375 per $1,000 of assessed property valuation; and WHEREAS, the May 7, 2019 introduction focused on amending the Fund Balance / Reserve Policy target levels for the City; now therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. ADOPT THE CITY OF EDMONDS FUND BALANCE / RESERVE POLICY. The city council hereby adopts the following attached document: 1. City of Edmonds Fund Balance / Reserve Policy to read as set forth in Attachment A hereto, which is attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. RESOLVED this 2°d day of July, 2019. CITY OF EDMONDS MAYOR, DAVE EARLING ATTEST: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Packet Pg. 183 6.1.b FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: RESOLUTION NO. xxxx Packet Pg. 184 6.1.c City of Edmonds DRAFT Fund Balance Reserve Policy July 2019 Packet Pg. 185 6.1.c Table of Contents DRAFT.........................................................................................................................................1 ARTICLE I INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................3 ARTICLE II CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING APPROPRIATE FUND BALANCE RESERVE LEVELS........................................................................................................................................4 Section1. Volatility.....................................................................................................................4 Section2. Operating Fund Size.....................................................................................................4 Section 3. Purpose of Fund Balance Reserves.................................................................................4 Section4. Bond Ratings...............................................................................................................4 ARTICLE III COMMITTED GENERAL FUND BALANCE RESERVES POLICY .............................4 Section 1. Establishment and Purpose of Operating General Fund Operating Reserve .........................4 ARTICLE IV CONTINGENT RESERVE FUND BALANCE POLICY...............................................5 ARTICLE V ANNUAL FUND BALANCE TYPES - STATUS REPORT............................................7 ARTICLE VI FIVE-YEAR RESERVE RATE REVIEW....................................................................7 ARTICLE VII DEVIATIONS FROM POLICY.................................................................................7 ARTICLE VIII DEFINITIONS........................................................................................................7 ARTICLE IX EFFECTIVE DATE..................................................................................................10 Page 2 Packet Pg. 186 6.1.c ARTICLE I INTRODUCTION The overall objective of Fund Balance/Reserve Management Policy is to define that portion of fund balance that is unavailable to support the current budget. In many ways, fund balance represents working capital, which can either be used as a liquidity reserve or for spending in future years. A comprehensive fund balance/reserve management policy provides guidelines for the major funds of the City of Edmonds and provides a structured approach in setting reserve levels in specifically designated funds. This Fund Balance/Reserve Management Policy is intended to guide prudent use of resources to provide for the much needed services to taxpayers and to maintain sound management policies. It is essential that governments maintain adequate levels of fund balance reserves to mitigate risks and provide a back-up for revenue shortfalls. Policy It is the policy of the City of Edmonds to provide for the continuity of City government by planning ahead for economic uncertainties and unforeseen or unplanned major expenditures. In order to achieve reserve goals the City must exercise prudent debt and liability management policies and follow sound fiscal management policies that prioritize the City's core services. This policy establishes reserve fund balance accounts that will provide funding for emergencies, economic uncertainties and for unanticipated operating expenses or revenue shortfalls. In addition, this policy incorporates provisions of Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement (GASB) no. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions. Objectives The purpose of this Fund Balance/Reserve Management Policy is to assist the City in the pursuit of the following equally important objectives: 1. Build adequate reserves which will provide the City the resources necessary for financial stabilization, particularly during times of unforeseen emergencies and economic downturns; 2. Establish sound fiscal reserve policies that will serve as the foundation for ensuring that strong fiscal management policies guide future City decisions; 3. Provide prudent guidelines regarding the establishment, use and replenishment of City committed or assigned fund balances/reserves; 4. Establish a process for periodic reporting and review of the City's various fund balances (reserves); and 5. Enhance the City's credit ratings received from rating institutions through the establishment of clearly delineated Fund/Reserve policies that promote strong fiscal management; 6. Establish reserve policies that are in full compliance with GASB 54 financial reporting requirements. Page 3 Packet Pg. 187 6.1.c ARTICLE II CRITERIA FOR ESTABLISHING APPROPRIATE FUND BALANCE RESERVE LEVELS There are key elements that must be reviewed and analyzed to determine the appropriate size of a given fund balance reserve. Failure to follow the guidelines established in this policy can result in developing unattainable fund reserve goals or unsustainable fund balance reserve levels. The following criteria shall be used in determining the appropriate fund balance reserve levels: Section 1. Volatility The predictability and/or the volatility of its revenues or its expenditures (i.e., higher levels of fund balance reserves may be needed if significant revenue sources are subject to unpredictable fluctuations or if operating expenditures are highly volatile). Section 2.Operating Fund Size The overall size of the fund's budgetary events should be taken into consideration in setting the required fund balance reserve level and type for a particular fund. Section 3. Purpose of Fund Balance Reserves Another consideration for determining the size of each reserve will be the purpose of the reserve: Is there significant or perceived exposure to one-time outlays (e.g., disasters, immediate capital needs, state budget cuts, or are there potential drains upon fund resources from other funds, or conversely, are there potential reductions in funding transfers from other funds)? Section 4. Bond Ratings The potential impact on the entity's bond ratings and the corresponding increased cost of borrowed funds. ARTICLE III COMMITTED GENERAL FUND BALANCE RESERVES POLICY This Policy shall establish a committed fund balance reserve within the General Fund, define funding levels and call the reserve the General Fund Operating Reserve. The purpose of the reserve is for meeting economic uncertainties, and unanticipated expenses or revenue shortfalls. This Policy requires the City to establish and maintain a General Fund Operating Reserve, within the General Fund, in an amount equal to or greater than 16% of the General Fund's Adopted Annual Operating Expenditure Budget. If it is determined that the reserve balances are not adequate, the Finance Director shall propose an amendment to these policies. A detailed accounting of this reserve account will be maintained by the Finance Department to show deposits, withdrawals (when authorized pursuant to policies contained herein) and interest earned. All accounting for these accounts shall be recorded in the City's ERP system. A detailed report, prepared by the Finance Department, shall be presented annually to the Council. Section 1. Establishment and Purpose of Operating General Fund Operating Reserve A separate balance sheet account shall be setup by the Finance Director for the General Fund Operating Reserve, to be used in instances of fiscal emergencies that include: economic uncertainties, unforeseen emergencies and unanticipated operating expenses or revenue shortfalls. Page 4 Packet Pg. 188 6.1.c The Mayor has the power to declare a fiscal emergency based upon one of the following: 1) A natural catastrophe; 2) An immediate threat to health and public safety; or 3) A significant decline in General Fund revenues. The fiscal emergency declared by the Mayor must be approved by a simple majority of the City Council. Limitations of Fund Use Any use of the committed General Fund Operating Reserves shall be used only in cases of fiscal emergency and shall not be used to augment ongoing budgetary/operating spending increases. The committed General Fund Operating Reserve may also be used for one-time non -reoccurring expenditures and/or capital projects (operations and maintenance shall not be included), all as submitted by the Mayor and approved by the Council. The amount of funds to be withdrawn from this committed fund balance reserve shall be determined by the Mayor. In his/her presentation to the Council, the Mayor or his/her designee shall include a detailed list of how the funds will be applied. A simple majority vote of the Council shall be required to approve the amount and use of funds. Transition Policy Council adoption of this policy will trigger moving an amount not less than 16% of the General Fund's Adopted Annual OperatingExpendiWre Buag�unrestricted fund balance to the General Fund Operating Reserve. Committed Fund Bala General Fund Operating Reserve Replenishment If any use of the committed General Fund Operating Reserve has occurred, the Finance Director must present to Mayor and City Council an annual Replenishment Report during the month of November. The Replenishment Report must be presented each year, until the Reserves are fully replenished. The Replenishment Report must include the following information: 1) Amount of Reserves used 2) Whether it is anticipated additional Reserves will be needed in the following budget cycle, 3) If no additional Reserves are needed, then the Replenishment Report must include a plan for replenishing the Reserve to policy mandated levels. The committed_ General Fund Reserve shall be restored pursuant to the guidelines delineated below: 1) If a reserve is drawn down by 0-10% of reserve fund balance, then a solution to replenish to at least the minimum shall be structured over a 1 to 3 year period. 2) If a reserve is drawn down by 11-25% of reserve fund balance, then the budgetary plan to restore the reserve shall be structured over a 3 to 5 year period. 3) If the reserve is drawn down by 26-50% of reserve fund balance, then a budgetary plan shall be implemented to return the reserve level to between 75% and 100% of the minimum balance over a 5 to 7 year period. ARTICLE IV CONTINGENT RESERVE FUND BALANCE POLICY Page 5 Packet Pg. 189 6.1.c This Policy shall establish a fund and define funding levels for a committed Fund Balance Reserve to be called the Contingent Reserve Fund. The primary purpose of the reserve is for meeting emergencies of the City and, secondarily, if the General Fund Operating Reserve have been exhausted, the Contingent Reserve Fund can be use in times of economic uncertainties, and for unanticipated expenses or revenue shortfalls. The target balance of the Reserve shall 1) not exceed the limitations set forth by RCW 35A.33.145, which sets the statutory maximum at $0.375 per $1,000 of assessed valuation and 2) when combined with the General Fund Operating Reserve, the two fund balance reserves shall not exceed 20% of the General Fund's Adopted Annual Operating Expenditure Budget. In other words, if the General Fund Operating Reserve balance equals 16% of operating budget, then the Contingent Reserve Fund balance cannot exceed 4% of the operating budget. It further requires a simple majority vote of Council with a statement declaring the reason for their use. A detailed accounting of the Fund shall be maintained by the Finance Department to show deposits, withdrawals (when authorized pursuant to policies contained herein) and be presented annually to the Council. The Mayor has the power to declare a fiscal emergency based upon one of the following: 1) A natural catastrophe; 2) An immediate threat to health and public safety; or 3) A significant economic decline in General Fund revenues. The fiscal emergency declared by the Mayor must be approved by a simple majority of the City Council. Limitations of Fund Use Any use of the committed Contingent Reserves shall be used in cases of fiscal emergency, shall not be used to augment ongoing budgetary/operating spending increases and should be used only after the General Fund Operating Reserves have been exhausted or when City Council approves specific used of the committed Contingent Reserve for one-time non -reoccurring expenditures and/or capital projects (operations and maintenance shall not be included). The amount of funds to be withdrawn from this committed fund balance reserve shall be determined by the Mayor. In his/her presentation to the Council, the Mayor or his/her designee shall include a detailed list of how the funds will be applied. A simple majority vote of the Council shall be required to approve the amount and use of funds. Contingent Reserve Replenishment If any use of the committed Contingent Reserve has occurred, the Finance Director must present to Mayor and City Council an annual Replenishment Report during the month of November. The Replenishment Report must be presented each year, until the Reserves are fully replenished. The Replenishment Report must include the following information: 1) Amount of Reserves used 2) Whether it is anticipated additional Reserves will be needed in the following budget cycle, 3) If no additional Reserves are needed, then the Replenishment Report must include a plan for replenishing the Reserve to policy mandated levels. The committed Contingent Reserve shall be restored pursuant to the guidelines delineated below: 1) If a reserve is drawn down by 0-10% of reserve fund balance, then a solution to replenish to at least the minimum shall be structured over a I to 3 year period. Page 6 Packet Pg. 190 6.1.c 2) If a reserve is drawn down by 11-25% of reserve fund balance, then the budgetary plan to restore the reserve shall be structured over a 3 to 5 year period. 3) If the reserve is drawn down by 26-50% of reserve fund balance, then a budgetary plan shall be implemented to return the reserve level to between 75% and 100% of the minimum balance over a 5 to 7 year period. ARTICLE V ANNUAL FUND BALANCE TYPES - STATUS REPORT Once a year, in August, the City Finance Director shall present to the Council Finance Committee a comprehensive report on the City's fund balance reserve types as of June 30th. The report shall include an updated fund balance reserve level for each fund balance type. This report shall include the following funds: 1. General Fund Operating Reserve balance; 2. Contingency Reserve Fund balance. ARTICLE VI FIVE-YEAR RESERVE RATE REVIEW Every five years, during the annual budget hearings, the Mayor, based upon a comprehensive financial and economic review of all City fund balance types and in consultation with the City Finance Director, and Department Directors as necessary, shall make recommendations to the City Council for either maintaining existing fund balance reserve polices or revising fund balance reserve policies including percentage ranges established by category herein and replenishment requirements by categories established herein. ARTICLE VII DEVIATIONS FROM POLICY No deviations from the fund balance reserve polices set forth in this Policy will be allowed except as approved by a simple majority of vote by the Council. This includes any increase or decrease in the base fund balance reserve levels established by this policy and expenditures from fund balance reserve accounts for anything other than the intended budgeted use of said fund balance. ARTICLE VIII DEFINITIONS Budget - A plan of financial operation containing an estimate of proposed expenditures for a given period (usually a fiscal year) and a proposed forecast of revenues (receipts) to cover them. A budget is also a plan that outlines an organization's financial and operational goals and strategies in monetary terms. Capital Expenditures are expenditures incurred when monies are spent either to buy fixed assets or to add to the value of an existing fixed asset with a useful life that extends beyond the fiscal year. In accounting, a capital expenditure is added to an asset account ("capitalized"), thus increasing the asset's basis (the cost or value of an asset). The general rule (even for municipalities) is that if the property acquired has a useful life longer than the fiscal year, the cost must be capitalized. The capital expenditure costs are then amortized or depreciated over the life of the asset in question. Page 7 Packet Pg. 191 6.1.c Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) - A CAFR is a set of financial statements for a state, municipality or other governmental entity that comply with the accounting requirements established by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB). It must be audited by an independent auditor using generally accepted government auditing standards. The CAFR consists of three sections: Introductory, Financial and Statistical. The Introductory section orients and guides the reader through the report. The Financial section presents the entity's basic financial statements as well as notes to the statements and the independent auditors' report. The Statistical section provides additional financial and statistical data, including data about financial trends that may better inform the reader about the government's activities. Council - Means the legislative body (the city council) that governs the City of Edmonds. Expenditure - The actual payment of cash or cash equivalent for goods delivered or services rendered, or a charge against available funds in settlement of an obligation as evidenced by an invoice, voucher or other such document during the fiscal year. For governmental reporting purposes, expenditures include expenses or a provision for debt retirement not reported as a liability of the fund from which retired. Fiscal Year - A 12 month period to which the annual operating budget applies and the end of which a governmental unit determines its financial position and the results of its operations. The City has specified January 1 through December 31 as its fiscal year. Fund - A fund is a self -balancing set of accounts recording cash and other financial resources, together with all related liabilities and "residual" equity or balances, and changes therein, which are segregated for the purpose of carrying on specific activities or attaining certain planned objectives in accordance with special regulations, restrictions or limitations. Fund Balances - The overall objective of fund balance reporting is to isolate that portion of a fund balance that is unavailable to support the following period's budget (see GASB 54 definition below). In general, an unassigned fund balance shall be defined as those amounts that are not restricted, committed, or assigned, of a particular fund at the end of the fiscal year. GASB 54 - Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions - The City of Edmonds's CAFR Financial Statements are required to comply with GASB 54 beginning with its Fiscal Year End 2011 CAFR going forward. GASB 54 changes and identifies fund balance classifications that can be more consistently applied by clarifying existing governmental fund type definitions. Fund balance is basically the difference between the assets and liabilities reported in a fund. GASB statement No. 54 provides the following five categories for classifying fund balance and related definitions to be used for describing the components of fund balance: 1. Nonspendable Fund Balance Amounts that are not in a spendable form or are required to be maintained intact. Due to the nature or form of the resources, they generally cannot be expected to be converted into cash or a spendable form (e.g. Inventories and prepaid amounts). This also Page 8 Packet Pg. 192 6.1.c includes long-term loan and notes receivable and property held for resale. Applies as well to amounts that must be retained intact legally or contractually. 2. Restricted Fund Balance — Amounts that can be spent only for the specific purposes stipulated. Constraints are placed on the use of resources by external parties (e.g. by creditors, grant providers, contributors) or by laws or regulations (e.g. constitution or legally enforceable language). Restrictions may be changed or lifted only with the consent of the resource provider. 3. Committed Fund Balance — Amounts can only be used for the specific purposes determined by a formal action of City Council. Constraints on fund balance use are imposed by internal formal action of the government's highest level of decision -making authority (e.g. City Council) and can only be removed or changed by taking the same type of action it employed to commit those amounts through legislation, resolution, or ordinance (e.g. funds committed to satisfy contractual obligations). Action to constrain resources must occur prior to year-end; however the amount can be determined in the subsequent period. 4. Assigned Fund Balance — Assigned fund balances include amounts that are limited by the Council, Mayor, or his/her designee, for its intended use, but little or no formal action is required to modify or eliminate those limitations. Assigned fund balances comprises amounts intended to be used for a specific purpose. Amounts reported as assigned should not result in a deficit in unassigned fund balance. Also relates to all governmental funds other than the General Fund, with any remaining positive amounts not classified as nonspendable, restricted or committed. 5. Unassigned Fund Balance — Comprises the residual classification for the General Fund and includes all amounts not contained in the other classifications. Unassigned amounts are available for any purpose. This represents the residual amount of the fund balance that has not been restricted, committed, or assigned. General Fund - In public sector accounting, the General Fund is the primary operating fund for all revenues of the City that are not otherwise restricted as to their use, including monies from local property and sales tax, and other revenue sources that are not assigned for a specific purpose. The General Fund provides the resources necessary to pay/sustain the day-to-day activities for City services such as administration, community services, parks and recreation, police, fire, public works, elected officials, Mayor, and City Council. When governments or administrators talk about "balancing the budget" they typically mean balancing the budget for their general fund. Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) - GASB is the private, nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that works to create and improve the rules U.S. state and local governments follow when accounting for their finances and reporting them to the public. While the GASB does not have the power to enforce compliance with the standards it promulgates, the authority for its standards is recognized under the Rules of Conduct of the AICPA. Also, legislation in many states requires compliance with GASB standards, and governments usually are expected to prepare financial statements in accordance with those standards when they issue bonds or notes or otherwise borrow from public credit markets. The GASB was established in 1984 and is funded by publication sales, contributions from state and local governments, and voluntary assessment fees from municipal bond issues. Operating Budget — A detailed projection of all estimated income and expenses based on forecasted revenue during a given period (usually one year). Since an operating budget is a short-term budget, capital outlays are excluded because they are long-term costs. One-time revenues, such as grants, settlements, Page 9 Packet Pg. 193 6.1.c sales of assets and transfers are excluded because often they are non -recurring sources of revenues and cannot be counted on coming in from one budget cycle to the next. Revenue - The income of a government from all sources appropriated for the payment of the public expenses. It includes such items as tax payments, fees from specific services, receipts from other governments, fines, forfeitures, grants, shared revenues and interest income. Structural Budget Deficit or "Gap" - A budget deficit (Gap) that results from a fundamental imbalance whereby current year governmental expenditures exceed current year revenues without any consideration of carryover or prior year unspent revenue balances if they exist. A structural deficit remains across the operating fiscal cycle because the general level of government spending is too high for the prevailing revenue structure (e.g., taxes, fees and other sources). A fiscal Gap, is a structural budget deficit over an extended period of time and not only includes the structural deficit at a given point in time but also the difference between promised future government commitments, such as health and retirement spending, and future planned or anticipated tax and other revenues. Another description is that the current revenue structure is insufficient to maintain services at the current level. ARTICLE IX EFFECTIVE DATE This policy shall take effect upon its final adoption by the City Council. Page 10 Packet Pg. 194 6.1.d GASB 54 Fund Balance Classifications Summar The objective of this Statement is to enhance the usefulness of fund balance information by providing clearer fund balance classifications that can be more consistently applied and by clarifying the existing governmental fund type definitions. This Statement establishes fund balance classifications that comprise a hierarchy based primarily on the extent to which a government is bound to observe constraints imposed upon the use of the resources reported in governmental funds. The initial distinction that is made in reporting fund balance information is identifying amounts that are considered nonspendable, such as fund balance associated with inventories. This Statement also provides for additional classification as restricted, committed, assigned, and unassigned based on the relative strength of the constraints that control how specific amounts can be spent. The restricted fund balance category includes amounts that can be spent only for the specific purposes stipulated by constitution, external resource providers, or through enabling legislation. The committed fund balance classification includes amounts that can be used only for the specific purposes determined by a formal action of the government's highest level of decision -making authority. Amounts in the assigned fund balance classification are intended to be used by the government for specific purposes but do not meet the criteria to be classified as restricted or committed. In governmental funds other than the general fund, assigned fund balance represents the remaining amount that is not restricted or committed. Unassigned fund balance is the residual classification for the government's general fund and includes all spendable amounts not contained in the other classifications. In other funds, the unassigned classification should be used only to report a deficit balance resulting from overspending for specific purposes for which amounts had been restricted, committed, or assigned. Governments are required to disclose information about the processes through which constraints are imposed on amounts in the committed and assigned classifications. Governments also are required to classify and report amounts in the appropriate fund balance classifications by applying their accounting policies that determine whether restricted, committed, assigned, and unassigned amounts are considered to have been spent. Disclosure of the policies in the notes to the financial statements is required. This Statement also provides guidance for classifying stabilization amounts on the face of the balance sheet and requires disclosure of certain information about stabilization arrangements in the notes to the financial statements. How the Changes in This Statement Will Improve Financial Reporting The requirements in this Statement will improve financial reporting by providing fund balance categories and classifications that will be more easily understood. Elimination of the reserved component of fund balance in favor of a restricted classification will enhance the consistency between information reported in the government -wide statements and information in the governmental fund financial statements and avoid confusion about the relationship between reserved fund balance and restricted net assets. The fund balance classification approach in this Statement will require governments to classify amounts consistently, regardless of the fund type or column in which they are presented. As a result, an amount cannot be classified as restricted in one fund but unrestricted in another. The fund balance disclosures will give users information necessary to understand the Packet Pg. 195 6.1.d processes under which constraints are imposed upon the use of resources and how those constraints may be modified or eliminated. The clarifications of the governmental fund type definitions will reduce uncertainty about which resources can or should be reported in the respective fund types. Nonsoendable Fund Balance The nonspendable fund balance classification includes amounts that cannot be spent because they are either (a) not in spendable form or (b) legally or contractually required to be maintained intact. The "not in spendable form" criterion includes items that are not expected to be converted to cash, for example, inventories and prepaid amounts. It also includes the long-term amount of loans and notes receivable, as well as property acquired for resale. However, if the use of the proceeds from the collection of those receivables or from the sale of those properties is restricted, committed, or assigned, then they should be included in the appropriate fund balance classification (restricted, committed, or assigned), rather than nonspendable fund balance. The corpus (or principal) of a permanent fund is an example of an amount that is legally or contractually required to be maintained intact. Restricted Fund Balance Net Assets Restricted by Enabling Legislation, should be reported as restricted fund balance. Fund balance should be reported as restricted when constraints placed on the use of resources are either: a. Externally imposed by creditors (such as through debt covenants), grantors, contributors, or laws or regulations of other governments; or Imposed by law through constitutional provisions or enabling legislation. Enabling legislation, as the term is used in this Statement, authorizes the government to assess, levy, charge, or otherwise mandate payment of resources (from external resource providers) and includes a legally enforceable requirement that those resources be used only for the specific purposes stipulated in the legislation. Legal enforceability means that a government can be compelled by an external party — such as citizens, public interest groups, or the judiciary —to use resources created by enabling legislation only for the purposes specified by the legislation. Committed Fund Balance Amounts that can only be used for specific purposes pursuant to constraints imposed by formal action of the government's highest level of decision -making authority should be reported as committed fund balance. Those committed amounts cannot be used for any other purpose unless the government removes or changes the specified use by taking the same type of action (for example, legislation, resolution, ordinance) it employed to previously commit those amounts. The authorization specifying the purposes for which amounts can be used should have the consent of both the legislative and executive branches of the government, if applicable. Committed fund balance also should incorporate contractual obligations to the extent that existing resources in the fund have been specifically committed for use in satisfying those contractual requirements. In contrast to fund balance that is restricted by enabling legislation, as discussed above, amounts in the committed fund balance classification may be redeployed for other purposes with appropriate due process, as explained below. Constraints imposed on the use of committed amounts are imposed by the government, separate from the authorization to raise the underlying revenue. Packet Pg. 196 6.1.d The formal action of the government's highest level of decision -making authority that commits fund balance to a specific purpose should occur prior to the end of the reporting period, but the amount, if any, which will be subject to the constraint, may be determined in the subsequent period. Assiened Fund Balance Amounts that are constrained by the government's intent to be used for specific purposes, but are neither restricted nor committed, should be reported as assigned fund balance, except for stabilization arrangements, as discussed below. Intent should be expressed by (a) the governing body itself or (b) a body (a budget or finance committee, for example) or official to which the governing body has delegated the authority to assign amounts to be used for specific purposes. Both the committed and assigned fund balance classifications include amounts that have been constrained to being used for specific purposes by actions taken by the government itself. However, the authority for making an assignment is not required to be the government's highest level of decision - making authority. Furthermore, the nature of the actions necessary to remove or modify an assignment is not as prescriptive as it is with regard to the committed fund balance classification. Constraints imposed on the use of assigned amounts are more easily removed or modified than those imposed on amounts that are classified as committed. Some governments may not have both committed and assigned fund balances, as not all governments have multiple levels of decision -making authority. Unassigned Fund Balance Unassigned fund balance is the residual classification for the general fund. This classification represents fund balance that has not been assigned to other funds and that has not been restricted, committed, or assigned to specific purposes within the general fund. The general fund should be the only fund that reports a positive unassigned fund balance amount. Stabilization Arraneements Some governments formally set aside amounts for use in emergency situations or when revenue shortages or budgetary imbalances arise. Those amounts are subject to controls that dictate the circumstances under which they can be spent. Many governments have formal arrangements to maintain amounts for budget or revenue stabilization, working capital needs, contingencies or emergencies, and other similarly titled purposes. The authority to set aside those amounts generally comes from statute, ordinance, resolution, charter, or constitution. Stabilization amounts may be expended only when certain specific circumstances exist. The formal action that imposes the parameters for spending should identify and describe the specific circumstances under which a need for stabilization arises. Those circumstances should be such that they would not be expected to occur routinely. For example, a stabilization amount that can be accessed "in an emergency" would not qualify to be classified within the committed category because the circumstances or conditions that constitute an emergency are not sufficiently detailed, and it is not unlikely that an "emergency" of some nature would routinely occur. Similarly, a stabilization amount that can be accessed to offset an "anticipated revenue shortfall" would not qualify unless the shortfall was quantified and was of a magnitude that would distinguish it from other revenue shortfalls that occur during the normal course of governmental operations. Packet Pg. 197 6.1.d Fund Balance Classification Policies and Procedures Governments should disclose the following about their fund balance classification policies and procedures in the notes to the financial statements: a. For committed fund balance: (1) the government's highest level of decision -making authority and (2) the formal action that is required to be taken to establish (and modify or rescind) a fund balance commitment b. For assigned fund balance: (1) the body or official authorized to assign amounts to a specific purpose and (2) the policy established by the governing body pursuant to which that authorization is given Governments that establish stabilization arrangements, should disclose the following information in the notes to the financial statements: a. The authority for establishing stabilization arrangements (for example, by statute or ordinance) b. The requirements for additions to the stabilization amount C. The conditions under which stabilization amounts may be spent d. The stabilization balance, if not apparent on the face of the financial statements. Minimum Fund Balance Policies If a governing body has formally adopted a minimum fund balance policy (for example, in lieu of separately setting aside stabilization amounts), the government should describe in the notes to its financial statements the policy established by the government that sets forth the minimum amount. Packet Pg. 198 RCW 35A.33.145: Contingency fund —Creation. Page 1 of 1 6.1.e RCW 35A.33.145 Contingency fund —Creation. Every code city may create and maintain a contingency fund to provide moneys with which to meet any municipal expense, the necessity or extent of which could not have been foreseen or reasonably evaluated at the time of adopting the annual budget, or from which to provide moneys for those emergencies described in RCW 35A.33.080 and 35A.33.090. Such fund may be supported by a budget appropriation from any tax or other revenue source not restricted in use by law, or also may be supported by a transfer from other unexpended or decreased funds made available by ordinance as set forth in RCW 35A.33.120: PROVIDED, That the total amount accumulated in such fund at any time shall not exceed the equivalent of thirty-seven and one-half cents per thousand dollars of assessed valuation of property within the city at such time. Any moneys in the contingency fund at the end of the fiscal year shall not lapse except upon reappropriation by the council to another fund in the adoption of a subsequent budget. [ 1973 1st ex.s. c 195 § 28; 1967 ex.s. c 119 § 35A.33.145.1 NOTES: Severability—Effective dates and termination dates—Construction-1973 1st ex.s. c 195: See notes following RCW 84.52.043. http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=35A.33.145 Packet Pg. 199 4/20/2018 6.1.f Government Finonce Officers Associotion Fund Balance Guidelines for the General Fund Type: Best Practice Background: In the context of financial reporting, the term fund balance is used to describe the net position of governmental funds calculated in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). Budget professionals commonly use this same term to describe the net position of governmental funds calculated on a government's budgetary basis.' While in both cases fund balance is intended to serve as a measure of the financial resources available in a governmental fund; it is essential that differences between GAAP fund balance and budgetary fund balance be fully appreciated. GAAP financial statements report up to five separate categories of fund balance based on the type and source of constraints placed on how resources can be spent (presented in descending order from most constraining to least constraining): nonspendable fund balance, restricted fund balance, committed fund balance, assigned fund balance, and unassigned fund balance.' The total of the amounts in these last three categories (where the only constraint on spending, if any, is imposed by the government itself) is termed unrestricted fund balance. In contrast, budgetary fund balance, while it is subject to the same constraints on spending as GAAP fund balance, typically represents simply the total amount accumulated from prior years at a point in time. The calculation of GAAP fund balance and budgetary fund balance sometimes is complicated by the use of sub -funds within the general fund. In such cases, GAAP fund balance includes amounts from all of the subfunds, whereas budgetary fund balance typically does not. Often the timing of the recognition of revenues and expenditures is different for purposes of GAAP financial reporting and budgeting. For example, encumbrances arising from purchase orders often are recognized as expenditures for budgetary purposes, but never for the preparation of GAAP financial statements. The effect of these and other differences on the amounts reported as GAAP fund balance and budgetary fund balance in the general fund should be clarified, understood, and documented. It is essential that governments maintain adequate levels of fund balance to mitigate current and future risks (e.g., revenue shortfalls and unanticipated expenditures) and to ensure stable tax rates. In most cases, discussions of fund balance will properly focus on a government's general fund. Nonetheless, financial resources available in other funds should also be considered in assessing the adequacy of unrestricted fund balance in the general fund. Recommendation: GFOA recommends that governments establish a formal policy on the level of unrestricted fund balance that should be maintained in the general fund for GAAP and budgetary purposes.' Such a guideline should be set by the appropriate policy body and articulate a framework and process for how the government would increase or decrease the level of unrestricted fund balance over a specific time Packet Pg. 200 6.1.f period.' In particular, governments should provide broad guidance in the policy for how resources will be directed to replenish fund balance should the balance fall below the level prescribed. Appropriate Level. The adequacy of unrestricted fund balance in the general fund should take into account each government's own unique circumstances. For example, governments that may be vulnerable to natural disasters, more dependent on a volatile revenue source, or potentially subject to cuts in state aid and/or federal grants may need to maintain a higher level in the unrestricted fund balance. Articulating these risks in a fund balance policy makes it easier to explain to stakeholders the rationale for a seemingly higher than normal level of fund balance that protects taxpayers and employees from unexpected changes in financial condition. Nevertheless, GFOA recommends, at a minimum, that general-purpose governments, regardless of size, maintain unrestricted budgetary fund balance in their general fund of no less than two months of regular general fund operating revenues or regular general fund operating expenditures.' The choice of revenues or expenditures as a basis of comparison may be dictated by what is more predictable in a government's particular circumstances.' Furthermore, a government's particular situation often may require a level of unrestricted fund balance in the general fund significantly in excess of this recommended minimum level. In any case, such measures should be applied within the context of long-term forecasting, thereby avoiding the risk of placing too much emphasis upon the level of unrestricted fund balance in the general fund at any one time. In establishing a policy governing the level of unrestricted fund balance in the general fund, a government should consider a variety of factors, including: 1. The predictability of its revenues and the volatility of its expenditures (i.e., higher levels of unrestricted fund balance may be needed if significant revenue sources are subject to unpredictable fluctuations or if operating expenditures are highly volatile); 2. Its perceived exposure to significant one-time outlays (e.g., disasters, immediate capital needs, state budget cuts); 3. The potential drain upon general fund resources from other funds, as well as, the availability of resources in other funds; 4. The potential impact on the entity's bond ratings and the corresponding increased cost of borrowed funds; 5. Commitments and assignments (i.e., governments may wish to maintain higher levels of unrestricted fund balance to compensate for any portion of unrestricted fund balance already committed or assigned by the government for a specific purpose). Governments may deem it appropriate to exclude from consideration resources that have been committed or assigned to some other purpose and focus on unassigned fund balance, rather than on unrestricted fund balance. Use and Replenishment. The fund balance policy should define conditions warranting its use, and if a fund balance falls below the government's policy level, a solid plan to replenish it. In that context, the fund balance policy should: 1. Define the time period within which and contingencies for which fund balances will be used; 2. Describe how the government's expenditure and/or revenue levels will be adjusted to match any new economic realities that are behind the use of fund balance as a financing bridge; 3. Describe the time period over which the components of fund balance will be replenished and the means by which they will be replenished. Generally, governments should seek to replenish their fund balances within one to three years of use. Specifically, factors influencing the replenishment time horizon include: 1. The budgetary reasons behind the fund balance targets; 2. Recovering from an extreme event; 3. Political continuity; 4. Financial planning time horizons; Packet Pg. 201 6.1.f 5. Long-term forecasts and economic conditions; 6. External financing expectations. Revenue sources that would typically be looked to for replenishment of a fund balance include nonrecurring revenues, budget surpluses, and excess resources in other funds (if legally permissible and there is a defensible rationale). Year-end surpluses are an appropriate source for replenishing fund balance. Unrestricted Fund Balance Above Formal Policy Requirement. In some cases, governments can find themselves in a position with an amount of unrestricted fund balance in the general fund over their formal policy reserve requirement even after taking into account potential financial risks in the foreseeable future. Amounts over the formal policy may reflect a structural trend, in which case governments should consider a policy as to how this would be addressed. Additionally, an education or communication strategy, or at a minimum, explanation of large changes in fund balance is encouraged. In all cases, use of those funds should be prohibited as a funding source for ongoing recurring expenditures. Committee: Accounting, Auditing, and Financial Reporting Governmental Budgeting and Fiscal Policy Notes: 1. For the sake of clarity, this recommended practice uses the terms GAAP fund balance and budgetary fund balance to distinguish these two different uses of the same term. 2. These categories are set forth in Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 54, Fund Balance Reporting and Governmental Fund Type Definitions. 