Loading...
02/24/2009 City CouncilFebruary 24, 2009 Following a Special Meeting beginning at 6:00 p.m. to interview newly appointed Planning Board Members and Sister City Commissioners, the Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Mayor Haakenson in the Council Chambers, 250 5'b Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Gary Haakenson, Mayor D. J. Wilson, Council President Michael Plunkett, Councilmember Peggy Pritchard Olson, Councilmember Steve Bernheim, Councilmember Dave Orvis, Councilmember Ron Wambolt, Councilmember Strom Peterson, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Grace Guenther, Student Representative 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA. STAFF PRESENT Al Compaan, Police Chief Duane Bowman, Development Services Director Stephen Clifton, Community Services /Economic Development Director Brian McIntosh, Parks & Recreation Director Noel Miller, Public Works Director Debi Humane, Human Resources Director Carl Nelson, Chief Information Officer Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer Jerry Shuster, Stormwater Eng. Program Mgr. Rob English, City Engineer Bio Park, City Attorney Linda Hynd, Deputy City Clerk Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst. Jeannie Dines, Recorder Council President Wilson added a "State of the City Report" by Mayor Haakenson as Agenda Item 4B and renumbered the current Item 4 to 4A. COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILSON, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. ROLL CALL B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL RETREAT MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 6 & 7, 2009. C. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 17, 2009. D. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #109980 THROUGH #110080 FOR FEBRUARY 19, 2009 IN THE AMOUNT OF $988,676.64. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSITS AND CHECKS #47847 THROUGH #47883 FOR THE PERIOD FEBRUARY 1 THROUGH FEBRUARY 15, 2009 FOR $821,491.36. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 1 E. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN ADDENDUM NO. 6 TO THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH R112 ENGINEERING, INC. FOR THE 2003 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT. F. AMEND THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF LYNNWOOD FOR THE OLYMPIC VIEW DRIVE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT AND APPROVE THE AWARD OF PHASE 2 OF THE PROJECT. G. APPROVAL FOR MAYOR TO SIGN LETTER OF SUPPORT REGARDING LAKE BALLINGER FORUM CAPITAL REQUEST. 3. CONFIRMATION AND INTRODUCTION OF NEWLY APPOINTED SISTER CITY COMMISSIONERS. Council President Wilson reported prior to tonight's meeting, the Council interviewed five Sister City Commissioners appointed by Mayor Haakenson. He remarked the applicants were very competent and capable and the Council was excited to have them participate on the Sister City Commission. Councilmember Wambolt remarked he was always amazed by how many qualified people there were in Edmonds who are willing to volunteer. COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, TO CONFIRM THE MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF YOSHITAKA INOUE, JEANNE BLAIR, WAYNE PURSER, LILI HALL AND MARIKO WATTS TO THE SISTER CITY COMMISSION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. New Sister City Commissioners Yoshitaka Inoue, Jeanne Blair, Wayne Purser, Lili Hall and Mariko Watts introduced themselves. Mayor Haakenson recognized Sister City Commissioners in the audience. 4A. CONFIRMATION AND INTRODUCTION OF NEWLY APPOINTED PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS. Council President Wilson reported the Council also interviewed two highly competent appointees to the Planning Board, Val Stewart and Kevin Clarke. He recalled the Council's policy decision last year to interview appointees one week and make appointments the following week. In this instance, because Councilmembers Wambolt, Peterson and Bernheim participated in the interviews, he suggested the Council could confirm the appointments tonight. COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, TO CONFIRM THE MAYOR'S APPOINTMENT OF VAL STEWART AND KEVIN CLARKE TO THE PLANNING BOARD. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. New Planning Board members Val Stewart and Kevin Clarke introduced themselves and expressed their interest in serving on the Planning Board. 4B. STATE OF THE CITY REPORT. Council President Wilson explained Mayor Haakenson provided the State of the City Report to the Rotary Club this morning which has typically been the forum for this information. He requested Mayor Haakenson make the same presentation at the Council meeting because it was an appropriate message and would frame the conversation with the community in the coming months about the City's financial situation and the November levy. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 2 With regard to how we got here, Mayor Haakenson explained it was a result of, 1) past City Council policy decisions over the last 20 -30 years, decisions that impacted growth in the community and reduced potential for revenue, 2) the initiative process that began in 1999 which has impacted the ability of cities to provide services to citizens, and 3) the economy. He did not fault Councilmembers for their decisions because the citizens elected them and assumed those policies were what the citizens desired. He remarked on a presentation made by the Director of the Association of Washington Cities who was retiring after 30+ years, and his comment that the citizens of Washington have not yet connected the dots from the initiative process to the lack of services cities provide. Mayor Haakenson explained the City has 266 employees; the annual budget is $73 million; and the day - to -day General Fund operating budget is $35 million. Two - thirds of the budget is salaries and benefits. The City provides services on a daily basis to 41,000 citizens. He challenged anyone to find another city in the State of Washington that had this few employees providing services to that many citizens. He displayed several photographs of City employees. He explained balancing the budget required a give and take effort. Citizens "give" the City $14 million /year in property taxes. He pointed out only approximately 20% of citizens' property taxes came to the City; 70% goes to the School District and 10% goes elsewhere. In return, the City provides police services ($10 million budget), and fire services ($8 million). He pointed out with the $14 million the City collected in property taxes, the City was already behind by $4 million just with police and fire services. He identified other services the City provides: parks & recreation, building, planning, engineering, human resources (2 people for 266 employees), information technology, court, city clerk, facilities maintenance, and non - departmental. He explained the non - departmental budget includes fees paid to the 911 call center, transfers from the General Fund to Utilities, bond interest, public defender, voter registration, elections, insurance, Leoff 1 retirement benefits, and loan payments. Of the other $20 million in revenue, $6 million is derived from sales tax. He noted car dealers provided the most sales tax, and car dealers were not doing well in this economy. The City has reduced sales tax projections by an additional 15% from the already reduced sales tax projection in the 2009 -2010 budget. The remaining $14 million is derived from other taxes, licenses and fees, the Transportation Benefit District, EMS transport fees, court fines, investment income, recreation fees, and development fees. In addition to the General Fund, the City has 30 other expense funds, primarily utility funds for street, water, drainage and sewage treatment. All are mandated by state and federal laws and are required to be in balance. In simple terms, the City ensures citizens have fresh water to drink, that their toilets flush, and their houses are not flooded by stormwater; very basic but expensive services to provide. Mayor Haakenson described the City's ending cash balance, comparing it to the balance in a person's checkbook. He explained the City's ending cash balance was projected to be approximately $50,000 at the end of 2010 and a deficit of over $1 million in 2011. The City's ending cash balance should be approximately $3 million; it should be even higher but the City can operate with an ending cash balance of $3 million. He identified three ways to maintain an ending cash balance of $3 million, 1) new revenues, 2) budget cuts, 3) increase taxes. He pointed out there were few opportunities for new revenue streams; the only two remaining sources are not supported by the Council - gambling and a B &O tax. With regard to budget cuts, he stressed there was nothing left to cut without eliminating programs. He recalled during budget deliberations in November 2008, the Council was faced with making cuts of over $1 million. Citizens pleaded with the Council not to make those cuts, not to cut Yost Pool or parks maintenance. As a result the Council agreed not to make the budget cuts and instead to ask the voters for Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 3 a tax increase in 2009. He explained in November voters would be asked to increase their property taxes by approximately $250 /year, commenting the specifics of the levy had not yet been decided. Despite the implementation of an EMS transport fee, voter approval of an EMS levy, a fee on vehicle license tabs for roads and sidewalks, and increase in all development fees, the revenue the City collected was not sufficient. He referred to recent news regarding the Dow, unemployment rates and foreclosures, acknowledging the news was not good. He anticipated 2009 would not be a good year and he was dubious about 2010. He pointed out for the last nine years the City has dealt with ever- declining revenue streams and increasing costs with budget cuts and duct tape. The decision to ask taxpayers to pay more did not come easily for the Council. He emphasized the success of the levy would require the full commitment of the City Council. Councilmembers will need to talk to their constituents and hold many public meetings and educational seminars to help people understand the dilemma the City faces. He noted when the Council passed the 2009 -2010 budget, they included a budget note that they would go to the voters in 2009 with a request to increase taxes. Councilmembers agreed again at their recent retreat that they were in favor of a levy. If the levy failed, Mayor Haakenson explained there would be cuts and service reductions. He noted the levy process included the formation of a Citizen Review Committee to discuss the size of the levy, cuts that would be made without a levy, etc. He recalled the cuts proposed in the budget process totaled $1.2 million; since then staff has reduced sales tax projections and if cuts were required today, a total of $2 million would be required. If the levy fails and cuts are made in November, they likely will total $2.5 -3 million. He challenged anyone to review the budget and find anything else that could be cut other than services. It will be up to the Council and the voters to determine what type of community they want Edmonds to be. Council President Wilson asked Mayor Haakenson to identify the cuts that were proposed during the budget process that were postponed in hopes of a levy. Mayor Haakenson recalled there were cuts in Parks & Recreation including the closure of Yost Pool and significant reductions in parks maintenance, cuts in the Planning Department, cuts in Police Services such as the DARE Program and several other cuts. He noted the emphasis in those proposed cuts was on Parks & Recreation, noting it was difficult to cut a person here or there without affecting the level of service the City provides, for example, the only way to cut firefighters was to close an entire station. He summarized services would be impacted if employees were cut. Council President Wilson highlighted the importance of determining what type of City citizens want Edmonds to be, noting several citizens have mentioned public safety as a need -to -have and parks as a want -to -have. If that is the prevailing sentiment of the community, it would be appropriate to make the cuts proposed in parks maintenance that would result in the closure of 31 neighborhood parks due to insufficient maintenance. He noted the $60,000 the City provides the senior center for programming as well as the lease, Yost Pool, etc. would be on the table for cuts. The Council may be required to begin making cuts in the next few months as the situation worsens. He noted the $3 million reserve was a minimum; the desired amount is $3 -5 million; the projected $50,000 in reserves represents 1% of the recommended amount. Mayor Haakenson added in his nine years in office he has done nothing but make cuts and added very little to the budget. The City's employees see that on a daily basis as their workloads increase and there are fewer employees, but it has not yet affected the general public which may be the reason some do not fear further cuts. He described his struggle with asking the voters for a tax increase in this economy versus not doing the levy and making $2 million in cuts so that the public could see the results. However, Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 4 he recognized a tax increase was necessary because the City would not be what it is today without an infusion of cash to carry on the current programs. Council President Wilson asked Mayor Haakenson to comment on cuts that were made in the past. Mayor Haakenson responded as a result of the initiative processes in 2000 and 2001, over $1 million was cut from the budget which resulted in lost services and the layoff of 24 employees or 9% of the workforce. Council President Wilson summarized the question for voters was this: is $250 /year worth maintaining the services the City offers today? 