3. Sometimes restricted fund balance includes resources available to finance items that typically would require the use of unrestricted fund balance (e.g., a contingency reserve). In that case, such amounts should be included as part of unrestricted fund balance for purposes of analysis. 4. See Recommended Practice 4.1 of the National Advisory Council on State and Local Budgeting governments on the need to "maintain a prudent level of financial resources to protect against reducing service levels or raising taxes and fees because of temporary revenue shortfalls or unpredicted one-time expenditures" (Recommended Practice 4.1). 5. In practice, a level of unrestricted fund balance significantly lower than the recommended minimum may be appropriate for states and America's largest governments (e.g., cities, counties, and school districts) because they often are in a better position to predict contingencies (for the same reason that an insurance company can more readily predict the number of accidents for a pool of 500,000 drivers than for a pool of fifty), and because their revenues and expenditures often are more diversified and thus potentially less subject to volatility. 6. In either case, unusual items that would distort trends (e.g., one-time revenues and expenditures) should be excluded, whereas recurring transfers should be included. Once the decision has been made to compare unrestricted fund balance to either revenues and/or expenditures, that decision should be followed consistently from period to period. Packet Pg. 202 6.1.g 1.0 2.0 3.0 Subject: Reserve Policy CITY OF EDMONDS RESERVE POLICY Original Policy Date: Originating Department: Finance Division Last Revision Date: PURPOSE: To establish a Reserve Policy for the City which is capable of addressing the various types (categories) of the City's operating and restricted use funds. The objectives of this Policy are to (i) provide a clear understanding of the goals and objectives of reserve establishment, (ii) offer guidance and limitations regarding the establishment, use and replenishment of City reserves, and (iii) establish a process for periodic reporting and review of City reserves. ORANANIZATION AFFECTED: All City funds. REFERENCES: GENERAL FUND RESERVE POLICY: The General Fund is used to account for all general revenues of the City not specifically levied or collected for other City funds, and for expenditures related to providing general services by the City. For the purpose of this policy and as it applies to the General Fund only, the City will establish a Contingency Reserve Fund with a minimum balance of 8% of annual General Fund revenues. At no time, however, shall the balance in the Contingency Reserve Fund fall below 8% unless specifically waived by the City Council because of an unforeseen emergency. The City shall maintain a targeted balance of 16% of annual General Fund revenues. 4.1 If actual expenditures in the General Fund are less than budgeted expenditures, and the General Fund does not end the year at a deficit, at least 5% of the difference between actual revenue and actual expenditures will revert to the Contingency Reserve Fund and may then be re -appropriated at the discretion of the City Council. 4.2 The City will annually direct a minimum of 5% of sales tax receipts from new construction (NAICS Industry Classification Code 23) to the Contingency Reserve Fund, up to $100,000 per year. Packet Pg. 203 6.1.g 4.3 Total annual transfers to the Contingency Reserve Fund shall not be more than 125% of the amounts calculated in Sections 4.0, 4.1 and 4.2 above. Once funded up to the 16% target, there shall be no limitation on the maximum annual contribution to the Contingency Reserve Fund. 4.4 Use of Contingency Reserve Fund — To the extent that there is an imbalance in the General Fund between budgeted revenues and budgeted expenditures, City Council and administration will strive to address the imbalance first with revenue increases, expenditure reductions, or a combination of the two. Use of the Contingency Reserve Fund is a one-time, non -recurring funding source. If an imbalance in the General Fund occurs that cannot be addressed with additional revenues or expenditure reductions, a multiyear plan shall be developed to address the imbalance concurrently with the planned reserve draw down of the Contingency Fund. The implementation of the replenishment plan will be done in accordance with the guidelines below (see "Replenishment of Reserves"). A planned draw down of the fund's reserves should: a) not exceed 50% of the balance in the Contingency Reserve Fund, and b) not reduce the reserve below 4% of annual General Fund revenues. 4.5 Replenishment of Reserves — The following criteria will be used to restore the Contingency Reserve Fund based upon the remaining fund balance compared to the minimum reserve guideline: 1. If the reserves are drawn down by 25-50% of reserve fund balance, then a budgetary plan shall be implemented to return the reserve level to between 75% and 100% of the minimum balance over a 5 to 7 year period. 2. If the reserves are drawn down by 10-25% of reserve fund balance, then the budgetary plan to restore the reserve shall be structured over a 3 to 5 year period. 3. If the reserves are drawn down by 0-10% of reserve fund balance, then a solution to replenish to at least the minimum shall be structured over a 1 to 3 year period. 4.6 Annual Status Reporting and Periodic Review — Annually, after presentation of the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, the Finance Director will prepare and present an updated Reserve Level Status report by August 1 st of the following year. 4.7 At least every five years, the Mayor, based on advice from the Finance Director, will ask the City Council to reaffirm or revise this policy, including the percentages established herein. 2 Packet Pg. 204 6.1.g 5.0 RISK MANAGEMENT RESERVE POLICY: 5.1. The City shall maintain a Risk Management Reserve Fund dedicated to mitigation of the risk of loss arising from potential claims and lawsuits against the City for general liability purposes as well as claims resulting from natural disasters such as earthquakes. Amounts not needed for current or estimated future claims will be made available along with the Contingency Reserve Fund in Section 4 for unanticipated expenditures or significant declines in actual revenue versus budgeted revenue. 5.2. The Risk Management Reserve Fund shall be set at 2% of annual General Fund revenues. The City shall reach the target of 2% no later than fiscal year 2014. 5.3. Legal claims expenses incurred below the City's insurance deductible amounts will be paid for out of the Risk Management Reserve Fund. Uninsured legal claim expenses will also be deducted from the Risk Management Reserve Fund. 5.4. Use of the Risk Management Reserve Fund — A draw down of the fund's reserves should: a) not exceed 50% of the balance in the Risk Management Reserve Fund, and b) not reduce the reserve below 0.5% of annual General Fund revenues. Council may grant exceptions to this limitation on draw down of reserves at its discretion. Any exception granted will be adopted as part of the City's annual budgeting process. 5.5. Replenishment of Reserves — The following criteria will be used to restore the Risk Management Reserve Fund based upon the remaining fund balance compared to the minimum reserve guideline: 1. If the reserves are drawn down by 25-50% of reserve fund balance, then a budgetary plan shall be implemented to return the reserve level to between 75% and 100% of the minimum balance over a 3 to 5 year period. 2. If the reserves are drawn down by 10-25% of reserve fund balance, then the budgetary plan to restore the reserve shall be structured over a 2 to 3 year period. 3. If the reserves are drawn down by 0-10% of reserve fund balance, then a solution to replenish to at least the minimum shall be structured over a 1 to 2 year period. 5.6. The City Council may, at their discretion and as necessary, transfer funds between the Contingency Reserve Fund and the Risk Management Reserve Fund. Once the two reserve funds are fully funded up to the minimum levels as established within this policy, at no time will the combined balances of both funds decline below 8% of annual General Fund revenues without adopting of a replenishment plan. Packet Pg. 205 W. WASHINGTON MID -SIZED FINANCIAL POLICY SUMMARY RISK FUND RESERVE TARGET BALANCE CONTINGENCY CITY POLICY RANGE POLICY TARGET RANGE RESERVE POLICY TARGET RANGE AUBURN N N/A Y 8-12% NOTE #2 NOTE #2 N/A BOTHELL N N/A Y 15% of operating expenditures N/A N/A BREMERTON Y NOTE #1 minimum of 8.5% of operating Y NOTE #3 expenditures (NOTE #6) DES MOINES N N/A y NOTE #4 NOTE #5 NOTE #5 KENT N N/A Y cap of 18% of general fund y 10% of total city revenues fiscal year budget KIRKLAND N N/A N If uncommitted ending fund Y 80%of statutory balance dollars are available, cap of $0.375 per policy calls for distributing 50% $1000 of assessed of fund balance to the various valuaton reserve funds ISSAQUAH N N/A Y cap of 20% of general fund Y no cap defined in expenditures policy LYNNWOOD N N/A Y NOTE#7 N N/A MARYSVILLE N N/A Y 10% of general fund revenue N NOTE #8 MILL CREEK N N/A Y at least 15% of total general N NOTE #10 fund budgeted revenue (NOTE #9) MUKILTEO N N/A Y NOTE#11 Y Minimum of $1m PUYALLUP N N/A Y 8 - 15% of operating revenues N NOTE #12 REDMOND N N/A Y 12.% of operating revenues N NOTE #13 RENTON N N/A Y 12%of general fund operating N N/A expenditures SHORELINE N N/A Y 10% of economical ly-sensitive Y "Budget revenues (NOTE #14) Contingency" reserve of $805k NOTE 1: Bremerton is self -insured, and risk management pool varies each year based on claims activity. There is no specific funding target range. NOTE 2: Auburn also maintains a "cumulative reserve fund" with a range of 5-10% of general governmental operating expenditures. Other proprietary funds target balances of 10-20%of budgeted operating, maintenance and capital expenditures NOTE 3: Target is $0.375/$1000 of assessed valuation of property within the city. NOTE 4: Target is mimimum of 16.67%of recurring operating expenditures NOTE5: Has "stabilization reserve", which is 5%of general fund revenues NOTE 6: 2018 actual ending fund balance was 14.2%of operating expenditures NOTE 7: 19.5% of general fund operating expenses are allocated to two reserve funds: revenue stabilization fund and unencumbered (unassiged) fund balance. NOTE 8: endingfund balance may be held as reserve of reappropriated to a capital reserve, long term obligaton or debt service fund. NOTE 9: excluding beginning fund balance NOTE 10: General fund surpluses will be used to fund onttime operations,capital expenditures or dedicated to the CIP NOTE 11: General fund operating reserve is established as a "cash flow reserve," equal to two months (or 16.6%) of budgeted operating expenditures NOTE 12: Inclusion of all reserves brings total to 18.7%of general fund revneues NOTE 13: General fund reserve is also used to cover contingencies such as natural disasters NOTE 14: Economically sensitive revenues are "volatile" revenues such as taxes from sales tax, gambling tax, state -shared revenues, recreation fees, etc. Shoreline also maintains a $3m General Fund Operating Reserve for cash flow purposes Packet Pg. 206 MRSC - Which Financial Policies Work Best? 'It Depends.' Page I of 4 6.1.i �MRSC Local Government Success Which Financial Policies Work Best? 'It Depends.' April 26, 2017 by Mike Bailey Category: Finance Advisor, Finance Policies I was preparing a presentation on financial management recently and was reminded of a concept that has been reinforced to me many times over the years. For purposes of this blog post, I'll call it the 'It Depends' concept. I first gave some thought to this idea some time ago when I was involved in a discussion on what the right level of fund balance should be for local governments. This discussion occurred in the Committee on Budgeting and Financial Management for the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). The most common question GFOA regularly got from its 19,000 members was "what is the right level of fund balance for local government?" and the answer, in its entirety, was "it depends." That was all — an "it depends" followed by a "thank you for asking!" Fortunately, we soon realized that while "it depends" was the right answer, it was also totally unsatisfying. Real GFOA members, who worked with real councils / boards seeking to adopt meaningful financial policies, wanted more. So the budget committee went on to provide some additional guidance around the "it depends" answer. The current GFOA best practice has since evolved into different aspects on the fund balance question. There are published best practice documents on Fund Balance in the General Fund and Working Capital in Enterprise Funds. Essentially, the general guidance is to maintain at least two months of fund balance or working capital — but, of course, it depends. Different Strokes for Different Folks So, why do I think that "it depends" is the right answer? As pointed out in the GFOA's best practice documents on the topic, each government's context will be different. Our economies are different, our sources of revenues are different, our habits and practices are different. These differences are what makes local government an interesting and challenging place to work. Packet Pg. 207 http://mrsc.org/Home/Stay-Informed/MRSC-Insight/May/Best-Financial-Policy-It-Depend... 5/18/2017 MRSC - Which Financial Policies Work Best? 'It Depends.' Page 2 of 4 6.1.i No one set of answers will always (or ever) apply to the challenges and opportunities that we are confronted with. But these differences also need to be taken into account when we determine the best policies for our specific jurisdiction. Have a Conversation I also like this answer because it gets at the heart of what makes for the best policy guidance: Before a meaningful policy can be developed, a good conversation needs to occur. This conversation should be informed by such things as the best practice guidance mentioned above, your own past experiences, a review of the issues and influences that may come into play, and other elements. A discussion of this nature allows participants to interact with data, advice, experience, their own ideas, and the ideas of others. Thoughtful discussion allows best policy guidance to emerge, to be documented, and then, to be adopted by the legislative body. This is a great way to start a budget process. Take a look at the policies you've adopted (or maybe should still adopt) and consider if these continue to provide the best 'guardrails' to guide your local government into the future. Have the conversation! Beyond Fund Balance The "it depends" concept extends beyond fund balance. There are many, many areas where it is important to provide policy guidance for an organization to work effectively together and make progress over time. There is a tension inherent in these discussions that should be recognized as part of the discussion. Too much policy control will limit the flexibility of the staff to function as efficiently as possible. Too little control may enable administrative action that is outside the bounds of what the legislative (policy) body would prefer. Finding that happy medium between efficiency and preferred behavior will only occur through a thoughtful discussion. Potential Discussions Examples of potential discussions resulting in good policy guidance include: Purchasing limits —At what points do procurement of goods and services require council / board approval? Fees and charges —Who has what authority for setting fees in your organization? What are the goals in fee setting: cost recovery, equity, accessibility? Grants —Who can apply for grants? Are there any priorities for which grants to pursue? Where is responsibility for grant compliance? Investments —Who is authorized to invest public funds? What are the goals of the program? What investments are permissible? Balanced budgets —Is cash forward, or fund balance, available as a revenue to balance budgets? Capital expenditures —What is the capitalization threshold? What qualifies for a capital project in the budget: cost and life of the resulting asset? In each of these examples it can be very helpful to know the right answer before confronted with the challenge. The 'right' answer will be different from one local government to another. Therefore some discussion will be necessary to arrive at the best answer for your entity. Packet Pg. 208 http://mrsc.org/Home/Stay-Informed/MRSC-Insight/May/Best-Financial-Policy-It-Depend... 5/18/2017 MRSC - Which Financial Policies Work Best? 'It Depends.' Page 3 of 4 6.1.i Fortunately, in the public sector we can benefit from each other's experiences. The MRSC website has many good examples of financial policies adopted by various local governments (and is a great place to start). However, at the end of the day, the best financial policies for your jurisdiction can only be determined after a good conversation. That is because the answer to any of these questions is - "It depends." Not sure what the right financial policies are for your jurisdiction? MRSC has just launched a new series of online resources to help you develop policies and procedures that are tailored to your jurisdiction's needs. We've focused on five key areas in particular: • Asset management • Cost allocation • Debt • Fund balance/reserves • Investments For each area, we provide key questions to consider as well as links to best practices and examples from local jurisdictions in Washington. We can't give you the right answer — like Mike says, "it depends" — but we can help you ask the right questions to get there! About Mike Bailey Mike Bailey writes for MRSC as a Finance Advisor. Mike Bailey is currently the Finance Director for the city of Redmond. Previously he worked as Administrator of Finance and Information Services for the city of Renton and as the Director of Finance for the city of Lynnwood. Mr. Bailey also served as president of the Washington Finance Officers Association and is the Vice Chair of the GFOA Budget Committee. An experienced CPA and GFOA budget reviewer, Mr. Bailey co-founded the annual Budget and Fiscal Management Workshops held each summer. Mr. Bailey conducts numerous workshops and has authored various articles on local government finance, including Effective Budgeting in Washington State Cities published by the Association of Washington Cities. The views expressed in Advisor columns represent the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those ofMRSC. VIEW ALL POSTS BY MIKE BAILEY / Leave a Comment - Comments Packet Pg. 209 http://mrsc.org/Home/Stay-Informed/MRSC-Insight/May/Best-Financial-Policy-It-Depend... 5/18/2017 MRSC - Which Financial Policies Work Best? 'It Depends.' Page 4 of 4 6.1.i 0 comments on Which Financial Policies Work Best? 'It Depends.' Blog post currently doesn't have any comments. © 2015 MRSC of Washington. All rights reserved. Privacy & Terms. Packet Pg. 210 http://mrsc.org/Home/Stay-Informed/MRSC-Insight/May/Best-Financial-Policy-It-Depend... 5/18/2017 6.