5. COMMUNITY TRANSIT UPDATE ON SWIFT BUS RAPID TRANSIT. Todd Morrow, Chief of Strategic Communications, Community Transit, expressed appreciation for the relationship with the City and staff and welcomed Council President Wilson to their Board. He explained Community Transit (CT) provides local and commuter bus services, van pools, DART paratransit and commute trip reduction services to most of Snohomish County. CT makes more than 40,000 trips /day and manages 20 park & ride lots with 6,100 spaces. These services are paid for by fares and a .009% sales tax. He noted sales tax has historically covered approximately 70% of their expenses and the downturn in the economy has impacted the sales tax they collect. He described an increase in ridership of 11.8% last year, steps taken to control expenses and the importance of increased sales tax to their budget. He displayed a map of their service area in Edmonds, identifying routes and areas within I/4 mile of their service, explaining 702 buses enter Edmonds each weekday. There are 17,000 boardings on those buses, and 192 bus stops in Edmonds. Mr. Morrow described CT projects including ORCA smart card used for travel between transit systems; Mountlake Terrace's transit center with 660 spaces; a new park & ride in Marysville; the purchase of 23 double tall buses for commuter service; a program to curb congestion on 164th 128th and 20th by encouraging drivers of single occupancy vehicles to take the bus or carpool; work on a 20 -year plan; consideration of new park & ride facilities east of Mill Creek; improving the old transit center at Smokey Point; and renovating a maintenance base. He described Swift Bus Rapid Transit, a train -like service on rubber wheeled vehicles, a 17 -mile line of transit service from Everett Station to the Aurora Village Transit Center with 12 stations in each direction. Swift provides shorter trip times (40 minutes versus 60 minutes), utilizes business access transit lanes and transit signal priority. Swift was designed for people who live, work and shop along the corridor and was intended to complement Sounder, light rail and commuter bus service. Mr. Morrow displayed a photograph of the bus, describing the three doors to facilitate entrance /exit, places for mobility devices to enter /exit the bus, loading of bikes onto the bus itself, and tickets purchased at stations. He explained this will be the first Bus Rapid Transit system in the State and is made possible via partnerships with Everett Transit, the Federal Transit Administration, and Washington State Department of Transportation. He displayed a map of the Swift line, explaining there were no mid -block stations, stations are located adjacent to local bus stops, and it is hoped stations will stimulate economic activity in the surrounding area. He described station construction and identified stations in Edmonds at 216th southbound and 238th north and southbound. The total cost of Swift is approximately $31 million, half for buses and the remainder for stations. He provided a Swift construction schedule with groundbreaking in December followed by site construction and station installation with a total construction time of nine months. Swift is expected to be operational in late fall 2009. He commented on their outreach efforts to the surrounding areas and businesses regarding the impacts of construction. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 5 Council President Wilson asked Mr. Morrow to comment on how the December snows impacted Community Transit's service. Mr. Morrow responded the snow had a substantial impact on their service particularly in hilly areas and areas where articulated buses are used. He noted the double tall buses operated better in adverse weather. Council President Wilson asked if there was anything Edmonds could do with regard to the double tall buses such as tree trimming. Mr. Morrow advised they were working with staff in regard to some areas where trees restrict the use of the double tall buses. Councilmember Plunkett asked whether declining sales taxes would affect Swift service. Mr. Morrow answered it should not; Community Transit expected to receive economic stimulus funds for preventative maintenance and other capital items. Councilmember Wambolt commented he often walks downtown and observes buses traveling very fast. Mr. Morrow acknowledged they occasionally receive complaints about speeding and encouraged anyone with a concern to call their customer service line, 353 -RIDE. 6. UPDATE ON THE COMMUNITY TECHNOLOGY ADVISORY COMMITTEE (CTAC). Rick Jenness explained during the budget process, the Council approved funding for a legal test case in Snohomish County Superior Court to seek the opinion of the court on the City's ability to resell telecommunications capability in areas where the City has excess capacity. He described fiber optic assets the City has purchased and been given that run from the ferry terminal to Hwy. 99, south to the county line, and to the Westin building in downtown Seattle, assets that have enormous economic value to the City. He noted ten years ago the City had the ability to resell telecommunications capabilities; however, during code cleanup, the legislature inadvertently eliminated all reference to second class cities which also contained the provisions regarding telecommunication service. He expected to have a ruling on procedural motions by late next week and to a court date in early May. Mr. Jenness advised the activities of the CTAC have been in support of its attorneys including preparing affidavits from businesses in the City regarding whether they would find this service useful and economically viable. In his contact with local businesses, virtually no one objected to the idea and all were overwhelming positive regarding the benefits to their business and the economic magnet this type of asset would provide. He commented on video -on- demand which would change the paradigm of television from a broadcast schedule to viewer selected, which will require an infrastructure such as this fiber optic network. He anticipated the capacity and capabilities of this fiber optic system would make Edmonds a magnet for creative development software industry type jobs. He planned to continue working in support of the attorney, noting Chief Information Officer Carl Nelson is working with Snohomish County and neighboring cities in an effort to purchase fiber optic cable to connect cities with Snohomish County and each other. The ability to provide cities with internet access and access to an intergovernmental network would be economically attractive and revenue positive for Edmonds. 7. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Rose Cantwell, President, South County Senior Center Board, thanked the City for the funds they have provided annually to the South County Senior Center. She noted although South County is a regional center, its cornerstone is Edmonds. She also thanked the City for renewing their lease agreement and Councilmember Plunkett for his guidance through the lease agreement process. She explained for many seniors, the Center is a second home, providing classes formatted to maintaining health, continued Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 6 learning, staying independent, making friends, enjoying life and keeping them young at heart. The name of their new fundraising campaign is Young at Heart. She encouraged the public to join the Center, noting it was not necessary to be a senior to join. In spite of the economic situation, South County Senior Center is excited to have their first membership - elected boards, new programs, new goals and a new Executive Director, David McNair. One of their goals is to become more community oriented and find ways for senior centers to help with the healthcare crisis. David McNair, Executive Director, South County Senior Center, commented the Center has a long, rich history of providing services to area seniors and he wanted to ensure it continued to be a strong part of the fabric of the City and Snohomish County. He was excited about the Young at Heart challenge campaign and invited the public to visit the Center. Cliff Sanderlin, Edmonds, commented he preferred to call the South County Senior Center the Edmonds Senior Center because it was located in Edmonds and was not a county agency. He sought election to the Board when his mother -in -law, Alice, who recently sold her home in another state and moved in with his wife, found herself very isolated. After a friend began taking her to the senior center, she began taking classes, singing in the choir, eating lunch and enjoying social interaction. He stressed the importance of assisting the Center to succeed financially, recalling his suggestion to the Board that instead of an auction, they take a more direct approach to fundraising by telling the Center's story and asking for donations. The Senior Center needs to raise $100,000 in charitable contributions by the end of December and start by raising $25,000 by the end of March. Boardmembers have pledged to make gifts larger than they can afford to motivate the public to make generous tax- deductible contributions. If they raise $25,000 or more by March 31, he and other boardmembers will follow through with their pledges. He urged the Council, the Mayor and the public to give generously to keep the Center alive and healthy. He invited everyone to visit the Center south of the ferry terminal on Railroad Avenue. Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to Item 10, amendments to Chapter 20 of the ECDC, and asked what would be accomplished via a development agreement that was outside the normal permit application process, what advantages there were to a developer, and whether the development agreement process excluded the public. He referred to the section regarding determination of completion by the City, commenting there were many examples of buildings that were changed after the application was determined to be complete and the public was not informed. He urged the Council to consider how buildings were changed after a determination of completion was issued and an application approved and how the public should be notified of those changes. Brian Vanderburg, Lake Forest Park, referred to Item 8, advising his design team had spent the past two years and approximately $1 million designing the Edmonds Station and were ready to go out to bid. He encouraged the Council to move forward with whatever portions of the Edmonds Station project were non - controversial. Councilmember Plunkett thanked the Senior Center for their fundraising drive, advising he planned to make a contribution and anticipated other Councilmembers would as well. 8. DISCUSSION ON SOUND TRANSIT EDMONDS STATION. Community Services /Economic Development Director Stephen Clifton explained as requested by the City Council at the February 2009 retreat, tonight's presentation includes updates on three projects, 1) Edmonds Crossing Multimodal Terminal, 2) Sound Transit Edmonds Station, and 3) a study recently released by the Washington State Department of Transportation Ferries Division called Revised Draft Long -Range Plan 2009 — 2030. The emphasis of tonight's presentation relates to potential impacts on the Edmonds Crossing Multimodal Terminal project and more specifically the Sound Transit Commuter Rail Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 7 Station (Edmonds Station) if the Revised WSF Draft Long -Range Plan is adopted by the Washington State Legislature. Edmonds Crossing Mr. Clifton explained Edmonds Crossing was a multimodal terminal intended to integrate several modes of transportation and accommodate future growth in travel along SR 104 corridor and the Edmonds /Kingston ferry run. The project is supported by several local, regional and statewide transportation and comprehensive plans. Project partners include Community Transit, Sound Transit, Washington State Department of Transportation, Washington State Ferries, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Transportation Administration, and City of Edmonds. Upon completion, project components would include: a ferry terminal, Sound Transit and Amtrak train station, Community Transit Bus Transit Station, structured parking, and holding lanes for the project. After a lengthy environmental process, a Final Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision was issued in 2005 which includes a preferred Edmonds Crossing alternative. Since that time, Washington State Ferries and the City have been working on Phase 2 related to the final design and permitting as well as ways to fund the project. Mr. Clifton displayed a drawing of the Edmonds Station submitted for permitting in 2008. He explained during the past several years, Sound Transit has been implementing their Sound Move Plan. One element of the plan includes commuter rail services, otherwise known as Sounder. Three commuter rail stations are currently operating within Snohomish County, i.e., Everett, Mukilteo and Edmonds. Operations include eight trains per day, Monday through Friday, which equates to four round trips, and could eventually include reverse trips. Sound Transit Edmonds Commuter Rail Station, otherwise known as "Edmonds Station" is currently located between Main and Dayton Streets adjacent to the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) tracks. The station area is also co- located with Amtrak's Edmonds Passenger Station. Although the station is operational, all planned interim amenities, e.g., two platforms, lighting fixtures, signage, shelters, railings, revised parking lot, etc., have yet to be constructed. In order to fully commence construction, Sound Transit must obtain all necessary permits, including a building permit submitted to the City of Edmonds in 2008. Sound Transit and the City of Edmonds must also execute interlocal and developer agreements related to Edmonds Station. As Sound Transit, City administration and legal counsel were nearing an agreement on final drafts of developer and interlocal agreements, Washington State Ferries released the Draft Long -Range Plan in December 2008. Up to that point, Sound Transit and the City were considering defining the current Sound Transit Edmonds Station as an interim facility until such time the Edmonds Crossing project is completed, or circumstances related to the status of Edmonds Crossing change. The latter of these two scenarios appears to have occurred with the release of the Washington State Ferries Revised Draft Long - Range Plan. As an interim Station, Sound Transit proposed fewer amenities than were contained in an Edmonds Station plan approved by the City's Architectural Design Board and City Council in 2002. Presentations and updates have been given to the City Council in the past regarding the interim and 2002 proposals. On November 4, 2008, voters of the Central Puget Sound region also approved the Sound Transit Phase 2 transportation package. Contained within the Phase 2 transportation package is $22.9 - $26.3 million to help fund future permanent Sound Transit Commuter Rail Station improvements. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 8 Washington State Department of Transportation Ferries Division Revised Draft Long -Range Plan 2009 — 2030 The Revised Draft Long -Range Plan identifies three strategic issues, i.e., Operational Strategies, Fleet Procurement, and Long Term Capital Funding. The plan also contains possible future service and investment scenarios. Scenario A assumes that current levels of service remain constant with modest capacity improvements, includes a 23- vessel fleet and would show a $3.3 billion deficit. Scenario B recognizes that the State may not be able to provide new revenues to meet the evolving needs of all ferry customers and communities, and looks at a reduced marine highway system. Scenario B includes a 1.7- vessel fleet and would show a $1.3 billion deficit. Exhibit 6 of the Revised Draft Long -Range Plan indicates that the Edmonds - Kingston ferry route currently carries the highest number of vehicles and second - highest number of passengers of all WSF ferry routes. The forecasted vehicle and passenger ridership is expected to increase by 22% and 48% respectively for a total increase of 34% over the next 21 -year timeframe. Scenario A assumes that the Edmonds Terminal will remain in its current location, at least through 2030, and that an allowance of only $26 million in new capital money is included to provide multimodal connections. Under Scenario B, costs for major terminal improvements and reservation system remain unchanged. However, an amount of $11 million is proposed for terminal preservation. The document remains unclear as to how the increase in ridership on the Edmonds - Kingston route will be addressed using only $26 million for multimodal connections. Although the City has been able to secure $12.3 million in federal funding for the project, considering the current economic climate of Washington State and its agencies, it is unlikely the legislature will provide the funding needed to construct the Edmonds Crossing Multimodal Terminal project (as defined within the Final Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision) prior to 2030. City administration has asked that at a minimum, the legislature preserve and retain previously budgeted funds through year 2017 to help pay for review and examination of minimum -build alternatives to the Edmonds Crossing Multimodal Terminal project (as defined within the Final Environmental Impact Statement Record of Decision). Washington State Ferries representatives are supportive of this request. Retaining budgeted financial resources could help design and construct a well - functioning minimum build multimodal terminal / area for the City of Edmonds, Washington State Ferries, Sound Transit, and Community Transit. Funding for a minimum build alternative, in whatever form, would/could come from the following sources: Federal Funding $12.3 million (available and obligated) State Funding $23 — 26 million (capital) $4.6 - $11 million (preservation) as identified in the WSF Revised Draft Long - Range Plan and Governor's proposed 2009 -2011 biennial budget Sound Transit $22.9 - $26.3 million - Voter approved Proposition 1 in November 2008 Within the next 21 -year timeframe, if WSF were not able to move forward with the Edmonds Crossing preferred plan defined within the Environmental Impact Statement 2005 Record of Decision, the funding mechanisms listed above could provide the financial resources to help pay for improvements related to multimodal operations and connections between Washington State Ferries, Community Transit, Amtrak and Sound Transit in the vicinity of Main / Dayton Streets and Sunset / Railroad Avenues. This funding could also serve as a significant catalyst for other development in the area. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 9 In light of the limited amount of funding ($26M) proposed for Edmonds Ferry Terminal improvements within the WSF Revised Draft Long -Range Plan timeframe of 21 years, City administration recommends requesting Sound Transit work with other stakeholders, e.g., City of Edmonds, Community Transit, WSDOT, etc., on an ongoing basis, to implement the Sound Transit Edmonds Station plans approved by the City's Architectural Design Board and the City Council in 2002. The 2002 plans include amenities above and beyond those currently proposed as a part of the 2008 permit set for an interim station. Specifically, additional amenities include a bus transit station south of Main Street, a roundabout, additional landscaping and enhanced shelters. In response to Mr. Vanderburg's comments, Mr. Clifton explained Sound Transit could move forward with the plans about to be permitted, the platform, the south parking lot, landscaping, railing, etc., and work with the City and other stakeholders to design and eventually construct additional amenities needed to implement the 2002 plan such as the roundabout and the bus transit station. Ultimately, both Sound Transit and City of Edmonds desire a well functioning, attractively designed station that compliments the overall Sound Transit system and encourages local development that supports regional transit. As such, Sound Transit would utilize unexpended funding from Sound Transit's Phase 1 budget, along with any other available funding, for the Edmonds Station Project to fund improvements identified in the 2002 plan. He commented on the current favorable bidding climate. Mayor Haakenson commented once this project was built, it would be due to Mr. Clifton's perseverance. COUNCIL PRESIDENT WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT, THAT THE COUNCIL CONCUR WITH THE ADMINISTRATION STATEMENT THAT SOUND TRANSIT WORK WITH OTHER STAKEHOLDERS, E.G., CITY OF EDMONDS, COMMUNITY TRANSIT, WSDOT, ETC., ON AN ONGOING BASIS, TO IMPLEMENT THE SOUND TRANSIT EDMONDS STATION PLANS APPROVED BY THE CITY'S ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD AND THE CITY COUNCIL IN 2002. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. UPDATE OF STORMWATER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND STORMWATER MANAGE- MENT PROGRAM. Stormwater Engineering Program Manager Jerry Shuster explained reasons for updating the Stormwater Comprehensive Plan include that the recently published Puget Sound Action agenda cited stormwater runoff as one of the top threats to Puget Sound and the GMA requires the City have a capital facilities plan and stormwater infrastructure. The purpose of the Plan is to provide for the management of stormwater runoff from public and private property for the purpose of minimizing property damage from flooding and impacts to the water quality and the habitat value of receiving waters. This can be done by developing a stormwater capital facilities plan and financial plan to serve the needs of the community to ensure all activities related to the management of stormwater runoff are in compliance with applicable federal, state and local requirements. The Plan was last updated in 2003; since then the Department of Ecology has come out with the stormwater permit for Phase 2 municipalities such as Edmonds. The City's 2003 Plan had several capital projects that have been completed and there are additional capital needs. Mr. Shuster described steps to update the Plan including performing a gap analysis on current operational and capital needs and regulatory requirements; developing policies, programs and projects to fill those gaps; developing utility rate structure to fund the policies, programs and projects. He reviewed the schedule to have an updated Stormwater Utility Capital Improvement Plan by June 2009, a revised Rate Analysis by December 2009, draft Plan update by December 2009 and adoption of the final Plan in 2010. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 10 He provided a brief history regarding trends in stormwater management which began with ditches /pipes to convey water to the nearest waterbody. Rapid development led to flooding and the need for bigger pipes. Stormwater detention was developed in the mid 1970's and in the 1990s it was discovered detention volumes were too small to protect streams from back -to -back storms. Current practices include low impact development (LID) or "rainwater management" to manage rainwater so it does not become stormwater by mimicking forested or predevelopment conditions. Mark Eubank, Herrera Consultants, identified the following project goals: Ensure compliance with the City's DOE - issued Western Washington Phase H Municipal. Stormwater Permit (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System or NPDES permit), and improve the development review process for stormwater submittals Project tasks include the following: 1. A gap analysis to compare Edmonds' program with those required by the Phase II permit. 2. Develop necessary programs and recommend a staffing needs and funding strategy for permit compliance. 3. Develop conceptual plans and a funding strategy for Stonnwater Capital Improvement Projects to address current issues. 4. Develop new client handouts to clarify new stormwater requirements for new development and redevelopment especially small sites. Mr. Eubanks described the Phase II Municipal. Permit, explaining the City was issued a Phase 11 permit in January 2007. The Phase II program stems from the EPA Clean Water Act implementation that began in the 1970s and has now reached Edmonds and similar communities looking at sources of runoff. The requirements for compliance are phased in over five years; Edmonds is facing several permit compliance deadlines in 2009. The City is required to report progress to the DOE on a yearly basis; the next report is due in March. He explained the Phase II Municipal Permit is divided into five major categories: 1. Public education and outreach - many audiences need to be reached; many are currently being reached via the City's Discovery Parks Program. 2. Public involvement and participation - the City is required to have public input into the City's stormwater management program (SWMP). Opportunities for public participation include the Planning Board public hearing, City Council public hearing, Channel 21, quarterly newsletter as well as making the SWMP and annual reports available to the public via the City's website. 3. Illicit discharge detection and elimination - the City is required to prohibit non - stormwater, illegal discharges, have an ordinance that includes enforcement procedures and actions, develop an enforcement strategy and implement an illicit discharge detection program. Deadlines include an illicit discharge ordinance by August 2009, training requirements by August 2009, ongoing IDDE program in place by August 2011 and development of a municipal storm sewer map by February 2011. Mayor Haakenson remarked these were unfunded mandates. 4. Controlling runoff from new development, redevelopment and construction sites - the City is required to adopt ordinances that includes new technical requirements consistent with 2005 DOE stormwater manual (or more stringent), adopt provisions for LID inspection of all development sites, train staff and update procedures for storm drainage reviews, adopt legal authority to inspect private stormwater facilities and adopt requirements for a maintenance plan for private stormwater facilities, including adopting an enforcement strategy. 5. Pollution prevention and operation and maintenance for municipal operations. He commented the Public Works staff was meeting most of the requirements but documentation of those efforts was needed to satisfy DOE. Mr. Eubank identified next steps including updating the Stormwater Comprehensive Plan, annual compliance report due to DOE by March 31, establish a formal process for inviting public involvement in Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 11 the plan, begin work on compliance deadlines in 2009 and 2010, and considering the utility rate structure for stormwater management. Councilmember Orvis commented his house was built before 1970 and did not have any stormwater controls. He noted property owners in his situation had two options, a detention vault for stormwater or hiring a hydrology engineer to develop an alternate plan. He asked if this process would result in more standard options. Mr. Eubank answered staff has begun determining the appropriate types of stormwater facilities for small sites and to define tools so that a stormwater design engineer would not necessarily be required to design an onsite stormwater system by providing standard tables with the size of a stormwater treatment or flow control device for the amount of impervious surface on a site and to encourage low impact landscape type facilities. Councilmember Orvis asked if rain gardens had been used successfully for stormwater retention. Mr. Eubank answered yes and remarked they worked well in most settings. Councilmember Orvis commented he previously thought of things like the International Building Code as a pain but was learning it made it easier and cheaper to develop, in this case better stormwater controls. Councilmember Wambolt commented on periodic flooding at Harbor Square and asked whether this Plan would rectify that situation. Public Works Director Noel Miller advised that was being discussed with the consultant and a potential project will be identified for that area. Mayor Haakenson remarked the real problem was when the stormwater entered the drains at high tide and there was nowhere for it to go. Councilmember Peterson noted there were bills in the State legislature regarding stormwater funding as well as federal stimulus funds for clean water /stormwater. Mr. Miller answered the City's lobbyist, Mike Doubleday, was tracking those bills which would provide funding assistance for cities required to comply with the NPDES Phase II permit. The requirement for projects to be construction ready limited the projects that were eligible for economic stimulus funds but staff was hopeful some projects would qualify. The deadline for the first round of economic stimulus funding requests is March 15. Councilmember Bernheim asked about the major sources of illicit discharge. Mr. Eubank answered the sources in Edmonds would not be determined for a few years. They typically find illicit discharges are from residences, small businesses or episodic discharges such as a charity carwash. He noted the methods for detecting illicit discharge were simple; following stormwater outfalls to a creek and tracking any obvious indicators of non - groundwater or non - stormwater discharges upstream to their source. Council President Wilson commented in evaluating what enters the lake, the Lake Ballinger Community Association have discovered people dumping their used motor oil into the storm drain because they are unaware it does not go to the treatment plant and local restaurants that dump their fryer grease into catch basins. He commended Mr. Shuster for his work with the Lake Ballinger Forum. Mayor Haakenson