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 07/2/2019 Civic Park Financing Staff Lead: Scott James Department: Administrative Services Preparer: Scott James Background/History After a very robust public process, the Civic Park Master Plan was approved in March 2017, and officially adopted in the City's Comprehensive Plan in late 2017. The City authorized a contract for design services with Walker Macy to complete the design development, permitting, bidding, and construction support. Since this award of bid, Walker Macy has been engaged in our community with various stakeholders to complete the schematic design and begin the design development process. Stakeholders included the original Project Advisory Committee, a skate park focus group, the Petanque club, the Chamber of Commerce, the Arts Festival Foundation, the Arts Commission, the Boys and Girls club, Sno-King Youth organization, among others. Walker Macy has used this input to inform the beginning of their design. Recently, the issue of parking at Civic has become a community dialogue. There were several people in the community that requested for Council to reopen the master plan and add parking. The Council voted to stay the course, and not reopen the master plan. Council / City Action to Date include: On June 12, staff presented the Council Finance Committee with bond financing options that included 20, 25 and 30 year bond terms and discussed the issuance of a Bond Anticipation Note or BAN. Briefly, a BAN is a short-term loan issued in advance of a future bond issue, and is repaid from the bonds proceeds. On June 4, 2019, staff presented Council with financing options to fund the "Gap", between revenues obtained to help pay for Civic Park and the anticipated expenses to construct the park. In April 2019 Council received an update of the design process. In November 2018, Council adopted both the CIP and CFP that identified Civic as a project, with a goal to begin construction in 2020. In May 2018, Council adopted resolutions to authorize grant submittals to the State Recreation and Conservation office for funding for Civic. In April 2018, Council authorized the full design contract for Civic to Walker Macy. In April 2018, Council approved the closeout for the removal of Civic stadium. In 2017, the City contracted with Walker Macy to complete the demolition plans for the stadium. In 2017, the City contracted with Walker Macy to complete the geo technical work and survey work, for both the sewer line replacement and for park planning purposes. After a robust public process, Council adopted the Civic Master Plan in March 2017. Council kicked off the master planning of Civic with a special meeting in May 2016. Packet Pg. 211 6.2 Council awarded the contract to Walker Macy in May of 2016. The City published an RFQ/SOQ on February 12t", 2016 for firms to submit their qualifications for all three phases of Civic Park Master Plan and Development. The PROS plan and Parks CIP have both identified the City's goals of master planning and developing this property once acquired. Civic Center Field was acquired by the City from the Edmonds School District on February 9, 2016. Staff Recommendation Authorize the Administration to: 1) Proceed with the Issuance of a 20 Year Bond or Bond Anticipation Note 2) Engage Bond Counsel for services 3) Engage Financial Advisor for services Narrative At the June 2019 Council Finance Committee, the Committee voted to bring the Civic Park financing options to Council tonight with the goal to seek Council authorization to proceed with either the issuance of a 20 Year Bond or Bond Anticipation Note (BAN). Proceeds from the Bond or BAN will used to fund the "Project Gap" in the Civic Park construction budget, which is estimated to total $3.5 million. Tonight's staff presentation will include: 1. Discussion of the Pros and Cons of issuing bonds or issuing a BAN 2. Comparison of debt service requirements for 20, 25 & 30 year bonds 3. Review current debt service requirements and compare to potential new debt service requirements from a Civic Park bond issue Attachments include: 1. Power point presentation 2. Bond Counsel Engagement Letter 3. Financial Advisor Engagement Letter 4. Civic Park Budget and Assumptions as of 6.4.19 5. Final adopted master plan Attachments: 2019 July 2nd Council Civic Park Funding Presentation Agreement to Serve as Financial Advisor City of Edmonds Engagement Letter - 6-27-19 CIVIC PARK BUDGET AND ASSUMPTIONS 170227_ECCP_Master_Plan_Final_optimized Packet Pg. 212 .PC: l ` V 6.2.a Civic Park Funding Options � • r L I a v 0 _ d y L a as _ LL L a i3 _ 0 U _ N 7 Cn O N r _ d E t t,1 c0 a NORTHWEST Packet Pg. 213 MUNICIPAL ADVISORS 0t, 6.2.a Civic Park Funding Options Projected Expenses' Projected Revenues' Gap in Construction Budget Stormwater Mitigation' Project Funding Gap 'See budget sheet in Council Packet for breakdown 2Estimated Draft Budget U c $ 11,885,400 CU $ 8,8301000 L S S S U- 3,055,400 L U .v 500,000 0 U c N 3 31555,400 r O N r c m E t r r Q A/vNORTHWEST F Packet Pg. 214 MUNICIPAL ADVISORS 6.2.a Civic Park Funding Options Pros and Cons of Issuing Bonds vs. Finance Committee Recommendations: Request Council authority to: 1. Issue Bond, or 2. Issue Bond Anticipation Note (BAN) Issuing BAN 2 U a 0 L Y d U v c 0 0 U What is a Bond Anticipation Note (BAN)? Briefly, a BAN is a N short-term loan issued in advance of a future bond issue, and is 0 repaid from the proceeds of the bond issuance. E a AA/ NORTHWEST Packet Pg. 215 MUNICIPAL ADVISORS 6.2.a Civic Park Funding Options Pros and Cons of Issuing Bonds vs. Issuing BAN a U Pros for issuing bonds: 1. Take advantage of low interest rates d a` 2. Establish funding for project 9 IL 3. Also positions City to take advantage timely (L bidding 3 Cons for issuing bonds: 9 N 1. Current cost estimate is only from schematic w 0 design E 2. Still deciphering Stormwater mitigation costs Q A/vNORTHWEST MUNICIPAL ADVISORS Packet Pg. 216 6.2.a Civic Park Funding Options Pros and Cons of Issuing Bonds vs. Issuing BAN Pros for issuing a BAN: o 1. Gives us time to finalize costs L 2. Establishes intent to fund project 3. Also positions City to take advantage timely a bidding 'u 0 4. Provides cushion to pursue private giving options 3, a Cons for issuing a BAN: cm 1. Interest rates may go upCD 2. Change in leadership / Council may delay project 3. Additional borrowing cost a /VVN O RT H W E T Packet Pg. 217 MUNICIPAL ADVISORS Oj, F 0•19 -y Civic Park FundingOptions �4 l`3L20, 25 & 30 Year Term Comparison cv a 2 2 All -in Interest Cost for Scenarios 0 20 Year 25 Year 30 Year $2.5M 2.88% 3.01% 3.12% L $3.OM 2.84% 2.98% 3.09% $3.5M 2.81% 2.96% 3.06% U_ Y L Comparison of 20, 25 & 30 Year Bond Debt Service Payments' a U $2.5 Million Debt Service Payments $3.0 Million Debt Service Payments $3.5 Million Debt Service Payments 20 Year 25 Year 30 Year 20 Year 25 Year 30 Year 20 Year 25 Year 30 Year c o Payment U Totals $ 3,329,650 $ 3,596,750 $ 3,894,150 $ 3, 973, 200 $ 4, 303, 000 $ 4,647,050 $ 4, 619, 950 $ 5, 001, 600 $ 5,402,80C N $ over 20 Year Bond $ - $ 267,100 $ 564,500 $ - $ 329,800 $ 673,850 $ - $ 381,650 $ 782,85C 0 % over 20 r N Year Bond 0.0% 8.0% 17.0% 0.0% 8.3% 17.0% 0.0% 8.3% 16.99 1Estimated Debt Service Schedule Comparison E r r Q NORTHWEST Packet Pg. 218 MUNICIPAL ADVISORS 6.2.a Civic Park Funding Options 20 Year Term Comparisc i a LTGO (Nonvoted) Bonds - Current Market Plus Approx. 0.25%1 2 $2.5 Million Proceeds $3.0 Million Proceeds $3.5 Million Proceeds U All -in Interest 2.88% All -in Interest 2.84% All -in Interest 2.81% 0 Dec. 1 Principal Interest Debt Service Principal Interest Debt Service Principal Interest Debt Service a 2020 $ 75,000 $ 88,950 $ 163,950 $ 95,000 $ 106,300 $ 201,300 $ 110,000 $ 123,650 $ 233,650 2021 80,000 85,200 165,200 100,000 101,550 201,550 115,000 118,150 233,150 2022 85,000 81,200 166,200 100,000 96,550 196,550 120,000 112,400 232,400 a a� 2023 90,000 76,950 166,950 105,000 91,550 196,550 125,000 106,400 231,400 2024 95,000 72,450 167,450 115,000 86,300 201,300 130,000 100,150 230,150 2025 100,000 67,700 167,700 120,000 80,550 200,550 140,000 93,650 233,650 Y L 2026 105,000 62,700 167,700 125,000 74,550 199,550 145,000 86,650 231,650 a 2027 110,000 57,450 167,450 130,000 68,300 198,300 150,000 79,400 229,400 V 2028 115,000 51,950 166,950 135,000 61,800 196,800 160,000 71,900 231,900 V 2029 120,000 46,200 166,200 145,000 55,050 200,050 165,000 63,900 228,900 2030 125,000 42,600 167,600 150,000 50,700 200,700 170,000 58,950 228,950 2031 130,000 38,850 168,850 155,000 46,200 201,200 175,000 53,850 228,850 0 cU 2032 130,000 34,950 164,950 155,000 41,550 196,550 180,000 48,600 228,600 c 2033 135,000 31,050 166,050 160,000 36,900 196,900 190,000 43,200 233,200 14 2034 140,000 27,000 167,000 165,000 32,100 197,100 195,000 37,500 232,500 2035 145,000 22,800 167,800 170,000 27,150 197,150 200,000 31,650 231,650 2036 150,000 18,450 168,450 175,000 22,050 197,050 205,000 25,650 230,650 N 2037 150,000 13,950 163,950 180,000 16,800 196,800 210,000 19,500 229,500 2038 155,000 9,450 164,450 185,000 11,400 196,400 220,000 13,200 233,200 E 2039 160,000 4,800 164,800 195,000 5,850 200,850 220,000 6,600 226,600 R $ 2, 395, 000 $ 934, 650 $ 3,329,650 $ 2, 860, 000 $1,113, 200 $ 3,973,200 $ 3, 325, 000 $1, 294, 950 $ 4,619,950 Q 1Estimated Debt Service Schedule NORTHWEST Packet Pg. 219 MUNICIPAL ADVISORS Civic Park FundingOpti6�� 25 Year Term Comparison LTGO (Nonvoted) Bonds - Current Market Plus Approx. 0.25%1 $2.5 Million Proceeds $3.0 Million Proceeds $3.5 Million Proceeds All -in Interest 3.01% All -in Interest 2.98% All -in Interest 2.96% Dec. 1 Principal Interest Debt Service Principal Interest Debt Service Principal Interest Debt Service 2020 $ 60,000 $ 86,150 $ 146,150 $ 70,000 $ 103,050 $ 173,050 $ 80,000 $ 119,800 $ 199,800 2021 60,000 83,150 143,150 75,000 99,550 174,550 85,000 115,800 200,800 2022 65,000 80,150 145,150 75,000 95,800 170,800 90,000 111,550 201,550 2023 65,000 76,900 141,900 80,000 92,050 172,050 95,000 107,050 202,050 2024 70,000 73,650 143,650 85,000 88,050 173,050 100,000 102,300 202,300 2025 75,000 70,150 145,150 90,000 83,800 173,800 100,000 97,300 197,300 2026 80,000 66,400 146,400 95,000 79,300 174,300 105,000 92,300 197,300 2027 80,000 62,400 142,400 95,000 74,550 169,550 115,000 87,050 202,050 2028 85,000 58,400 143,400 100,000 69,800 169,800 120,000 81,300 201,300 2029 90,000 54,150 144,150 105,000 64,800 169,800 125,000 75,300 200,300 2030 90,000 51,450 141,450 110,000 61,650 171,650 130,000 71,550 201,550 2031 95,000 48,750 143,750 115,000 58,350 173,350 130,000 67,650 197,650 2032 100,000 45,900 145,900 115,000 54,900 169,900 135,000 63,750 198,750 2033 100,000 42,900 142,900 120,000 51,450 171,450 140,000 59,700 199,700 2034 105,000 39,900 144,900 125,000 47,850 172,850 145,000 55,500 200,500 2035 105,000 36,750 141,750 130,000 44,100 174,100 150,000 51,150 201,150 2036 110,000 33,600 143,600 130,000 40,200 170,200 155,000 46,650 201,650 2037 115,000 30,300 145,300 135,000 36,300 171,300 160,000 42,000 202,000 2038 115,000 26,850 141,850 140,000 32,250 172,250 160,000 37,200 197,200 2039 120,000 23,400 143,400 145,000 28,050 173,050 165,000 32,400 197,400 2040 125,000 19,800 144,800 150,000 23,700 173,700 170,000 27,450 197,450 2041 130,000 16,050 146,050 155,000 19,200 174,200 175,000 22,350 197,350 2042 130,000 12,150 142,150 160,000 14,550 174,550 185,000 17,100 202,100 2043 135,000 8,250 143,250 160,000 9,750 169,750 190,000 11,550 201,550 2044 140,000 4,200 144,200 165,000 4,950 169,950 195,000 5,850 200,850 $ 2, 445, 000 $1,151, 750 $ 3,596,750 $ 2, 925, 000 $1, 378, 000 $ 4,303,000 $ 3, 400, 000 $1, 601, 600 $ 5,001,600 1Estimated Debt Service Schedule NORTHWEST MUNICIPAL ADVISORS Packet Pg. 220 'ryc. 1 Sg" Civic Park FundingOpti&ff� 30 Year Term Comparison LTGO (Nonvoted) Bonds - Current Market Plus Approx. 0.25%1 $2.5 Million Proceeds $3.0 Million Proceeds $3.5 Million Proceeds All -in Interest 3.12% All -in Interest 3.09% All -in Interest 3.069/6 Dec.1 Principal Interest Debt Service Principal Interest Debt Service Principal Coupon Interest Debt Service 2020 $ 45, 000 $ 84,650 $ 129, 650 $ 55, 000 $ 101,200 $ 156, 200 $ 65,000 5.000% $ 117,750 $ 182,750 2021 45,000 82,400 127,400 55,000 98,450 153,450 65,000 5.000% 114,500 179,500 2022 50,000 80,150 130,150 60,000 95,700 155,700 70,000 5.000% 111,250 181,250 2023 50,000 77,650 127,650 60,000 92,700 152,700 70,000 5.000% 107,750 177,750 2024 55,000 75,150 130,150 65,000 89,700 154,700 75,000 5.000% 104,250 179,250 2025 55,000 72,400 127,400 70,000 86,450 156,450 80,000 5.000% 100,500 180,500 2026 60,000 69,650 129,650 70,000 82,950 152,950 85,000 5.000% 96,500 181,500 2027 65,000 66,650 131,650 75,000 79,450 154,450 90,000 5.000% 92,250 182,250 2028 65,000 63,400 128,400 80,000 75,700 155,700 90,000 5.000% 87,750 177,750 2029 70,000 60,150 130,150 85,000 71,700 156,700 95,000 3.000% 83,250 178,250 2030 70,000 58,050 128,050 85,000 69,150 154,150 100,000 3.000% 80,400 180,400 2031 75,000 55,950 130,950 90,000 66,600 156,600 105,000 3.000% 77,400 182,400 2032 75,000 53,700 128,700 90,000 63,900 153,900 105,000 3.000% 74,250 179,250 2033 80,000 51,450 131,450 95,000 61,200 156,200 110,000 3.000% 71,100 181,100 2034 80,000 49,050 129,050 95,000 58,350 153,350 110,000 3.000% 67,800 177,800 2035 85, 000 46, 650 131, 650 100,000 SS'Soo 155, 500 115, 000 3.000% 64, 500 179, 500 2036 85,000 44,100 129,100 105,000 52,500 157,500 120,000 3.000% 61,050 181,050 2037 90,000 41,550 131,550 105,000 49,350 154,350 125,000 3.000% 57,450 182,450 2038 90,000 38,850 128,850 110,000 46,200 156,200 125,000 3.000% 53,700 178,700 2039 95,000 36,150 131,150 110,000 42,900 152,900 130,000 3.000% 49,950 179,950 2040 95,000 33,300 128,300 115,000 39,600 154,600 135,000 3.000% 46,050 181,050 2041 100,000 30,450 130,450 120,000 36,150 156,150 140,000 3.000% 42,000 182,000 2042 105,000 27,450 132,450 120,000 32,550 152,550 140,000 3.000% 37,800 177,800 2043 105,000 24,300 129,300 125,000 28,950 153,950 145,000 3.000% 33,600 178,600 2044 110,000 21,150 131,150 130,000 25,200 155,200 150,000 3.000% 29,250 179,250 2045 110,000 17,850 127,850 135,000 21,300 156,300 155,000 3.000% 24,750 179,750 2046 115,000 14,550 129,550 140,000 17,250 157,250 160,000 3.000% 20,100 180,100 2047 120,000 11,100 131,100 140,000 13,050 153,050 165,000 3.000% 15,300 180,300 2048 125,000 7,500 132,500 145,000 8,850 153,850 170,000 3.000% 10,350 180,350 2049 125,000 3,750 128,750 150,000 4,500 154,500 175,000 3.000% 5,250 180,250 $2,495,000 $1,399,150 $ 3,894,150 $2,980,000 $1,667,050 $ 4,647,050 $3,465,000 $1,937,800 $ 5,402,800 1Estimated Debt Service Schedule NORTHWEST MUNICIPAL ADVISORS Packet Pg. 221 6.2.a Civic Park Funding Options 20, 25 & 30 Year Term Comparison i M a 2 2 U All -in Interest Cost for Scenarios -- 20 Year $2.5M 2.88% $3.OM 2.84% $3.5M 2.81% a 0 25 Year 30 Year 3.01 % 3.12 L 2.98% 3.09% a., 2.96% 3.06% u_ Y L Comparison of Average 20, 25 & 30 Year Bond Debt Service Payments' $2.5 Million Debt Service Payments $3.0 Million Debt Service Payments $3.5 Million Debt Service Payments v 20 Year 25 Year 30 Year 20 Year 25 Year 30 Year 20 Year 25 Year 30 Year Average Payment $ 166,483 $ 143,870 $ 129,805 $ $ over 20 Year Bond $ - $ (22,613) $ (36,678) $ % over 20 Year Bond 0.0% -13.6% -22.0% 1Estimated Average Debt Service Schedule Comparison c 0 198,660 $ 172,120 $ 154,902 $ 230,998 $ 200,064 $ 180,093 c N - $ (26,540) $ (43,758) $ - $ (30,934) $ (50,904; 3 rn r 0.0% -13.4% -22.0% 0.0% -13.4% -22.09v( o r Q NORTHWEST Packet Pg. 222 MUNICIPAL ADVISORS .PC: l` V 6.2.a Civic Park Funding Options 12/31 / 19 Outstanding Governmental Debt Original Issue Maturity Interest Original Balance Issue Name Date Date Rates Amount 12/31/19 >_ U_ General Obligation Bonds: 0 2012 LT GO Refunding Bonds 12/1/2031 2.00% a. Refunded 1993 Issue - Public Works Building 1993 194,407 97,306 0 m b. Refunded 1993 Issue - City Hall 1993 539,819 270,195 a c. 2001 LT GO Issue - Series A - Improvements: Library, Francis Anderson Center, Streets 2001 1,349,817 675,622 �a c d. 2001 LT GO Issue - Series B - Marina Beach 2001 1,270,000 635,672 U. e. 2002 LT GO Issue -Performing Arts Center 2002 5,650,000 2,827,988 c`a a Total General Obligation Bonds 9,004,043 4,506,783 V t.) 2016 Chase Bank Loan 12/1/2026 1.67% c a. HVAC Project 2006 2006 401,593 288,956 0 U b. Anderson Center Seismic 2007 2007 247,134 177,819 c. Energy Conservation 2007 2007 189,799 136,565 c N _1 Total Chase Bank Loan 838,526 603,341 o� Public Works Trust Fund Loans N a. 2003 Street Construction Loan 0/2022 (D5/24/2026 0.50% $ 340,000 $ 54,430 b. 2004 Street Construction Loan 0/2024 0.50% $ 400,000 $ 105,882 z c. 2006 Street Construction Loan 0.50% $ 624,750 $ 230,171 a Total Public Works Trust Fund Loans 1,364,750 390,483 11,207,319 5,500,607 Packet Pg. 223 $6,000,000 $5,0K000 $410001000 $3,0001000 $2,000,000 $1,0 00100 0 $0 Civic Field Fund Before Bonding for Civic Park a Outstanding Governmental Debt 0 U. a t� 7 � V C N 7 (n s N r E t,1 M W) `O 00 C O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N 19 Packet Pg. 224 ,PC: l` V Annual Debt Service Compari Before Civic Park Bond & After Civic Bond SUMMARY OF TOTAL DEBT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS Current Annual Debt Service Requirements* Estimated Debt Service w/ $3.5 m Civic Bond d Ct Year Fund 001 Fund 126 Total Civic Park Total >_ U (2) (3) (4) _ (2) + (3) (5) (6) _ (4) + - c 2019 $ 363,531 $ 159,861 $ 523,391 $ - $ 523,391 ca 2020 $ 227,306 $ 163,112 $ 390,417 $ 233,650 $ 624,067 m 2021 $ 228,099 $ 165,817 $ 393,916 $ 233,150 $ 627,066 y m - L 2022 $ 59,953 $ 167,243 $ 227,196 $ 232,400 $ 459,596�) d 2023 $ 60,478 $ 170,080 $ 230,557 $ 231,400 $ 461,957 2024 $ 60,038 $ 167,694 $ 227,732 $ 230,150 $ 457,882 LL 2025 $ 60,310 $ 165,566 $ 225,876 $ 233,650 $ 459,526 Y 2026 $ 60,479 $ 158,268 $ 218,747 $ 231,650 $ 450,397 to a 2027 $ - $ 83,663 $ 83,663 $ 229,400 $ 313,063 V Z 2028 $ $ 81,975 $ 81,975 $ 231,900 $ 313,875 V 2029 $ $ 80,288 $ 80,288 $ 228,900 $ 309,188 v c 3 2030 $ - $ 83,600 $ 83,600 $ 228,950 $ 312,550 V 2031 $ $ 81,800 $ 81,800 $ 228,850 $ 310,650 c 2032 $ $ - $ - $ 228,600 $ 228,600 c+ 2033 $ - $ - $ - $ 233,200 $ 233,200 2034 $ - $ - $ - $ 232,500 $ 232,500 0� 2035 $ - $ - $ - $ 231,650 $ 231,650 N 2036 $ $ - $ - $ 230,650 $ 230,650 c m 2037 $ - $ - $ - $ 229,500 $ 229,500 2038 $ - $ - $ - $ 233,200 $ 233,200 2039 $ - $ - $ - $ 226,600 $ 226,600 Q * O sginifies Column Number Packet Pg. 225 .PC: l` V $700,000 $500,000 $400,000 $300,000 $200,000 $100, 000 $0 ■ M O rl N O O N N N M N N O O N N 6.2.a Annual Debt Service Comparison Before Civic Park Bond & After Civic Bond Annual Debt Service Comparison o a� c c LL 1 1 Z L) d ItT U1 lD n 00 Ol O 1-1 N rM u1 lD Il- 00 Ql E N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M t O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O V N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ■ Before Civic Bond ■ With Civic Bond Q 14 Packet Pg. 226 6.2.a Civic Field Funding Oustanding Governmental Debt Before Civic & After Civic Bond Issue l— 00 0� kn � � 00 C1 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N ■ Before Civic ■ Civic Debt a Packet Pg. 227 Next Steps: 6.2.a Civic Park Funding Council Discussion /Direction U c O r 1. Council Decision on Bonds vs. BANSa. S a 2. Council authorization for Administration to LL a engage Bond Counsel and Financial Advisor u 3. Parks Department to determine final costs 9 4. Parks Department to implement private giving options NORTHWEST MUNICIPAL ADVISORS 0 N C d t t,1 c0 a ig Packet Pg. 228 6.2.b A/VNORTHWEST MUNICIPAL ADVISORS 11900 NE 111 Street, Suite 300 Bellevue, Washington 98005 June 27, 2019 Mr. Scott James Finance Director City of Edmonds 121 St" Avenue N Edmonds, Washington 98020 Re: ENGAGEMENT LETTER FOR FINANCIAL ADVISORY SERVICES c Dear Scott: c� c This letter and proposal specifies the terms of the engagement between Northwest Municipal Advisors and the City u_ of Edmonds (the "City") for financial advisory services related to capital planning and funding for the City. If acceptable to the City, this engagement shall become effective upon acceptance by the City. a INTRODUCTION TO NORTHWEST MUNICIPAL ADVISORS U Northwest Municipal Advisors ("NWMA") is a financial advisory firm that specializes in assisting public entities `o finance projects. We have significant experience in general government and special purpose district financing. p J g p g g p p p g• N > As a firm we do not sell or underwrite securities or bonds but only serve in an advisory role. This allows us to avoid Q a potential conflict of interest in providing advice to a bond issuer. f° c NWMA is a registered Municipal Advisor with the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") and the Municipal c Securities Rulemaking Board ("MSRB"). As such, NWMA has a fiduciary duty to our clients and shall act and provide ii advice in a manner it believes to be in the best interest of its clients. N As financial advisor, our most important responsibility is to provide sound advice to our clients, and our preference m is to be involved in all aspects of a financing, ranging from up -front planning and identification of financing options N to the actual sale, pricing and closing of a bond issue or other financing. We work with most of the bond counsel o and underwriter firms in the Northwest, with many of the national underwriting firms, with regional and national banking institutions, and have good relationships with the bond rating agencies. m E Our firm includes three professionals and support staff. Alan Dashen, Malinda Okerlund, and I are in our Bellevue a) a) office. I will be the primary contact on any financing, with back-up from Alan and Malinda. Im Q SCOPE OF SERVICES NWMA will serve as financial advisor for the City's financing needs and provide the following services: • Consult with the City in determining the amount of borrowing, bond structure and the timing of any bond sale financing. This analysis will take into account current and future capital requirements, adequate levels of City reserves, interest rates and reinvestment rates, among other things. We will advise the City on whether or not to proceed with any financing. • Recommend to the City whether a borrowing should be completed through a bank loan, a public issuance of bonds or other. If a public issuance of bonds, recommend a negotiated or competitive sale process. • If a bank loan or negotiated sale is appropriate, assist the City in selecting a bank or underwriter for the financings. • Attend financing meetings as appropriate and assist in facilitating the business aspects of such meetings. • Review the City's outstanding debt and update the City, as appropriate, on refunding opportunities. Packet Pg. 229 6.2.b A/V • Assume overall coordination of any financing, including developing time schedules, ensuring that documents are available on a timely basis and keeping the City up-to-date on the bond market and any changes that could affect the financing timeline. • Prepare and coordinate rating presentations for the bonds. We would also discuss with the City options for the presentation. • Review all documents related to the issuance of any bonds and provide the City and bond counsel with comments and recommendations as appropriate. • Perform analytical work and provide other advice and recommendations associated with the issuance of bonds, as requested by the City. • Meet with the City's City Council, management and staff as requested. a� E U c • Represent the City during pricing of the bonds and advise and inform the City as to the reasonableness of M c the structure and terms of the bonds and the fairness and reasonableness of the pricing offered by the ii underwriter, as of the sale date of the bonds. We will recommend whether or not to accept the Y underwriter's offer to purchase the bonds. a • If acting in the capacity of an Independent Registered Municipal Advisor ("IRMA") with regard to the IRMA > exemption of the SEC Rule, NWMA will review all third -party recommendations submitted to NWMA in U writing by the City. o N • Provide such other related services as requested by the City. z FEES AND CHARGES For bond sales where we have primary responsibility for coordinating the financing, working with the rating agencies and structuring the bond issue, the fee schedule would be up to the following amounts for each issue: • For issues up to $40 million, $1.25 per $1,000 par amount of bonds, with a minimum fee of $20,000 (subject to reduction for small issues or bond anticipation notes). • For issues over $40 million, $50,000 plus $0.50 per $1,000 par amount of bonds, up to an agreed upon cap. • For preparing the preliminary and final official statements, an additional fee not to exceed $10,000. Fees calculated on the above schedule shall be adjusted as follows: • NWMA will be reimbursed for direct out-of-pocket expenses. These expenses may include, but are not limited to, mileage, travel expenses, printing, conference calls, and other. • For special projects or assignments not directly related to the issuance of debt, NWMA will work with the City to define a scope of service and will negotiate a fixed fee or hourly compensation (at the City's option) prior to any work being commenced. If the City selects hourly compensation, we bill (per hour) $295 for principals and $195 for financial advisors. OTHER PROVISIONS This Agreement represents the complete and exclusive agreement between the parties. Additional services and compensation may be added to this Agreement by a written supplement, with the mutual written consent of both parties. All amendments or supplements shall be signed by both parties and attached to this Agreement. FIDUCIARY DUTY NWMA is registered as a Municipal Advisor with the SEC. As such, NWMA has a fiduciary duty to the City and must provide both a Duty of Care and a Duty of Loyalty that entails the following. 