echoed Council President Wilson's commendation of Mr. Shuster, commenting his background and knowledge had been a great addition to the City. Council President Wilson commented the Lake Ballinger Forum has discussed areas to coordinate on such as discharge hotlines, public education outreach, etc. He asked whether there were plans for cities to work together to defray costs. Mr. Shuster noted coordinating on an illicit discharge hotline would be a way for cities to work together. Council. President Wilson invited Mr. Shuster to seek the Council's assistance if necessary. Council President Wilson commented he had been told one of the easiest ways to control the toxins in stormwater was to require development to place a thatched covering over open soil and asked if that should be addressed in the Plan. Mr. Eubank agreed a number of jurisdictions require preservation of the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 12 natural soil layer or soil amendment for any major land redevelopment. Preservation or creation of that type of soil characteristic could be included as a way of mitigating stormwater runoff impacts. Council President Wilson suggested coordinating the requirement for a thatched covering on exposed soil with Development Services. He learned recently that an 18" diameter tree holds 100 gallons of water and therefore removing trees impacts the capacity of a site to retain water. He asked how the City could incorporate retention of significant stands of trees into this Plan. Mr. Eubank advised that could be included as a policy objective in the Stormwater Comprehensive Plan. Council President Wilson commented he was specifically interested in preserving large stands of trees. Mr. Shuster recalled staff recently discussed the possibility of allowing stormwater credits as an incentive for retaining or adding certain size trees on a site. Councilmember Orvis asked if Development Service fees could be used to cover the cost of DOE's unfunded mandates. Mr. Bowman answered yes. Mr. Shuster advised approximately $50,000 of the Stormwater Program update was funded via a grant from DOE. With regard to tree preservation, Mr. Miller commented it was problematic to save trees that were uplifting sidewalks. He noted any trees that were removed were replanted. Mayor Haakenson declared a brief recess. 10. WORK SESSION ON RECOMMENDED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 20 OF THE EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE RELATING TO ESTABLISHING PERMIT TYPES PROCESS REQUIREMENTS, NOTICE REQUIREMENTS, CONSISTENCY WITH SEPA, OPEN RECORD HEARING PROCEDURES, CLOSED RECORD APPEALS, AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. Development Services Director Duane Bowman explained the purpose of tonight's presentation was to provide the Council an overview of the draft regulations, address any questions the Council may have and set March 17, 2009 for a public hearing on the proposed changes. He explained objectives of the rewrite were to, 1) provide clear standards for permit processing, 2) reduce potential liability, and 3) address Hearing Examiner procedural concerns. He identified the major proposed changes: • Establishing permit types. • Tables identifying the different permit types and the decision - making process. • Submission requirements and procedures. • Public notice requirements establishing the responsibility for the permit applicant to provide the notice. • Establishing SEPA consistency regulations. • Establishing open and closed record hearing procedures. • Creating a new section dealing with Development Agreements. With regard to the fonnat, he envisioned Title 20 would be reformatted to place the process and procedures section at the start of the chapter with a subsection for specific permit review criteria. The process and procedures section would have seven subsections: • Chapter 20.01 - types of development project permit types • Chapter 20.02 - type I -IV development project permit applications • Chapter 20.03 - public notice • Chapter 20.04 - consistency with development regulations and SEPA Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 13 Chapter 20.06 - open record public hearings Chapter 20.07 - closed record appeals Chapter 20.08 - development agreements Mr. Bowman displayed the development project permit application framework for decisions found in Chapter 20.01. He explained this was not in the current code and a person would need to search the code to find this information. The table defines the different permit types and the table in Chapter 20.02 identifies who makes a recommendation, who makes the final decision, whether a notice of application . was required, whether there was an open record public hearing or open record appeal of a final decision, whether there was a closed record review and judicial appeal. Mr. Bowman reviewed the public notice requirement in Chapter 20.03, explaining the biggest change in this section was the requirement for the applicant/appellant to provide all public notice. Staff will prepare the notice content and give it to the permit applicant /appellant to post and mail. Affidavits for posting and mailing are required prior to any public hearing. Failure to provide proper notice will result in the project not going to public hearing or the appeal being dismissed. Mayor Haakenson asked how public notice was currently provided. Mr. Bowman answered the applicant/appellant submitted the mailing list and staff prepared and mailed the notice and posted the property. He advised some of the cost of the current process was passed on to the applicant. Councilmember Plunkett asked the standard used to determine if mailing was accomplished, recalling there have been instances when residents have claimed not to have received notification. Mr. Bowman answered along with the affidavit of mailing and posting, the applicant /appellant submitted their mailing list. Staff would also drive by the site to ensure posting was accomplished. Councilmember Plunkett asked how many other cities had the applicant do the public notice. Mr. Bowman answered he knew Bothell did but would research that for the March 17 public hearing. City Attorney Bio Park advised the affidavit was submitted under penalty of perjury. Mr. Bowman explained Chapter 20.06, open record public hearings, establishes clear procedures for conducting open record hearings, addresses the issues raised by the Hearing Examiner regarding the processing of reconsideration requests, and establishes the burden of proof (in a permit applicant, the burden of proof is on the applicant; in an appeal the burden of proof is on the appellant /proponent). Mr. Bowman explained Chapter 20.04, consistency with development regulations and SEPA, formalized what staff already does in preparing staff reports and adds planned actions which are not currently covered. Councilmember Bernheim commented on the difficulty of evaluating the new code without reference to the existing code. Mr. Bowman explained the reason for the changes was to bring the code in line with the Regulatory Reform Act, to make the code easier to understand and to streamline information. He offered to provide citations to the existing code by March 6 to allow the Council to track the changes that were made and how they relate to the existing code. Council President Wilson agreed with