2 Packet Pg. 230 6.2.b A/V Duty of Care a) Exercise due care in performing its municipal advisory activities. b) Possess the degree of knowledge and expertise needed to provide the City with informed advice. c) Make a reasonable inquiry as to the facts that are relevant to the City's determination as to whether to proceed with a course of action or that form the basis for any advice provided to the City. d) Undertake a reasonable investigation to determine that NWMA is not forming any recommendation on materially inaccurate or incomplete information; NWMA must have a reasonable basis for: Any advice provided to or on behalf of the City; Any representations made in a certificate that NWMA signs that will be reasonably foreseeably relied upon by the City, any other party involved in the municipal securities transaction or municipal financial product, or investors in the City securities; and iii. Any information provided to the City or other parties involved in the municipal securities transaction in connection with the preparation of an official statement. Duty of Loyalty NWMA must deal honestly and with the utmost good faith with the City and act in the City's best interests without regard to the financial or other interests of NWMA. NWMA will eliminate or provide full and fair disclosure (included herein) to the City about each material conflict of interest (as applicable). NWMA will not engage in municipal advisory activities with the City as a municipal entity if it cannot manage or mitigate its conflicts in a manner that will permit it to act in the City's best interests. MUNICIPAL SECURITIES RULEMAKING BOARD RULE G-10 DISCLOSURE Pursuant to Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board Rule G-10, on Investor and Municipal Advisory Client Education and Protection, Municipal Advisors are required to provide certain written information to their municipal entity and obligated person clients which include the following: • NWMA is currently registered as a Municipal Advisor with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. • Within the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board ("MSRB") website at www.msrb.org, the City may obtain the Municipal Advisory client brochure that is posted on the MSRB website. The brochure describes the protections that may be provided by the MSRB Rules along with how to file a complaint with financial regulatory authorities. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND OTHER MATTERS REQUIRING DISCLOSURES As of the date of the Agreement, except as disclosed below NWMA is not aware of actual or potential conflicts of interest that NWMA that might impair its ability to render unbiased and competent advice or to fulfill its fiduciary duty, except as discussed. If NWMA becomes aware of any other potential conflict of interest that arise after this disclosure, NWMA will disclose the detailed information in writing to the City in a timely manner. • NWMA is compensated for municipal advisory activities to be performed that is contingent on the size or closing of any transactions as to which NWMA is providing advice which can be a conflict of interest. The fee paid to NWMA increases the cost of investment to the City. The increased cost occurs from compensating NWMA for municipal advisory services provided. 3 U Packet Pg. 231 6.2.b A/V • NWMA does not have any other engagements or relationships that might impair NWMA's ability either to render unbiased and competent advice to or on behalf of the City or to fulfill its fiduciary duty to the City, as applicable. • NWMA does not act as principal in any of the transactions related to this Agreement. • During the term of the municipal advisory relationship, this agreement will be promptly amended or supplemented to reflect any material changes in or additions to the terms or information within this agreement and the revised writing will be promptly delivered to the City. • NWMA does not have any affiliate that provides any advice, service, or product to or on behalf of the client that is directly or indirectly related to the municipal advisory activities to be performed by NWMA. • NWMA has not made any payments directly or indirectly to obtain or retain the City's municipal advisory a� E business. U c • NWMA has not received any payments from third parties to enlist NWMA recommendation to the City of ii its services, any municipal securities transaction or any municipal finance product; Y • NWMA has not engaged in an fee -splitting arrangements involving NWMA and an provider of Y p g g g Y p M a U investments or services to the City. .> U • NWMA does not have any legal or disciplinary event that is material to the City's evaluation of the municipal L advisory or the integrity of its management or advisory personnel. w A • NWMA is not involved in the underwriting of bonds and is not associated with any underwriting firm which a eliminates any conflicts of interest related to underwriter selection or underwriter compensation. • NWMA serves as financial advisor to Snohomish County and Mukilteo School District; however we don't c believe these present a conflict of interest. If any potential conflict arises, we would inform the City. E LEGAL EVENTS AND DISCIPLINARY HISTORY NWMA does not have any legal events and disciplinary history on its Form MA and Form MA -I, which includes information about any criminal actions, regulatory actions, investigations, terminations, judgments, liens, civil judicial actions, customer complaints, arbitrations and civil litigation. The City may electronically access NWMA's most recent Form MA and each most recent Form MA -I filed with the Commission at the following website: www.sec.gov/edgar/searchedgar/companysearch.html. There have been no material changes to a legal or disciplinary event disclosure on any Form MA or Form MA -I filed with the SEC. RECOMMENDATIONS If NWMA makes a recommendation of a municipal securities transaction or municipal financial product or if the review of a recommendation of another party is requested in writing by the City and is within the scope of the engagement, NWMA will determine, based on the information obtained through reasonable diligence of NWMA whether a municipal securities transaction or municipal financial product is suitable for the City. In addition, NWMA will inform the City of: • the evaluation of the material risks, potential benefits, structure, and other characteristics of the recommendation; • the basis upon which NWMA reasonably believes that the recommended municipal securities transaction or municipal financial product is, or is not, suitable for the City; and • whether NWMA has investigated or considered other reasonably feasible alternatives to the recommendation that might also or alternatively serve the City's objectives. 4 Packet Pg. 232 6.2.b AA/ If the City elects a course of action that is independent of or contrary to the advice provided by NWMA, NWMA is not required on that basis to disengage from the City. RECORD RETENTION Effective July 1, 2014, pursuant to the SEC record retention regulations, NWMA is required to maintain in writing, all communication and created documents between NWMA and the City for 5 years. TERM OF AGREEMENT This agreement shall remain in effect until the earlier of December 31, 2022 or termination by either party. In the event of termination, NWMA shall be reimbursed for expenses incurred to the date of termination. a� c LIMITATION OF LIABILITY c R Liability of NWMA under this agreement shall be limited to fees paid. ii L APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT d If this agreement is satisfactory to the City, please sign and return to NWMA. V We look forward to working with the City to meet your financing needs. If you have any questions regarding this U engagement letter, please do not hesitate to call. o N Sincerely, a Scott J. Bauer Accepted and approved by City of Edmonds This day of 2019. By: 5 Packet Pg. 233 MP FOSTER PEPPER Direct Phone (206) 447-7888 E-Mail marc.greenoughCfoster.com June 27, 2019 Mr. Scott James c Finance Director r_ c City of Edmonds 121 Fifth Avenue North a Edmonds, Washington 98020 2 U Re: Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, 2019 Dear Scott: I look forward to working with you in our representation of the City of Edmonds (the "City") on the issuance above -referenced bonds (the "Bonds") to finance improvements to Civic Park. Our bond counsel services will consist of the tasks identified in the attached "Scope of Services." The fee for bond counsel services, if the Bonds are issued in the principal amount of approximately $3.5 million, is $14,700. If the City issues a bond anticipation note ("BAN") prior to issuing the Bonds, the additional fee for bond counsel services in connection with the BAN is 60% of the fee for the Bonds, or $8,800. Fees shall be payable by the City upon issuance of BAN and the Bonds, as applicable. From time to time our firm serves as counsel to financial institutions, including banks and underwriters that the City may select to provide financing, on matters entirely unrelated to the City. By executing this engagement letter, the City would waive any potential conflict of interest posed by our work for such financial institutions in other contexts. We do not believe that any such unrelated representation presents a risk of disclosure of City confidences or would reduce the diligence and loyalty we will devote to our work for the City. However, we will consult with you prior to proceeding with any such representation where the City's interests may be adverse. As we have discussed, on June 14, 2019, the equity members of Foster Pepper agreed to combine the firm with the firm of Garvey Schubert Barer, P.C., a similarly sized firm headquartered in Seattle with a similarly significant commitment to serving public sector clients. The merger is expected to become effective September 1, 2019. The two firms have not identified any significant client conflicts that will result from the merger. The combined firm will be a professional corporation comprising approximately 180 lawyers with offices in Seattle, Portland, Spokane, New York, Washington, D.C., and Beijing. We do not expect the merger to affect our public finance clients in any way, other than the ability to better serve them with an expanded geographical platform and efficiencies that will permit us to continue investing in the technology and resources critical to providing exceptional legal services. TEL: 206.447.4400 FAX: 206.447.9700 1111 THIRD AVENUE, SUITE 3000 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101-3299 www.FOSTER.com SEATTLE WASHINGTON SPOKANE WASHINGTON Packet Pg. 234 s.2.� Ms. Scott James June 27, 2019 Page 2 Please let me know if this approach is acceptable to the City and if so, I would appreciate it if you or another authorized official would print and sign a copy of this letter and return it to me at your convenience. We appreciate the City's business and very much look forward to working with you on the successful issuance of the Bonds. Very truly yours, 6 c FOSTER PEPPER PLLC M c ii L M a Marc R. Greenough 2 U APPROVED AND ACCEPTED: CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON an Title: Date: 53431045.1 Packet Pg. 235 6.2.c SCOPE OF BOND COUNSEL SERVICES FOSTER PEPPER PLLC The range of services provided by bond counsel can be narrow or broad, and frequently varies from financing to financing. In addition, the amount of work necessary to perform the same services can be quite different depending upon the nature and complexity of the financing. In the following, we use the term "bonds" to include any obligation of the issuing local government (the "Issuer") for which we are asked to serve as bond counsel. A. BOND COUNSEL SERVICES Those services which Foster Pepper PLLC traditionally provides as bond counsel to the Issuer include: (1) Advising the Issuer and its consultants on the legal requirements applicable to and, when requested, participating with those consultants and Issuer's staff in planning, financing, or refinancing of a project, including advice on state law and federal income tax and securities laws; (2) Reviewing the transcripts relating to the prior issuance by the Issuer of related outstanding obligations, to assure conformity of the bonds with applicable covenants and conditions; (3) Based on facts provided by the Issuer, performing the necessary legal analysis to determine, in financings in which the bonds are intended to be tax-exempt, whether interest on the bonds will qualify for an exclusion from gross income for federal income tax purposes, and preparing tax exemption and nonarbitrage certificates; (4) Drafting the ordinances/resolutions and other documents necessary to authorize the bonds to be sold and issued (including, where applicable, ballot title ordinances/resolutions); (5) Attending certain meetings relating to the sale and issuance of the bonds; (6) Forwarding Issuer financing documents to bond rating agencies and/or bond insurers, when requested by the Issuer or Issuer's financial consultant or underwriter, and explaining those documents to agency and insurer representatives; (7) When requested by the Issuer or the Issuer's financial consultant or underwriter, reading those portions of drafts of the official statement, offering circular, or other sales material relating to the bonds prepared by the Issuer's financial consultant or underwriter necessary to assure the accuracy only of the description of the bonds, the source of payment and security for the bonds, any continuing disclosure undertaking, and the federal tax treatment of the interest on the bonds; (8) Preparing closing documents necessary to support the issuance of the bonds and assembling the transcript after the closing; and U 53431045.1 Packet Pg. 236 s.2.� (9) Subject to the completion of proceedings to our satisfaction, furnishing the firm's approving legal opinion for the bonds regarding the validity and binding effect of the bonds and the excludability of interest on the bonds from gross income for federal income tax purposes. Our bond opinion will be based on facts and law existing as of its date, and will constitute the expression of our professional judgment on the matters expressly addressed and not a guarantee of result. In rendering that opinion, we will rely upon the certified proceedings and other certifications of public officials and other persons furnished to us without undertaking to verify the same by independent investigation, and we will assume the Issuer's continuing compliance, after r_ the issue date, with applicable laws relating to the bonds. During the course of this engagement, we i will rely on the Issuer to provide us with complete and timely information on all developments a pertaining to any aspect of the bonds and their security, as well as the expected use of bond 2 proceeds. We understand and expect that officers and employees of the Issuer will cooperate with us L) in this regard. B. OTHER SERVICES Traditional bond counsel services described above do not include the following additional bond and project -related work for the Issuer which we would be pleased to perform on request, working with the Issuer's attorney or other designated representatives. The provision of these services involves appropriate fee arrangements. (1) The drafting or review for sufficiency of any environmental impact statements or other evidence of compliance with the State and National Environmental Policy Acts, the Shoreline Management Act, the Growth Management Act, and similar laws; (2) The drafting or review for accuracy of portions of any official statement, offering circular, or other sales material relating to the issuance of the bonds prepared by the Issuer or its financial consultant or underwriter or otherwise used in connection with the bonds (other than the review of those portions of the official statement describing the bonds, the source of payment and security for the bonds, any continuing disclosure undertaking, and the expected federal tax treatment of the interest on the bonds, which is included in our services as bond counsel in item A.7 above); (3) Giving advice to the Issuer's consultants regarding the applicability of the registration requirements under federal or state securities laws or regarding federal and state securities disclosure requirements or due diligence review; (4) Drafting or negotiating of bond purchase agreements (though as a matter of course as bond counsel we typically review such agreements to assure that they conform to the Issuer's bond authorization documents); (5) Negotiating and drafting repurchase agreements, investment contracts, custodial agreements, swap agreements, credit enhancement or liquidity facilities (other than bond insurance), 53431045.1 Packet Pg. 237 s.2.c and contracts (including contracts with developers or owners of property included within local improvement districts formed by the Issuer), or disputes or litigation in connection therewith; (6) Attending rating agency or public information meetings in connection with the issuance of bonds; (7) Preparation of supplemental opinions required of bond counsel by the Issuer or the underwriter of bonds in connection with their issuance; c M (8) Drafting or obtaining state or federal legislation; r- U- L (9) Participating in administrative proceedings or trial or appellate litigation; a (10) Drafting special assessment district formation and assessment documents and 0 attending special assessment hearings; (11) Work in connection with seeking or obtaining governmental assistance or approvals from governmental agencies (other than the Issuer) necessary for carrying out the purposes of the bond issue; (12) Providing services relating to public works bidding, negotiating design or construction contracts, or carrying out the acquisition of property or the construction of projects; (13) Representing the Issuer in Internal Revenue Service examinations or inquiries or Securities and Exchange Commission investigations; (14) After closing, providing continuing advice to the Issuer or any other party concerning any actions necessary to assure that interest paid on the bonds will continue to be excludable from gross income for federal income tax purposes (e.g., our engagement as bond counsel does not include rebate calculations for the bonds or dealing with changes of use or delays in the expenditure of proceeds); (15) Assisting the Issuer with its continuing disclosure obligations consistent with applicable securities laws; or (16) Addressing any other matter not specifically set forth above that is not required to furnish our bond opinion. C. FILE MANAGEMENT After the transaction is concluded, we will deliver to the Issuer a complete copy of the transcript of the transaction. A transcript is delivered generally within 30 to 60 days after closing. We then close our files regarding the matter, and our representation on the transaction is completed. Additional services after closing would be addressed under Part B, above. 53431045.1 Packet Pg. 238 6.2.d CIVIC PARK BUDGET AND ASSUMPTIONS 4-Jun-19 REVENUE 2019 2020 Total Fund 125 $70,000.00 $500,000.00 $570,000.00 Fund 126 $750,000.00 $500,000.00 $1,250,000.00 City GF $2,000,000.00 $500,000.00 $2,500,000.00 Park Impact Fees $500,000.00 $500,000.00 $1,000,000.00 RCO/Local Parks/YAF $850,000.00 $850,000.00 LWCF/State $500,000.00 $500,000.00 Snohomish County $450,000.00 $450,000.00 Hazel Miller Foundation $1,500,000.00 $1,500,000.00 ADA Playground Upgrades $110,000.00 $110,000.00 Verdant/FitnessZone $100,000.00 $100,000.00 TOTAL $3,430,000.00 $5,400,000.00 $8,830,000.00 EXPENSES 2019 2020 Total A&E $750,000.00 $205,000.00 $955,000.00 Permitting $0.00 Construction $6,800,000.00 $6,800,000.00 GC's, escalation, contingency $2,380,000.00 $2,380,000.00 Const. support/testing/misc/Engineerin g $30,000.00 $1,020,000.00 $1,050,000.00 WSST $700,400.00 $700,400.00 TOTAL $780,000.00 $11,105,400.00 $11,885,400.00 Gap in funding Assumptions: 2020 CIP budget includes additional REET and PIF 2020 GF 500,000 LWCF Funded at $500,000 $3,055,400.00 .0 Packet Pg. 239 6.2.e c.i U a Packet Pg. 241 6.2.e ACKNOWLEDGMENTS City of Edmonds Mayor Dave Earling Edmonds City Council Edmonds Planning Board City Staff Carrie Hite, Director, Parks, Recreation & Cultural Services (PRCS) Renee McRae, Deputy Director, (PRCS) Frances Chapin, Arts & Culture Manager, (PRCS) Rich Lindsay, Park Maintenance Manager, (PRCS) Rob Chave, Planning Manager Kernen Lien, Senior Planner Todd Cort, Recreation Coordinator Phil Williams, Public Works & Utilities Director Mike DeLilla, Senior Utilities Engineer Shane Hope, Director, Development Services Rich Lindsay, Parks Maintenance Manager Rob English, City Engineer Jennifer Lambert, Engineering Technician Consultant Team Project Advisory Committee Kyla Blair Barbara Chase Mike Echelbarger Kristiana Johnson Lesly Kaplan John McGibbon Joe Mclalwain Bob Rinehart Emily Scott Doug Sheldon Steve Shelton Valerie Stewart Dave Teitzel Dick Van Hokebeke Diana White Alex Witenberg Pat Wooden WALKER MACY Walker I Macy - Landscape Architecture, Project Lead Chris Jones, Principal Lara Rose, Design Principal Ann Marie Schneider, Project Manager, Landscape Designer Alyssa Machle John, Landscape Designer enviroissues Enviroissues - Public Outreach / WBE Ara Swanson, Associate Harrison Price, Project Coordinator ORA- Architecture Owen Richards, AIA, LEED AP Steven Lazen, AIA Emily Perchlik, Assoc. AIA JMB Consulting Group, LLC - Cost Estimating Jon Bayles, Principal Herrera Environmental Consultants - Permitting HERRERA Shelby Petro, Wetland Scientist, Env. Permit Coordinator V Packet Pg. 242 6.2.e c.i U a Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 243 Table of Contents Introduction.......................................................................................................................6 SITE BACKGROUND &ANALYSIS..................................................9 History..............................................................................................................................10 ExistingConditions........................................................................................................10 Related Studies & Plans................................................................................................11 Context............................................................................................................................. 12 DESIGN DEVELOPMENT+ COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ............ 19 Process& Schedule....................................................................................................... 20 DeedRestrictions...........................................................................................................21 Park Activities & Amenities........................................................................................... 22 ExistingUses.............................................................................................................. 22 PotentialNew Uses................................................................................................... 24 DESIGN ALTERNATIVES.................................................................................................30 Option1- Meadow Loop........................................................................................ 30 Option 2 - Activity Central....................................................................................... 32 Events............................................................................................................................... 34 CurrentEvents...........................................................................................................34 Design Alternative Event Overlays......................................................................... 35 OpenHouse 2, August 2016........................................................................................ 36 Format & Objective.. : .................... 36 Small Group Discussions.........................................................................................36 Participation and Attendance................................................................................ 38 Feedback.................................................................................................................... 39 MASTER PLAN.............................................................................41 Hybriddesign..................................................................................................................42 AerialView..................................................................................................................43 Examples of Signature Features............................................................................43 MasterPlan Views..........................................................................................................46 Master Plan Event Overlays.......................................................................................... 48 Small to Medium Size Events Within the Park....................................................48 Large Events and the 6th Avenue Market Promenade......................................49 Architectural Elements..................................................................................................50 Boys and Girls Club Expansion...............................................................................50 Examples of Signature Features............................................................................ 51 ShadePavilion...........................................................................................................51 OpenHouse 3, October, 2016...................................................................................... 52 Format.........................................................................................................................52 Participation and Attendance................................................................................53 Phasing.............................................................................................................................54 Supplemental Information..........................................................................................55 AlleyBuffers................................................................................................................55 Utilities and City Planning.......................................................................................55 Parking Considerations..........................................................................................55 Tennis / Sports Fencing...........................................................................................55 Street Improvements....................................................................................................56 6th Avenue Market Promenade.............................................................................56 7th Avenue Street Improvements..........................................................................57 .0 0 Packet Pg. 244 INTRODUCTION Civic Center Playfield is an eight acre park in the heart of downtown Edmonds that straddles the boundary between residences, civic amenities and the downtown commercial district. Well -loved and used by residents of all ages, it is home to the Boys and Girls Club, the Petanque Club, athletic fields, a playground, a skatepark, tennis courts and several of Edmonds largest annual festivals such as the Taste of Edmonds and the 4th of July Fireworks. Originally the Edmonds High School sports facility in the 1930's, the site has served as a recreational and event space for decades while the population of Edmonds has continued to grow and develop around it. The City has been operating and maintaining the property for public use since 1975, with no investment of capital funds and little change to the layout since its former use by Edmonds High School. In the 2014 Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan (PROS Plan), Civic Center Playfield was identified as a key asset and securing the park, that had been leased from the Edmonds School District for40 years, was deemed a priority. In direct response, the City of Edmonds acquired the property in the fall of 2015 with grant assistance from the Washington State Recreation Conservation Office and the Snohomish Conservation Futures Program, thereby ensuring that the site will remain accessible to the community, providing both passive and active recreation. In April 2016, through a Request For Qualifications and interview process, Walker Macy, a Landscape Architecture and Urban Design firm, was hired bythe Edmonds Parks. Recreation and Cultural Services (EPRCS) department to lead the Civic Center Playfield Master Planning effort. The project goal was to work with the City of Edmonds and the Edmonds community to design a Master Plan that envisions Civic Center Playfield as a signature park in the heart of downtown Edmonds. The project undertook a rigorous public engagement process, including three public open houses, three online open houses, stakeholder interviews and a series of meetings with the Project Advisory Committee, the Parks and Recreation Staff, the City Council and the Planning Board in order to create a plan inspired by the community's desires and reflecting public sentiment and feedback. Several iterations of design and feedback were presented, tested and reviewed, resulting in a schematic design that integrates active program, civic engagement and beautiful landscape spaces. The Civic Center Playfield Master Plan embraces the potential of this downtown park to contribute to a sense of community identity and civic pride while promoting active, healthy lifestyles, energizing the local economy and bolstering the city's growing reputation as a destination on Puget Sound. The legacy of the park as an iconic place for gathering, celebration and enhanced daily life is intended to serve Edmonds for generations to come. 2 V 6 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 245 I� DaIe'y _ �• Cl �Z/ — 1 h Sprague St MEADOWS _ Sprague St. THE GREAT LAWN 7 Ir.� r Edmonds St Im R r w i •- � I i ����,,' • - , � .� a- - � ddd - _ � yam, - � _ Bell St 6.2.e c.i U a Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 247 6.2.e c.i U f4• ,4; ��_ S ITE. _ ACKG RO U N D & �_ �o Edmonds N City Hall e— Boys & w � Girls Club a Farmer's � Market & Future Veterans Plaza P BELL ST Main Edmonds Street Historical Shops Museum MAIN ST ■ r � mom �M IM M Mir ANALYSIS 1 LEGEND HISTORIC SITES w a DESTINATIONS Site Background & An Packet Pg. 248 HISTORY Civic Center Playfield was the athletic grounds for Edmonds High School, originally built a block from the site at 410 Fourth Avenue North, now the Edmonds Center for the Arts. Prior to recreational development it's believed to have been a marshy field. In 1957 the high school relocated to the Holmes Corner neighborhood at 76th and 212th. The City has operated the property as a park since 1975 with minimal change to its amenities or use. 1930's - courtesy of the Sno-Isle Musem 1950's 2015 - Google Earth EXISTING CONDITIONS Today, the eight acre site includes a playground, basketball and tennis courts, football field, soccer fields, track, skate park, petanque courts, portable restrooms, and two structures - the grandstand and the Boys and Girls Club (former high school field house). Civic Center Playfield is currently used for neighborhood recreation, community sports team practices and games by local organizations such as Sno-King Youth Club and EPRCS recreation programs. It also hosts events such as the 4th of July, Taste of Edmonds, Edmonds Arts Festival parking and the Wenatchee Youth Circus. There are two structures on site, the field house, most likely built after 1935 when the district acquired the property, was remodeled in 1999 and is currently leased to the Edmonds Boys and Girls Club. The grandstand, also over 50 years old, is still used on occasion for events and also serves as storage for a number of local organizations. The Edmonds Boys & Girls Club has occupied the field house since 1968. It's currently operating at full capacity, serving approximately 150children. Activities offered atthe Boys&Girls Club include arts and crafts, computer use, homework help, volleyball and basketball, arts and music, snacks and meals. The building presently contains spaces typical in most Club facilities - ground floor offices, a small game/recreation room, computer lab area, restrooms, storage and service spaces. The upper floor, includes a gym and additional storage. The Boys& Girls Club is in conversation with EPRCS and the City to discuss the needs and plans of the organization in conjunction with the park redesign. The field house would likely require expansion if it is to continue to serve the growing needs of the Club. In a City of Edmonds Historic Preservation Commission Special Meeting on June 29, 2016, a majority of the Commissioners "voiced support for retaining the field house structure due to its significance to the community and because it echoes what Edmonds used to look like in the 1920's and 1930's." The Commission also discussed the historic value of the entire site and the importance to the community of "retaining some of it's historic [] flavor" as the park design continues (see Appendix for full HPC Meeting Minutes). The State of Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation recently ruled that the grandstand is not of historic significance and the State of Washington Recreation Conservation Office has approved the removal of the structure. A structural review was also completed during the Master Plan effort with the conclusion that significant upgrades are needed to meet both structural and accessibility compliance (see full grandstand structural evaluation in Appendix). 2 U 10 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 249 6.2.e Panorama taken from the playground at the south east corner of the site. The grandstand is to the left and back of the field house is left of center. Field house (Boys & Girls Club) entrance Grandstand Field house 2nd floor gymnasium RELATED STUDIES & PLANS Field house 1st floor entry area Prior studies were consulted by the project team during the master planning process. These include: • 4th Ave implementation Plan • 4th Ave Arts Corridor Plan • Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan (PROS Plan), February 2014 • City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan • Edmonds Cultural Plan, February2014 • Edmonds Transportation Plan • Edmonds Strategic Plan • The Edmonds Waterfront Access Alternatives Study 2 U Site Background & An Packet Pg. 250 6.2.e CONTEXT t URBAN ECOLOGIES A sizeable public open space in downtown Edmonds, Civic Center Hayfield serves a unique role that differs from other parks in the vicinity. It's urban context, flatness and lack of tree cover set it apart from Yost Park and the Shell Creek corridor, Edmonds Marsh, and Brackett's Landing, all of which are larger in scale and provide important eco-destinations and habitat. City Park offers undulating topography and significant tree canopy resulting in a more passive park experience with some active play area, while the nearby Frances Anderson Center hosts a green space with more intimate neighborhood -scale activity, recreation and gathering. 12 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 251 6.2.e F :.i U }' _A VFW� T r - 1 U . - 'q r p 41 PANORAMIC VIEWS OVER PARK SITEVIEWS Spectacular views of the Puget Sound and the Olympic mountain range are a signature feature of the City of Edmonds. The east edge of Civic Center Playfield offers glimpses of the Olympic peaks due to it's slightly higher elevation and the parks grand, open scale. Also noteworthy are the panoramic views from the streets and residences on the high slopes directly east of the park where the park grounds become foreground. Site Background & An Packet Pg. 252 6.2.e V O w 11101 {w,: ..-.Lit _ ii''a I.M..; flyer • `�� PARK EDGES AND CURRENT ZONING Civic Center Playfield is nestled between residential and civic zones and will be most successfu [if designed to respond to its adjacencies. The east side of the park is single-family residential while the north and south edges of the park consist of more dense multi -unit housing. The west edge is made up of predominantly civic institutions such as the police and fire stations, City Hall and the Edmonds Center for the Arts while also being at the edge of the downtown commercial district. 14 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 253 6.2.e to Amtrak/ LINK Station .anding ine my -W Main Street Shops O ", i ■ - - - - - - - - - - - EdmondsIr Center For The Arts 7 � � V � 1 /4 mile l l � � I ? 5-minute walk MAIN ST l ' Frances Library — I Anderson DAYTON ST A Center w - v . , LEGEND BUS STOP a } ¢ a l EXISTING BIKE ROUTE PROPOSED BIKE ROUTE N m M FERRY ROUTE O - ' IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII AMTRAK/LINK ROUTE TRANSIT CONNECTIONS Civic Center Hayfield is within walking distance of most downtown amenties and a short bike ride for many residents. It is also in close proximity to regional transit, including the Ferry Terminal to Kingston and the Amtrak/Sound Transit commuter station to Seattle and Eve rett. Site Background & An 6.2.e Edmonds -' Center For The Arts O�\\� w Q Q\\ Future �o \\\ Edmonds Veterans ,� \\ City Hall .P i Plaza l Q \ LEGEND BELL ST '�- _ HISTORIC SITES Main \ ` Edmonds Street \ \ Historical ■DESTINATIONS O Shops \ Museum MAIN SST r i Frances - Anderson Library � - - Center DOWNTOWN CONNECTIONS & DESTINATIONS Civic Center Playfield is a key component in a community circuit connecting local residences and civic destinations such as the Edmonds Farmers Market, the Sno-Isle Library, the Frances Anderson Center and downtown shops and restaurants. The park also has the potential to serve as part of an arts and culture plan with the evolving 4th Avenue Arts Corridor connecting Main Street to the Edmonds Center for the Arts. V U 16 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 255 6.2.e CIVIC FIELD EDMONDS, WA 8 ACRES EDMONDS CITY PARK EDMONDS, WA 14 ACRES CAL ANDERSON PARK SEATTLE, WA 7.5 ACRES SCALE COMPARISON BELLEVUE DOWNTOIA BELLEVUE, WA 21 ACRES PETER KIRK PARK KIRKLAND, WA 12.5 ACRES Parks similar to Civic Center Hayfield, or known to local residents, were studied by the design team and shared with the public to facilitate understanding and discussion of the parks' program. Site Background & An Packet Pg. 256 6.2.e c.i U a Packet Pg. 257 6.2.e 1AA / ►. It PMENT + EMENT Packet Pg. 258 6.2.e PROCESS & SCHEDULE The Civic Center Playfield Master Plan project team undertook a rigorous public engagement process that included three public open houses (offered both in -person and online); on - site postings, stakeholder interviews and outreach meetings. As a result, the design process was highly integrated with public engagement opportunities and public feedback shaped both the methods of design as well as the final plan. Stakeholders included the Boys and Girls Club, who currently lease the Field House on -site; recreational groups that use the fields such as Sno-King Youth Club and the Edmonds Petanque Club; groups that host events currently held at the park or nearby such as the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce (Taste of Edmonds), the Edmonds Art Festival and Festival Foundation; and other civic organizations directly effected by the park's potential transformation such as the Edmonds Arts Commission, the Museum/Market Board; City Council and Planning Board members; Edmonds Center for the Arts; Economic Development Commission; Floretum Garden Club; Historic Preservation Commission; and City staff. Community feedback and design team progress was discussed in regular briefings to City Council, the Planning Board, Edmonds Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services, and the Project Advisory Committee. The Project Advisory Committee was comprised of a broad selection of community representatives and leaders with varying interests selected to provide guidance to the project team. Mayor Dave Earling speaking at the first Open House on June 23rd, 2016. Mayor Earling provided introductions to all three Open Houses. Public 1 Briefings Stakeholder IAK Planning CityInterviewsHouses Board Council Project Advisory Committee Each public open house addressed a different project milestone and incorporated, as well as solicited, feedback from the community. Online open houses were launched immediately following each in -person open house and were accessible for a minimum of two weeks. Project description, progress, schedule, open house results, and meeting minutes were posted publicly, and regularly, on the city's splash page at: http://www. edmondswo.gov/parks-recreation-departments/civic- center-master-plon.html The project was organized into three phases that corresponded with each Open House. All events took place in 2016 unless otherwise noted. Park Activities (Program) • PAC kickoff meeting: May 12 • Stakeholder Meetings: May 17 & 23 • Open House#1: June23 • PAC meeting: July 7 • Planning Board Meeting: July 27 • City Council Meeting: August Master Plan Alternatives • Open House #2: August 24 • PAC Meeting: September 1 • Planning Board Meeting: September 14 • City Council Meeting: September27 Hybrid Master Plan • Open House #3: October 19 • PAC Meeting: October25 • Planning Board Meeting, Wednesday, November • City Council Meeting: January 17,2017 • City Council Adoption: March 7, 2017 2 U 20 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 259 PROJECT SITE (8 ACRES) 01. n 2 ACRES EXEMPT " FROM DEED RESTRICTIONS DEED RESTRICTIONS (6 ACRES) • Not more than 10% impervious surface (excluding pathways) • Must be preserved as open space • No synthetic turf • No buildings (restrooms allowed but apply to impervious calculations) • Shade structures are permitted • Multi -use open grass areas are allowed • Temporary festival use can be accommodated • No temporary or permanent parking is allowed R - Z ■ it ■ '- .. '•. _ _z, ,- 6.2.e PARK ACTIVITIES & AMENITIES Existing Uses Existing Civic Center Hayfield amenities include a large multi- use lawn with sports fields, a 400-metertrack, a playground and various courts that accommodate a number of activities. Uses for the park were categorized into active, passive, civic and event spaces and the community was engaged to determine what existing program should remain and what new program was desired. Parking is not currently provided in the park while storage space exists belowthe Grand Stand, within the Field House and the shed. These uses were also put forth for discussion. • Soccer/Lacrosse Fields (2 -1 Adult and 1 Youth) • Tennis Courts (2) • Petanque Courts (4) • Basketball Courts (2) • Baseball/Softball Field (1) • Skate Park • Taste of Edmonds • 4th of July Fireworks • Wenatchee Youth Circus • Sports tournaments • Arts Festival (parking) • Boys & Girls Club (Field House) • Grand Stand • Storage c.i U 22 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 261 6.2.e Parks in the greater Edmonds area were reviewed to understand nearby amenities available to residents, to help identify priorities and to facilitate discussion about the potential future uses of the park. HAINES WHARF PARK 1 VIEW POINT I PICNIC AREA I PLAYGROUND I WILDLIFE I TRAILS I RESTROOMS STAMM OVERLOOK PARK 2 VIEW POINT I WILDLIFE HUTT PARK 3 TRAILS I WILDLIFE SEAVIEW PARK 4 PICNIC AREA I PLAYGROUND I TRAILS I BASKETBALL I TENNIS I SOCCER I GAS RESTROOMS SIERRA PARK 5 PICNIC AREA I PLAYGROUND I TRAILS I BASKETBALL I SOCCER I BASEBALL/S( MAPLEWOOD HILL PARK 6 PICNIC AREA I PLAYGROUND I TRAILS I WILDLIFE OLYMPIC BEACH PARK 7 PICNIC AREA I WALKWAY I ART I MARINE SANCTUARY I FISHING I RESTROOMS BRACKETT'S LANDING NORTH & SOUTH / UNDERI 8 PICNIC AREA I TRAILS I VIEW POINT I ART I RESTROOMS I MARINE SANCTUARI OCIVIC FIELD 9 PLAYGROUND RUNNING TRACK BASKETBALL TENNIS FOOTBALL SOCCE BASEBALL/SOFTBALLISKATEPARK I PETANQUE FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 10 PICNIC AREA I PLAYGROUND I BASEBALL I SOCCER I ARTS RESTROOMS HUMMINGBIRD HILL PARK 11 PICNIC AREA I PLAYGROUND I BASKETBALL 12 PINE RIDGE PARK TRAILS I WILDLIFE HAZEL MILLER PLAZA 13 OUTDOOR PERFORMANCE SPACE I ART I DOWNTOWN GATHERING AREA YOST PARK 14 PICNIC AREA PLAYGROUND I TRAILS I BASKETBALL I TENNIS I OUTDOOR POO RESTROOMS MARINA BEACH PARK 15 PICNIC AREA I PLAYGROUND I VOLLEYBALL I KITE HEYING I BOAT LAUNCH I BAF STANDS I VIEW CORRIDOR I RESTROOMS 16 EDMONDS MARSH TRAILS WILDLIFE VIEW CORRIDOR EDMONDS CITY PARK 17 PICNIC SHELTERS I PLAYGROUND (2) I TRAILS I SOCCER I WATER PLAY I OUTDO PERFORMANCE SPACE I HORSESHOES I RESTROOMS PINE STREET PARK 18 PICNIC AREA I PLAYGROUND I BASEBALL/SOFTBALL I RESTROOMS 7TN & ELM PARK 19 OPENSPACE 20 EDMONDS MEMORIAL CEMETERY & COLUMBARIU HICKMAN PARK 21 PICNIC SHELTERS I PLAYGROUND (TRAILS I SOCCER I BASEBALL/ SOFTBALL I I RESTROOMS MATHAY-BALLINGER PARK 22 PICNIC AREA I PLAYGROUND I BASKETBALL TOTAL FACILITIES FOR LOCAL PARKS AND SCHOOLS COMBINED (INCLUDING CCP) Soccer Fields (Adult + Youth): .... 