the suggestion regarding addressing half of the amendments on March 17 and the other half the first Tuesday in April. Mayor Haakenson encouraged the Council to complete this by March 17 because Mr. Bowman was retiring on March 31 and no one else on staff had his institutional knowledge. Mr. Bowman explained Chapter 20.07, closed record appeals, establishes procedures for closed record appeals, establishes consolidated appeals process, and establishes standing to initiate an administrative Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 14 appeal. Mr. Park commented there were a few substantive changes in this section including permitting parties of record to submit written arguments based on the record to the Council to avoid oral arguments that should not occur in a closed record appeal. Councilmember Plunkett commented that was a substantive change. Mr. Bowman offered to highlight that type of change in the code. He noted having argument submitted in writing made the Council's process much easier; the biggest problem with closed record reviews was the introduction of new information. Mayor Haakenson commented written argument also made it easier for the chair of the meeting, who must determine whether argument was on the record. Councilmember Plunkett stated there were some advantages but there were also disadvantages with not allowing oral argument. Mr. Bowman explained Chapter 20.08, establishes a new section dealing with development agreements, establishes processing procedures, and establishes an appeal process. He recalled the fee ordinance established fees for a development agreement to ensure the City Attorney and staff's time spent reviewing the development agreement were recovered. He explained development agreements required a public hearing before the City Council. Mr. Park explained a development agreement was an agreement in advance of development between the City and the proponent. The agreement establishes the standard of development and requirements that will apply to the development. He assured the regulations in place at the time the development agreement is established apply, there are no exceptions. Development agreements provide more consistency for a multi -stage development and provide ease of process. Councilmember Orvis recalled a development agreement case in Spokane where there were trades made between the City and the developer. Mr. Park answered the provisions of the development agreement must be consistent with the code at the time the agreement is established. He noted some codes allowed "trades" such as building height in exchange for open space, etc. Mr. Bowman encouraged Councilmembers to email him any questions prior to the public hearing. He agreed to provide the Council an annotated version of the ordinance that included citations to existing code sections and to identify substantive changes. Councilmember Orvis referred to the table in 20.01, types of development project permit types, and clarified preliminary plats, general variances and conditional use were moved from Type III -B to Type III -A. Mr. Bowman agreed, commenting there is currently a bifurcated process whereby a preliminary plat goes to the Council but the Planned Residential Development (PRD) goes to the Hearing Examiner. Because a developer typically does a preliminary plat at the time of a PRD, both should be in the same category. Mr. Bowman advised a site plan, shoreline substantial development variances and plat vacations were heard by the Hearing Examiner. The Council retains its authority over Architectural Design Board as the Hearing Examiner is not design- oriented. He advised the Planning Board conducted the open record hearing on site specific /contract rezones (Type IV -B) and the Council conducts the closed record appeal. He offered to also highlight changes made to the table. Councilmember Plunkett referred to page 30 and the statement that applicants may submit written or oral argument. Mr. Bowman stated an appellant could submit oral argument, and suggested Council consider requiring argument be submitted in writing in advance of the hearing to ensure the record maintained its integrity. Judicial appeals considered whether the integrity of the hearing process was maintained. It was the consensus of the Council to schedule this on the March 17 agenda for a public hearing. Mr. Bowman offered to email responses to a Councilmember's questions to all Councilmembers and to provide a list of questions /answers at the public hearing. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 15 11. COUNCIL REPORTS ON OUTSIDE COMMITTEE /BOARD MEETINGS COUNCILMEMBER WAMBOLT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BERNHEIM, TO EXTEND THE MEETING FOR 15 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Council President Wilson reported the Lake Ballinger Forum discussed their request for federal funds. Further, the internal Levy Review Committee has been meeting frequently to develop a plan for the Citizen Levy Review Committee that will meet the last two Mondays in March and the first two Mondays in April. Applications are available on the City's website. Councilmember Wambolt reported at their February 9 meeting, the Port Commission approved the design of the new yacht club building. The Commission approved an updated travel policy for staff and Commissioners, and reviewed their financial results for 2008; their net income was $364,000 below budget but would have been $91,000 over budget if they had not been required to take an unbudgeted environmental expense accrual of $483,000 for Harbor Square remediation. At their February 23 meeting, the Commission reviewed plans for Harbor Square renovations to make the buildings more attractive to prospective tenants. He advised the Port Executive Director Chris Keuss is retiring May 31. There were 73 applicants for that position. Two Commissioners screened those to 25; the Commission will screen them to 6 -10 semi - finalists. A committee comprised of two Commissioners, an Executive Director from another Port, a person with real estate knowledge, the Mayor of Woodway and he will reduce the applicants to three finalists. The Port Commission will make the final selection. Councilmember Orvis reported the Health Board is seeking people to serve on the Strategic Plan Committee; he volunteered to serve. Councilmember Peterson reported Mr. Clifton reported what he has been working on the Economic Development Committee and they began discussing marketing toward environmental initiatives. They also met with local builders to discuss how the Committee could assist them. Councilmember Plunkett reported a property owner has proposed to the Highway 99 Task Force a transition zone between the highrise zone on Highway 99 and the residential zone. He plans to hold public meetings and eventually make a proposal to the City. 12. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Haakenson thanked the Council for the opportunity to present the State of the City report. 13. COUNCIL COMMENTS Council President Wilson expressed his appreciation to Mayor Haakenson for his State of the City report. Student Representative Grace Guenther asked to photograph the Council for her senior project. 14. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:07 p.m. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes February 24, 2009 Page 16