10 Tennis Courts: ................................ 7 Petanque:...................................... 4 Basketball Courts :....................... 10 Baseball/Softball Fields (Adult + Youth) :............ 11 Skate Park: .................................... 2 Pickleball:...................................... 10 V NUMBER AT CIVIC CENTER PLAYFIELD 2 2 4 2 1 1 2 Design Development + Community Engag Packet Pg. 262 6.2.e Potential New Uses In addition to existing uses, new ideas for park activities were putforth for communityfeedback in Open House 1. Ideas came from interests expressed by the community, stakeholders and the design team. Proposed uses included: • exercise path (informal track) • creative play (informal playground, nature play, etc.) • seasonal games (shuffle board, ping pong, etc.) • classes (yoga, tai chi, etc.) • activities clubhouse • concessions Passive • multi -use lawn • horticultural gardens • stormwater gardens • berms • shade trees • picnic areas • strolling paths • shade pavilion plaza cafe water feature • performance space a, c • permanent art U c • temporary art • promenade ii Y • covered market space a • museum display .2 • restrooms V • theater performances • markets • music • culinary events • art installations • fun -runs AM { 24 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 263 OPEN HOUSE 1, JUNE 2016 (see detailed summary in Appendix) Format & Objective The first in -person Open House on June 23, 2016, consisted of a presentation, Q&A, and a series of informational and interactive boards for participant engagement. The online version provided the same content in an electronic format. The objective of the session waste gauge community interest in specific park amenities and activities and to begin to develop a sense of identity (theme) for the park. Informational Boards BACKGROUND Project Description History Scope, Schedule and Process q,.,a,...,� ,.,.� �.. ,., a �•�- �O-� Eamonas CMc Curter Piayfielo Master Plans THE SITE WA I - Spacial Cdn,l rirn-aio ns I Civic Field Today Existing StrucWnes ®® MEN mom Center Playl'iexl Maslar Plen "ALKL'; Content • Informational boards about the site background, existing conditions, restrictions, context and scale. • Interactive boards allowing participants to "vote" for favored activities and themes as well as comment directly on an aerial of the site. • Interactive models (3) that allowed participants to better understand the scale of different existing and proposed programs and how much the park could accommodate. • Comment forms for additional written feedback. U CONTEXT -. ., tJurvnloa,s Cunnv.cGons Transit Conn,:.';-: Ecoloyic3l Context v'Ievrs Activities at Edmonds Parks Edmonds Civic Ccml r Playwid Master Plan WALKERI '" SCALES OF SIMILAR PARKS 1 I if � I #W,_ Eamwds Civic Certter Playtiela Master Plan VVALKER'I Design Development + Community Engag Packet Pg. 264 0 Interactive Boards Five boards were placed at the back of the room and offered opportunity for a range of input from participants. Design staff were also available for discussion and questions. Which activities should confine-e? (Place pins inside the colored areas) POSSIBILITIES M-W6]W&ffMr- What might you like to see? (Place pins inside the colored areas) Passive r� ! Events PIN A COMMENT ON CIVIC CENTER PLAYFIELD Tack a comment on the site or margin. Ipp"', Special Con sideralians U POSSIBILITIES What might you like to see? (Place pins inside the colored areas) ® Other ideas?... I(list them here) PARK THEMES What types of activities should be prioritized in the renovated park? (check all that apply) CIVIC PASSIVE ACTIVE 26 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 265 6.2.e Program Models / Games Participants were able to test out ideas and gain a better understanding of the size and compatibility of different park activities by placing scaled model pieces on top of corresponding site aerials. This was also a way to explore the flexibility of different programs to serve a variety of uses, for example plaza space that also serves as performance space or multi -use lawn that can also host events. Additional Outreach Youth from the Student Conservation Association were engaged in an additional outreach event hosted by Edmonds Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services. Park opportunities were discussed and students were encouraged to engage with the model to test their ideas. The twelve students in attendance encouraged prioritizing year-round active uses including games, concessions and a zip line. Youth from the Student Conservation Association were engaged and took turns testing out ideas on the models. Participants at Public Open House #1 working with site program models to understand the scale of different park programs. Design Development + Community Engag Packet Pg. 266 Participation and Attendance (See detailed summary in Appendix) Attendance and participation in Open House 1 was impressive and demonstrated the communities passion forthe future of Civic Center Playfield. In -Person Open House, June 23, 2016 Attendance: • 131 signed in • 141 attended Online Open House (6/24/2016-7/7/2016) Statistics: • 1,350 total page views • 180 responses received iauld � On4nueP (Place pins risine H� Feedback Themes (Priorities) Three ideas were put forth as over -arching themes for the park. The feedback received expressed the desire for the new park to be characterized primarily as active, with passive as a close second and civic garnering the least interest. Theme Active In -Person Votes 53 Online Votes 21 Total 74 Passive 50 12 62 Civic 20 3 23 V 28 Packet Pg. 267 Activities Over 40 activities were solicited for feedback and then tracked and summarized to help the design team prioritize elements for the new park design. The activities with the greatest number of votes are shown below (see full results are in the Appendix). Note, there was no way of prohibiting multiple votes so counts are taken as reasonable, rather than absolute, gauges of public interest. Activity Type (Current v. Possible) Category Activity In Preson Votes active restrooms 41 active petanque 43 Online Votes Total Votes 36 77 33 76 Possibilities Current Activities Possibilities active jogging/walking path 43 28 71 Current Activities active soccer 35 32 67 Possibilities passive shade trees 29 27 56 Current Activities active skate park 25 25 50 Current Activities active playground 21 29 50 Current Activities active tennis 24 25 49 Current Activities buildings B&G Club 16 32 48 Possibilities passive strolling paths 28 19 47 Possibilities passive multi -use lawn 17 25 42 Current Activities active formal track 15 25 40 Possibilities events performances (sm. music+theater) 10 29 39 Possibilities passive horticultural gardens 18 17 35 Current Activities active baseball 14 20 34 Possibilities civic market 5 29 34 Current Activities active basketball 13 18 31 Current Activities buildings Grand Stands 16 14 30 Possibilities civic performance space 12 17 29 Possibilities active creative play 15 13 28 Possibilities passive picnic areas 12 15 27 Possibilities active seasonal games 16 10 26 Possibilities passive stormwater gardens 13 13 26 Possibilities civic permanent art 10 16 26 Possibilities civic water feature 10 15 25 V Packet Pg. 268 DESIGN ALTERNATIVES Based on community input, the design team developed two master plan alternatives, each intended to emphasize one of the two main themes that emerged from community input, active versus passive, and to encourage further discussion on these two topics. The final plan would eventually emerge as a hybrid between these two alternatives, as informed by the community process. Option 1- Meadow Loop The design concept for the Meadow Loop provides a generous landscape buffer on the residential edges of the park and a more civic edge along 6th Avenue, while more intense uses are concentrated in the central multi -use lawn. This option introduces more passive landscape features into the park perimeter, including meadows, berms and stormwater gardens that frame the central active space. This option features jogging and walking paths with exercise stations around a central lawn area large enough to accommodate the same level of soccer usage that occurs now. A wide, promenade -style sidewalk along 6th Avenue allows for strolling or markets and includes a plaza and shade pavilion that could accommodate food concessions, movable tables and chairs, and a small water feature. This scheme also includes a small amount of other recreational program - multi- use courts and petanque- thatflankthecommunityhubsateitherend of the civic edge. Meadow Loop Precedents The following images, from existing parks, are intended to give a sense of the general character of the proposed features. Meadows and gardens Promenade / flexible -use market space Creative, integrated playa reas Shade pavilion and plaza Multi -use lawn Passive landscape gardens U 30 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 269 - — - — - — - — - — - — - — - — - — -- HIGH AL W-1 -ii, tot walking/jogging paths berms existing trees ,Use r .ub multi -use lawn playfields obstacle course or exercise stations V. n�eadows & gardens rmw 91 mill 6.2.e Option 2 - Activity Central The design concept for Activity Central creates a generous neighborhood connection along the old Sprague Street right-of-way and allocates the southern portion to active recreation space while creating a quieter landscape buffer to the north. This option maximizes recreational activities and facilitates spectatorship. It includes a 200-meter track, multi -use lawn for soccer and other sports, and viewing terraces that offer views of both mountains and playfields. Option 2 also includes petanque groves, a skate park, and four multi -use courts around an expanded Field House that could potentially house the Boys and Girls Club or a cafe and restrooms. The north portion of the park is still fairly active but more landscaped in character, and includes a picnic or performance pavilion and multi -generational play and exercise areas. The main path across the park offers a clear connection from the residential neighborhood to the 4th Avenue Arts Corridor and other civic destinations. This path also offers the potential for bringing markets and other events into the park. Activity Central Precedents The following images, from existing parks, are intended to give a sense of the general character of the proposed features. Shade pavilion and picnic area All -ages recreation Lawn terraces for spectating and views Small plaza with interactive waterfeature PE BUFFIIN CONNECTION BORMOOD EQUATION U Landscape integrated play Game courts within shade trees and planting beds. 32 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 271 COMMUNITY HUBS ACTIVITY CENTRAL SITE PLAN ACTIVITY ZONES CONNECTIONS JWMV�jo�ig paths U Design Development + Community Engag Packet Pg. 272 EVENTS Current Events There are currently a number of events that take place at Civic Center Playfield. These include: The Taste of Edmonds - an annual festival held in August that utilizes most of the park and hosts a number of vendors, activities and performances. This event generates significant revenue for the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce who would like to see it continue. Conversation with the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce is ongoing and the organization is open to discussion about how the event could evolve with the park, including reviewing inefficiencies with the festival layout and the potential to move vendor parking off -site. a� • 4th of July Fireworks - during the day, a parade begins at 6th Avenue adjacent to the park. At night, spectators fill the park to watch the fireworks. • Sports tournaments - the Sno-King Youth Club and other organizations sometimes host sports tournaments on the grounds.LL • Arts Festival (parking) -The annual Arts Festival in late June is held at the nearby Frances Anderson Center and the Civic Center Playfield is used by participants for vendor parking and camping. a • Wenatchee Youth Circus .> V PARK BOUNDARY t Stoop 71h Avenue 34 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 273 Design Alternative Event Overlays Throughout the design process, careful consideration was given to providing flexible use spaces that could accommodate a variety of types and scales of events. Ongoing conversation with the community and stakeholders about current and future event uses will continue as the park design develops. To facilitate conversation about event use, the following diagrams were presented in Open House 2 to illustrate the amount of park space available. MEADOW LOOP EVENT OVERLAY ACTIVITY CENTRAL EVENT OVERLAY :.i U Design Development + Community Engag Packet Pg. 274 6.2.e OPEN HOUSE 2, AUGUST 2016 (see detailed summary in Appendix) Format & Objective The second in -person Open House on August 24, 2016, included the presentation of two alternative park designs, Q&A, and small group discussions with a final report back to the larger group. The online version provided the same content in an electronic format. The objective of the session was to encourage dialogue about differing themes and park program elements and to garner community feedback on the direction of design development so that a final hybrid plan could be developed. The following questions were asked as a starting point for in - person feedback and discussion as well as online comments: • Which alternative park plan do you prefer? • Please share your thoughts about Option 1. What do you like or dislike about this option? • Please share your thoughts about Option 2. What do you like or dislike about this option? • Are there park elements not shown in either option that you would like to see? • Additional comments were encouraged. Resident and local business owner Rick Steve's sharing the outcome of their small group discussion. V In -person attendees watching presentation at Open House 2. Small Group Discussions Large side -by -side plan drawings were provided for each of 16 tablesatthe In -Person Open Houseand attendees split themselves into groups of 8-12 to discuss the similarities and differences between the design alternatives and share their interests and visions for the park. The group overwhelmingly agreed to extend the time of the in -person Open House to allow each table to report back on the outcome of their discussions with the larger group. 36 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 275 MEADOW LOOP FEATURES multi -use lawn/play fields (2 small or 1 large soccer field) walking/jogging paths 11/2 multi -use courts 4 petanque courts • berms • obstacle course with exercise a� S stations c • meadows and gardens ii • playgrounds • existing fieldhouse/Boys &Girls a Club > • shade pavilion & restrooms v • plaza with water feature or art N installation c ACTIVITY CENTRAL FEATURES • multi -use lawn/playfields (1 large + 1 small soccer field) • walking/jogging circuit • 2 multi -use courts • 2 tennis courts • 8 petanque courts • 200-metertrack • skatepark • playground • sand volleyball • parking • exercise stations • expanded Field House for B&G Club / Cafe / restrooms • picnic terrace with shade pavilion • plaza with small, interactive water feature Design Development + Community Engag Packet Pg. 276 6.2.e Participation and Attendance (see detailed summary in Appendix) In -Person Open House, August 24, 2016 Approximately 160 attendees 16 Discussion Tables Preferred Plan (by majority at table): • Option 1: 8 (50%) • Option 2: 4 (25%) • Split: 2 (12.5%) • Unclear: 2 (12.5%) Individual Comment Cards: • Option 1 preferred: 5 • Option 2 preferred: 3 • Undecided / Unclear: 3 Approximation of Combined Results Option 1: 178 (35%) • In -person - 90 (64%) • Online - 88 (24%) Option 2: 330 (65%) • In -person - 50 (36%) • Online -280 (77%) Participants in the In -Person Open House small group discussion. Online Open House (8/24/2016-9/7/2016) • 1,057 visitors • 379 responses • 88 Prefer Option 1 (23.9%) • 280 Prefer Option 2 (76.1%) Age • Over 70: 38 (17.7%) • 45-69: 81 (37.7%) • 30-44: 80 (37.2%) • 18-29: 7 (3.3%) • Under 18: 5 (2.3%) 2 U 38 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 277 6.2.e Feedback (see detailed summary in Appendix) Most consistent comments across both Open Houses • Like the lawn terraces • Skatepark should remain in the park • Option 1 curves are nice but want more active program like in Option 2 Common reasons respondents preferred Option 1 • Free -flowing structure, layout • Walking paths • Water feature and plaza • Open green spaces and lawn • Reduced number of petanque courts • No track Common elements not shown that respondents would like to see • Additional restrooms • Benches and/or seating areas • Lighting • Additional covered athletic facility and market space • Stage • ADA accessibility • 400-meter track Common reasons respondents preferred Option 2 • View terraces • Long walking and running paths • Focus on fields and athletic facilities • Expanded Boys and Girls Club • Skate park • Potential for large events • More spaces for families and children • Track 2 U Design Development + Community Engag Packet Pg. 278 6.2.e c.i U a Packet Pg. 279 R 6.2.e HYBRID DESIGN The refined park plan features recreation and activities for all ages in a beautiful park setting. The plan includes three different zones that each provide a unique experience: "The Meadows", "The Great Lawn" and "The Market Promenade". The Meadows provide both passive and active enjoyment and encourage exploration. This area of the park includes gently rolling hills, meandering paths, and landscaped buffers at all residential edges of the park. Special features include a'/3 mile measured walking/jogging path, playground, skatepark, picnic lawn, youth climbing wall and exercise areas set within planted areas and low berms. The Great Lawn is designed to support soccer in multiple configurations as well as other field sports and casual recreation. Lawn terraces offer mountain views and provide spectator seating forfield events, concerts and festivals alike. Street improvements to 6th Avenue are seamlessly integrated with the park'swestern edgeto provide a generous promenade - style sidewalk for markets, parades and festivals. A multi -use plaza and shade pavilion, with restrooms and storage, provide space for outdoor seating, water play, interactive art, and the potential to host small performances, and civic events. The existing Field House continues to serve the Boys and Girls Club as conversations continue about the potential for expansion or new construction. A 12,000 SF addition to the existing Field House is delineated on the Master Plan as a potential option congruous with the park design. The 6th Street area also includes a range of multi -use recreation spaces: petanque and multi -use courts for tennis, basketball and pickleball. The park is designed to be flexible and accommodates a substantial amount of activity, but will also be beautiful at quieter times. All paths are accessible, and park and sport lighting will be provided throughout. The park is also designed to be economically and environmentally sustainable - multiple locations are identified for stormwater treatment and careful consideration will be given to site conditions and amenities needed to support recreation and event use. The Petanque Grove features six full-size petanque courts to support both the Edmonds Petanque Club and the greater community. Located at the southwest corner of the park and the 6th Avenue promenade, the Grove will serve as a community cornerstone and welcoming gateway defined by aggregate courts set within seasonal planting beds, shade trees and integrated seating. How we responded to what we heard: Top 10 activities (from Included in Open House #1) Votes Hybrid Plan restrooms 77 petanque 76 jogging/walking paths 71 soccer 67 shade trees 56 skate park 50 c playground 50 tennis 49 Boys &Girls Club 48 M multi -use lawn 42 L formal track 40 a small performance space 39 2 gardens 35 �% t�> From total list of 40 activities, 36 are accommodated in the hybrid plan Themes / Priorities as voted on by the community and carefully considered in the hybrid plan: 1st: Active 2nd: Passive 3rd: Civic 42 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 281 6.2.e Aerial View Examples of Signature Features The following images, from existing parks, are intended to give a sense of the general character of the proposed features. Gardens with Integrated Play Creative Play Grounds & Water Feature Market Promenade & Plaza Berms Landscape Integrated Skatepark Jogging/walking paths with a Youth Climbing Wall U exercise stations Maste Packet Pg. 282 6.2.e :ME 1•I COMMUNITY HUBS CONNECTIONS L I Boys & Girls Club The continued presence of the Boys and Girls Club at Civic Center Playfield is desired by all parties. Conversation with the Club is ongoing to determine a short and long term solution that will allow the Boys and Girls Club to remain at Civic Center Playfield and to grow and integrate facilities as the park develops. Two options for potential Club expansion were proposed by the design team and presented at Open House 3 (see page 50, Architectural Elements, for details). Option one, a 12,000 SF extension with possible renovation of the existing field house, is delineated on the preferred site plan. The potential expansion, it's location, scale and relationship to the park and the field house, will be further reviewed and developed in the next phase of design. 44 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 283 6.2.e PREFERRED SITE PLAN Oart & stormwater opportunity io stormwater gardens Otennis/multi-use court (optional outlined) ii field lighting O'Amilejogging&walking path iz petanque grove aO exercise station is shade pavilion, restrooms & storage s0 youth climbing wall is multi -use plaza with water feature or interactive art 0 picnic meadow is Boys and Girls Club or cafe & concessions Oberms ie multi -use court (potential 12,000 SF Boys & Girls Club expansion) 0 playground i7 skatepark Oview terraces ie multi -use playfields Maste Packet Pg. 284 6.2.e MASTER PLAN VIEWS Stormwater Gardens Field Lighting** Multi -use Lawn Sprague Street Playground Connector Youth Meadow Climbing Planting Wall Viewing Terraces 1 /3 mile Berms Picnic Exercise Jogging -Walking Meadow Stations Path ** Number of posts and placement to be determined C C C ILL. L a .j. c� 46 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 285 6.2.e Multi -use Court Shade Pavilion Plaza, Field House (Potential Boys 6th Ave Market with Restrooms Interactive Art or (Boys & & Girls Club Art Promenade & Storage Water Feature Girls Club) Expansion) Opportunity Petanque Groves Skatepark Stormwater Multi -use Court Gardens a� C C C M L a .j. U Q Maste Packet Pg. 286 MASTER PLAN EVENT OVERLAYS Small to Medium Size Events Within the Park Significant community and stakeholder interest was expressed in hosting more small to medium size events and performances at the park. The 6th Avenue plaza and promenade areas, Petanque grove, picnic meadow, lawn terraces and corresponding playfield were all designed as flexible use spaces that could be ideal for a variety of smaller -scale gatherings, concerts, performances, markets or events. The final park design will also provide distributed utility services for facilitating all scales of event use. 48 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 287 Large Events and the 6th Avenue Market Promenade The park has a long-standing tradition of hosting some of the city's most iconic large events. The new park plan offers a large amount of flexible use space that can accommodate festivals, markets, parades and more. The maximum amount of area for a single large event is outlined below and demonstrates the ability of the park to accommodate key existing program elements for the Taste of Edmonds. Conversations are ongoing with the Edmonds Chamber of Commerce and other stakeholders on the potential reconfiguration of the Taste of Edmonds, the Edmonds Arts Festival and the 4th of July parade and fireworks to best utilize the new park design. Maste Packet Pg. 288 ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS Boys and Girls Club Expansion The Boys and Girls Club has been occupying the field house since 1968 and have expressed a preference to remain in the park. However, with the current enrollment of 150 children, they have reached full capacity in the 9,500 SF facility. Typical Boys and Girls Club facilities range from 18-25,000 SF and the Club will need more space if it is to continue to grow. Atthetime ofthe master plan, therewas no formal long-range plan for the Club expansion or relocation but the design team explored Club facility expansion options that could be integrated and/or phased -in with the new design. Owen Richards Architecture (ORA) created conceptual massing studies for two options - a 12,000 SF expansion that creates an entry courtyard adjacent to the existing Field House, and a 20,0000 SF alternative building. Creating integrated indoor/outdoor spaces, a bright new gym and open and inviting volumes that could both complement and offset the Field House were a priority. BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OPTION 1- PREFERRED MASSING STUDY FOR 12,000 SF EXPANSION The proposed building locations and footprints were presented for discussion and feedback at Open House 3 and the consensus was that the larger footprint in option 2 consumed too much of the park. The smaller footprint is shown in the Preferred Master Plan for future discussion as the park design advances. BOYS & GIRLS CLUB OPTION 2 MASSING STUDY FOR 20,000 SF EXPANSION U 50 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 289 ENLARGED SITE PLAN Shade Pavilion A new shade pavilion and restrooms were strongly supported by the community. The design team was primarily focused on the scale and siting of the structure but also began to explore its potential character and ability to serve as gateway to the park and iconic gathering space. Potential uses include seating area, market cover and other small performance or event use. MASSING STUDY FOR SHADE PAVILION WITH RESTROOMS c.i U Examples of Signature Features The following images, from existing pavilions, are intended to give a sense of the general character of the proposed structure. Maste Packet Pg. 290 6.2.e OPEN HOUSE 3, OCTOBER, 2016 (see detailed summary in Appendix) Format The meeting consisted of opening remarks by Mayor Dave Earling, a presentation by the design team, a brief Q&A session and an open house during which attendees were able to: • Discuss the hybrid design and design elements with other members of the community • Provide feedback on the hybrid design to the project staff • Ask questions and talk with project staff and PAC members • Submit written comments about the hybrid design The following questions were asked as a starting point for in - person feedback and discussion as well as online comments: • Please share your thoughts, what do you like or dislike about the plan? • Which elements of the new park design would bring you to the park most often? • Are there park elements not shown that you would like to see? • Additional Comments were encouraged. First draft of the hybrid master plan that was presented and discussed at Open House #3. 1"1 Principals Lara Rose and Chris Jones of Walker Macy and participants at Open House 3 discussing the Hybrid Plan during the Q&A session. 52 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 291 6.2.e Participation and Attendance (see detailed summary in Appendix) In -Person Open House October 19, 2016 • Approximately 101 attended Online Open House October 19 - November4, 2016 • 347 visitors (majority were nearby residents who had not attended any of the in -person Open Houses • 156 responses Age Range: • Over 70: 6 (7.4%) • 45-69: 39 (48.1%) • 30-44: 33 (40.7%) • 18-29: 0 (0%) • Under 18: 2 (2.5%) I don't like... A broad range of comments were received, similar to prior feedback. • Like the integrated activities • Like the curves, paths, and passive areas • Northern skatepark location is an issue for residents • We should leave the parkas is • Good compromise; thoughtful incorporation of com m u n ity feed back • Not enough sports/playfields and too much passive area • Not enough passive area and too much sports/playfields • Petanque grove is nice but would like larger tournament area • Formal track should be included • Like the 1/3 mile walking/jogging path • 6th Avenue market promenade and plaza will be a great asset • Concerns about buffers, noise, dogs, lighting and other design details Overall sentiment was that the hybrid plan is successful at incorporating community feedback and will be a great asset to the city. HYBRID F 17 r 4 � w r�tr n r�J iaytield Master Plan 2 U Maste Packet Pg. 292 PHASING Potential implementation could be considered in three phases with the flexibility to prioritize these phases in any order depending on alignment with city initiatives and budget. The boundaries of the phasing would shift slightly depending on the order of construction as described below: • Phase A includes the more civic uses of the park up to the back -of -curb along 6th Avenue. This area includes a majority of park's hardscape as well as the architectural features and the Petanque Grove. (Note: if this phase follows Phase C, itis recommended that the park -side portion of the promenade be completed along with 6th Avenue). • Phase B is the heart of the park and involves more site grading and softer landscape features as well as the Sprague Street connection and the sidewalk along 7th Avenue. (Note, if this phase precedes PhoseA it is recommended that the Sprague Street connection be completed oll the way to 6th Avenue). • Phase C represents the 6th Avenue "Market Promenade" from back -of -curb on the park side and includes the pedestrian crossings at Sprague Street and the full right -of way for all edges not along the park. (Note: if Phase C precedes PhoseA it is recommended that the park -side portion of the promenade be completed along with the 6th Avenue improvements). :.i U 54 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 293 6.2.e SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Alley Buffers The design team has proposed that the existing 8' chain link fence that surrounds the park be removed. The fence was erected while the property served as school grounds and is in poor condition. Community concerns were raised about buffering between the park interior and the residential alleys to the north and south of the site for safety and security purposes. The design team has advised that dense planting offers a more inviting and attractive condition while still providing effective buffers. The suggested condition below demonstrates a 14' minimum width. City Council voted in favor of replacing the fence with a vegetated buffer.' PROPOSED TYPICAL BUFFER SECTION` �� Planted Berms Utilities and City Planning c.i U 8' Jogging 14' Min. 17' Walking Path Planted Buffer Alley New stormwater code is scheduled to be published in January, 2017. Alignment with this plan will happen in the Design Development phase of the Civic Center Playfield. The city is planningto install a new sewer line between 6th and 7th Avenues that would cross Civic Center Playfield from east to west within the old Edmonds Street right-of-way. There is flexibility on the exact location within that zone and the park design will collaborate with the Edmonds Public Works and Utilities department to determine the final locations of any structures and assess other impacts to the park design. Parking Considerations Parking concerns were raised as a discussion point in several of the Civic Center Playfield Master Plan meetings and Open Houses. The consensus of the community was that park property should be retained as public open space and not allocated to parking. The design team has recommended that parallel street parking along 6th and 7th Avenues remain with further study to determine amount and locations for designated ADA and loading access areas. The suggestion of back -in angle parking was made but the design team feels strongly that this causes pedestrian and vehicularsafety concerns as well as negatively impacts the park edge condition. It is highly recommended that the City of Edmonds undertake a city- wide parking study to identify needs and determine options. The design team also recommends that bus transit routes be reviewed to consider a future bus stop at Civic Center Playfield. Tennis / Sports Fencing The adjacent residential community expressed concerns about the high fencing around the tennis courts and the potential to obstruct views. The design team responded with examples of fencing with low visual impacts that was well received. Maste Packet Pg. 294 6.2.e STREET IMPROVEMENTS 6th Avenue Market Promenade The 6th Avenue/Market Promenade is envisioned as a `Festival Street' that could host special events through temporary closure to vehicular traffic. The proposed right-of-way features a raised roadway that is level with the surrounding sidewalk between Daley and Bell Streets to create a more pedestrian - friendly park edge and entrance. The street would incorporate special paving, flush curbs, street trees, planting and space for market tents and other activities. Additional benefits include: • Providing clear connections between the park, downtown Edmonds and Edmonds Center for the Arts. • Balancing the uses of the street for walking, driving, transit, cycling, emergency services, parking, drop-offs, etc. • Creating an attractive and engaging gateway to the park. • Traffic calming to promote safety of pedestrians and vehicles. SECTION A: 6TH AVENUE MARKET PROMENADE �A:trJ1 or P ♦ ♦ P 8' 10, 10' 8' 6' 10) 10, i 36' Note: Existing conditions and dimensions ore approximate. U 56 Edmonds Civic Center Playfield Master Plan Packet Pg. 295 7th Avenue Street Improvements The existing sidewalk and street trees along 7th Avenue place the pedestrians on a narrow sidewalk at the edge of the curb. The master plan recommends that the lane widths be reconsidered to allow the street trees and planting to create a buffer between the curb and the sidewalk. Curb bump -outs and a designated pedestrian street crossing at the Sprague Street Connector entrance would also provide safer and more direct park access for residents. 7th Avenue looking north at Edmonds Street SECTION B: 7TH AVENUE STREET IMPROVEMENTS �I �I 0 a u Lull O I 1 v r� 7 I � I U Existing Grade 4' 816' 1 12' 12' 8' 1 I I 44' Note: Existing conditions and dimensions ore approximate. Maste Iralftwv, 7.1 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 07/2/2019 Multi -Family Tax Exemption Program Overview Staff Lead: Patrick Doherty Department: Economic Development Preparer: Patrick Doherty Background/History The City Council has instituted the Multi -Family Tax Exemption (MFTE) program in Edmonds within both the Westgate Mixed -Use Zone and the Highway 99 Corridor as a way to encourage planned -for multifamily and mixed -use development that includes at least 20% of affordable units (10% for low- income and 10% for moderate income), as has been done in over 30 cities throughout Washington. The MFTE provides a partial exemption from property taxes for up to 12 years. Staff Recommendation No action. Presentation only. Narrative Staff will offer a presentation at the 7/2/19 regular Council meeting to provide an overview of the MFTE program. Attached you will find a copy of the PowerPoint presentation to be made that evening. Attachments: MFTE Refresher 7-19 Packet Pg. 297 -� Multi -Family Tax Exemption Program Refresher Presentation City Council July z, 2019 7.1.a History 1995 -State Legislature created Exemption (MFTE) program RCW 84.14 the Multi -Family Tax To help spur redevelopment in lagging urban centers Fulfill GMA goals to encourage in -fill development in existing urban centers, thereby reducing sprawl and promoting "smart growth" Provide for affordable housing Packet Pg. 299 'how it works MFTE provides incentive to developers to invest in "residential targeted areas" and include affordable housing Residential targeted areas -mixed-use centers designated by cities in Comp Plans or Subarea Plans to receive greater density of multifamily and commercial development Packet Pg. 300 7.1.alim- Nkomo, Residential targeted areas Often called "urban villages" or "urban centers" - • Walkable • Amenity -rich • Transit -supportive • Mixed -use areas Intended to accommodate future growth in housing and employment Designated by cities through Comp Plans or Subarea Plans per GMA Packet Pg. 301 7.1.a Barriers to redevelopment Notwithstanding a city's plans, transformation to "urban village" can be fraught with challenges 3 aD Packet Pg. 302 7.1.a Barriers to redevelopment Challenges include: Competition from higher -rent locales (e.g., Seattle, Bellevue) Complications with urban redevelopment: • Unwilling property sellers • Need to aggregate multiple properties • Existing long-term leases • Environmental remediation Provision of below -market -rate housing requires some subsidy or incentive These factors can stall planned -for redevelopment and provision of affordable housing for decades! Packet Pg. 303 7.1.a One small tool The MFTE program is one small tool to provide an incentive to developers and investors to overcome these challenges and encourage development of multifamily and mixed -use projects that include affordable housing Packet Pg. 304 7.1.a Prograrn-'s reach Many cities in Washington have implemented MFTE: Near Edmonds Seattle Everett Shoreline Mountlake Terrace Lynnwood Kenmore Marysville Packet Pg. 305 7.1.a Program .1 s reach Statewide Tacoma Puyallup Wenatchee Spokane SeaTac Walla Walla Yakima Bellingham Moses Lake Bellevue Auburn Anacortes Renton Olympia Issaquah Kirkland Vancouver Tukwila Burien Federal Way Des Moines Bremerton Kent Covington University Place 3 m m 0 L 0 aL c 0 r a x W x 21 .E M T L L NN� 1.6 W a Packet Pg. 306 Prograrn-'s reach ss San Juan4 2 Island. In fact, because of program's widespread application Statewide, many developers have come to consider the MFTE program as a necessary tool to help overcome the challenges of urban redevelopment in all but the highest -rent housing markets Clallam Jefferson s Harhor Whatow Skagit Snohomish Pleree Thurston Pacific I L9wls towlHr I Skamania Clark a t Okanogan 0 Ferry Stevens a R cdn Spokane Grant Kltt Ada ms Whllman Franklin Garfield Yakima G Benton M11e Walla �� Asolin 19ickitat gwlogy.mm m O M L tM 0 a` r tZ E d x W x R H 21 LL 7 d d W a Packet Pg. 307 7.1.a MFTP ir Edmonds In July 2oi6 Edmonds City Council implemented the MFTE in Edmonds Starting with Westgate Mixed -Use Zone Extended the provision to Highway 99 Corridor in zoi7 Packet Pg. 308 7.1.a Program basics MFTE Program is applicable to: Projects containing at least Zo dwelling units Exempts residential improvement value ONLY Nonresidential (commercial, e.g.) improvement value is NOT exempt Land value is NOT exempt Packet Pg. 309 7.1.a Program basics Edmonds program provides: is -year exemption period if the project includes at least ao% of units as affordable to rent or buy to low - and moderate -income households io% for low-income and io%for moderate -income (Low-income = 80% ofAMI; moderate -income = iis% of AMI) Packet Pg. 310 7.1.a Tax revenue implications Start with review of property tax basics: City property tax rate is product of Council -approved annual tax levy (amount to be raised) divided by City's total Assessed Valuation (AV). The Council approved zoig levy amount of $10,548,203 The City's AV was $9,107,284,679 Therefore, the City's property tax rate is approx. $i.i582 per $i000 of property value. $500,00o house pays $579.10 in City property taxes Packet Pg. 311 7.1.a Tax revenue implications How does partially exempted building fit into the equation? Assume $5,000,000 mixed -use development. $1,000,000 - land and commercial component $4,000,000 - residential component, incl affordable housing MFTE exempts the residential portion for iz years. This portion is not added to the City 's AV and is not taxed. However, increased land value and commercial portion are both added to City's AV and are taxed. Packet Pg. 312 7.1.a Tax revenue implications Assuming no other changes (incl. same levy amount): City's AV goes up by si,000,000 to s9,1o8,284,679 City's property tax rate goes down to $ $1.1581/si,000 $500,000 house pays $579.05 (-$0.05) Project contributes $1,158.1 in property taxes from land and commercial portion Residential portion is not added to the City's AV and is not added to tax rolls. Pays no property tax for 12 years. After l2 years residential portion is added to City's AV and contributes property tax revenue Packet Pg. 313 7.1.a Tax revenue implications Even during12-year partial exemption period, project contributes: Initial impact fees (transpo, parks) Project's residents and businesses/customers pay: • Sales taxes • Utility taxes • Gas taxes Packet Pg. 314 7.1.a Tax revenue implications What if the project were NOT partially exempted? All of new value would be added to AV City's AV goes up by $5,000,000 to $9,iiz,z84,679 City's property tax rate goes down to $i.1576/$i,000 $500,00o house pays $578.80 (-$0.30) Project contributes $5,788 in property taxes from year i Upshot: $500,000 could theoretically pay $0.30 less in property taxes But new project, incl. affordable hsg., may not occur Packet Pg. 315 7.1.a MFTP impact summary MFTE is tool to encourage planned -for development and provide affordable housing (8o% to 115% AMI) MFTE exempts residential value only for iz years During exemption period project contributes: Initial impact fees for transportation and parks Property taxes from land and commercial component Sales, utility, gas taxes After iZ years the project contributes full property taxes No additional taxes paid by City taxpayers Packet Pg. 316 7.1.a Questions? 3 a� Packet Pg. 317 7.2 City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: 07/2/2019 Council discussion on next steps for emergency access to the waterfront. Staff Lead: {Type Name of Staff Lead} Department: City Council Preparer: Maureen Judge Background/History N/A Staff Recommendation N/A Narrative Council is asked to discuss the process for moving forward on an alternative to the emergency crossing in the event of an emergency on the other side of the tracks. Things to consider during the discussion (suggested topics not meant to be inclusive): 1) Which alternatives should be considered going forward? Ask the Council to revisit the set of alternatives that were considered previously but not chosen as a preferred alternative amongst other alternatives? Or is there a need to start from scratch? a. Does the Council want to look at short-term solutions, then long-term solutions, or just long-term solutions? 2) What process does the City Council envision for consideration of the future alternatives? Opportunity for Councilmembers to offer suggestions for alternatives such as forming a commission made up of citizens? Police? Fire? Business? Council? Staff? To explore alternatives. 3) Does the city council want to set up a separate inquiry from the alternatives inquiry to better understand where we are failing in our public outreach process so that we can understand the fatal flaws in future projects earlier in the process? 4) Information Needed: Review of cancelled project reports Review of community input and how to do better Review of other committees, transportation, safety, climate, etc. Environmental impacts Neighborhood impacts Business impacts Packet Pg. 318