Loading...
2023-11-28 Regular MeetingEDMONDS CITY COUNCIL MEETING APPROVED MINUTES November 28, 2023 ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Mike Nelson, Mayor Neil Tibbott, Council President Vivian Olson, Councilmember Will Chen, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Susan Paine, Councilmember Chris Eck, Councilmember Jenna Nand, Councilmember 1. CALL TO ORDER/FLAG SALUTE STAFF PRESENT Susan McLaughlin, Planning & Dev. Dir. Todd Tatum, Comm., Culture & Econ. Dev. Dir. Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7 pm. by Mayor Nelson in the Council Chambers, 250 5t' Avenue North, Edmonds, and virtually. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Councilmember Buckshnis read the City Council Land Acknowledge Statement: "We acknowledge the original inhabitants of this place, the Sdohobsh (Snohomish) people and their successors the Tulalip Tribes, who since time immemorial have hunted, fished, gathered, and taken care of these lands. We respect their sovereignty, their right to self-determination, and we honor their sacred spiritual connection with the land and water." 3. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH OF OFFICE FOR NEWLY ELECTED COUNCILMEMBERS Mayor Nelson administered the oath of office to Councilmember Jenna Nand. Mayor Nelson administered the oath of office to Councilmember Chris Eck. 4. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 5. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER PAINE MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 1 Carl Zapora, Edmonds, congratulated the newly elected councilmembers. He was representing himself, not any companies or organizations. He reminded the city council they declared a financial emergency a few weeks ago in the millions of dollars and will take 3-5 years to get the reserves back to the minimum level to get the City out of that state of emergency. He asked how much of a priority it is for the city council to put together a plan to replenish reserves. No city the size of Edmonds should have reserves as low as the City will have in 2024. He requested the council consider freezing all non -essential expenditures, the prudent thing for any organization or company to do under major financial duress. He also recommended placing a moratorium on all new programs or new ventures. It is looking likely that in 2024 the council will have to seek a voter approved tax increase. He envisioned it would be difficult to get citizens to approve a tax increase unless the City has demonstrated major strides in tightening its belt every way possible. He implored the council to do that as much as possible when planning the 2024 budget and beyond. Joel Steinke, Edmonds, spoke regarding the proposed red light camera installation, exegesis of panopticism, a term coined by Foucault to represent the increasing surveillance state inspired by the prison design put forward by Jeremy Bentham. Effectively, there is a central pillar surrounded by a circle of cells wherein the guards in the pillar can view into every cell without the inmates knowing. Foucault found in this architectural marvel a metaphor which described the presiding rationality of the state. He did not need to convince the council or anyone of the growing efficacy of public and private surveillance by the state and private means, it's self-evident at this point. He suggested automatically monitored cameras actually move an automatically panoptic relationship and into something called perfect surveillance, effectively making real and omnipotent states the like of which were previously reserved only for theoretical discussion and pieces of fiction. It is clear that the City is unknowingly becoming bedfellows with a particularly hobbesian galilean notion of freedom. He strongly recommended reading Quentin Skinner; liberty is not merely the absence of interference, we are not doing our best work. How might perfect surveillance go beyond the panoptic relationship between the surveilled and the state. Are we reflecting upon the psychological affects resulting from the existence of an omnipotent state. Image if the whole of Edmonds was perfectly surveilled, every speeding infraction was accounted for and dispatched accordingly. If someone knows that their evert action is watched, is not the deeper truth of panopticism destroyed? The self-regulating behavior arises because you know not if the guard in the tower is watching or in this instance, if the cop is around the corner. When one knows they are being monitored perfectly and at all times, the responsibility for my engagement with the possibility of being watched becomes subsumed, now the only concern is whether one wishes to violate the law and pay the fine or drive in an economically avowed manner? He wanted to invoke the economic dimension in greater detail and filter surveillance qua safety through it because he knew the city wished to present the proposal as one ostensibly concerned with safety. Mr. Steinke continued, asking if the concern was absolutely with safety? No, instead it is delineating a more conditional notion of public safety that is subordinate to an already existing economic rationality that is fundamental, a type of economic rationality that produces the very possibility for such a notion to exist. Hence we can resolve the apparent paradox between the state ostensibly concerned with safety that wants you to dive safe but will allow you to drink yourself to death in your home, the disavow of one and the avow of the other resolved within the broader framework of profitability. Is it the role of government to condition behavior? With such a question, we are squarely within the biopolitical horizon that [inaudible] wrote extensively about. When we invoke ideas of protection as both the justification and the means toward desired conditioned behavior, we should consider deeply our perceived understanding of the origin of both civility and moral decency. Tocqueville was clear that over 300 years ago it was the role of the church and the clergy, what we would today consider the public institutions of education, to provide the proper moral edification of the public. The nongovernmental yet public education of citizens is foundational to democracy. Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, congratulated the newly elected councilmembers. He echoed Mr. Zapora's comments regarding the budget. He recalled a couple weeks ago the council discussed forming a taskforce; Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 2 he was waiting to hear the results of that taskforce which apparently has yet to be disclosed to the public. The hope was by using a taskforce there would be discussions about a stabilized budget; unfortunately, all decisions the council has made to date have destabilized the budget further and made the City more susceptible to bankruptcy. He encouraged the council to listen to Councilmember Chen who said the City is on the path toward bankruptcy. By Mr. Ogonowski's analysis, unless the City borrows money, the City will be insolvent by the 2024. He did not see any path that said otherwise; borrowing is the last resort but the council is quickly heading toward that unless they make some really tough budgetary decisions. That is what councilmembers were elected to do and what the citizens expect. Citizens, staff and the council are frustrated, but he did not see a council vision or path; it is just ad hoc. He hoped the council gets its act together because time is running out. 7. RECEIVED FOR FILING 1. SEPTEMBER MONTHLY REPORT 2. BUDGET QUERIES - COUNCIL BUDGET QUESTIONS AND ADMINISTRATION / STAFF RESPONSES 3. OUTSIDE BOARDS AND COMMITTEE REPORTS 8. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER NAND MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER OLSON, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: 1. APPROVAL OF COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES NOVEMBER 14, 2023 2. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS AND WIRE PAYMENT. 9. COUNCIL BUSINESS 1. LANDMARK 99 PROJECT UPDATE Community, Culture & Economic Development Director Todd Tatum said the council has reached the first major decision point since voting to pursue this option in June. Since that time an incredible about of conversation has occurred around the Highway 99 corridor and the long standing opportunities and concerns. In staff s opinion, this has been a very positive development and he hoped that continued. There has been much work done to bring structure to this very unstructured opportunity. A project plan has been developed since June as well as research conducted as well as outreach to staff of cities and municipalities across the region who have undertaken similar projects. Staff has learned quite a bit and broadened their horizons. There have been plenty of conversations with council and with the development community in the meantime as well as a lot of discussions with community members in official meetings, one on one and in small group settings. There has been a lot of site planning done as well as negotiations with the seller. He summarized a lot of work, thought and effort has been done in the past five months to get to this point which tonight's presentation will try to distill. Consideration of Landmark 99 is scheduled for two meetings, tonight and December 5 so there is time to discuss, hear from the public, think and come together on a decision. Mr. Tatum continued, the option required two main things by December 31, 2023: negotiate a purchase and sale agreement (PSA) and execute an addendum to the option replacing Exhibit B which originally included the terms of 75% and 25%, with the PSA. He reviewed: • Decision for December 5' o Authorize the Mayor to sign an amended Option attaching the negotiated PSA as Exhibit B, and amending the timeline and "assignment clause" language. o This action results in: Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 3 ■ $100,000 becoming nonrefundable ■ The option continuing, thereby allowing further consideration until we execute the option or we choose to discontinue pursuing this project ■ Staff advancing the project as described in this presentation Major changes o Staff heard council's comments and concerns and worked with the property owner on some critical changes ■ The language in the original option required assignees to agree that "at least 75% of the acreage of the property will be for public purposes" - The PSA language replaces this with "an assignment of the Purchaser's entire interest in the Agreement shall only be allowed if the assignee is a public entity." ■ The original option required us to exercise by December 31, 2024 and close by June 30, 2025 - The PSA and amended option replace those dates with March 31, 2025 to exercise and no later than September 30, 2025 to close ■ We've retained the finance, due diligence, and title contingencies between the two dates Planning & Development Director Susan McLauglin commented in addition to understanding the decision at hand, it is important to understand the why and what's possible to help council and the community to consider the information that Mr. Tatum reviewed and to make an educated decision. She commented community amenity space, civic use, public open space in the Highway 99 corridor has been a goal for a long time. There are policies and plans in place to support not only pursuing this property but other properties and other strategies to achieve that goal. That is a collective goal in the community and one the council and staff are committed to. She reviewed: • Policy Framework: Promoting partnerships o Comprehensive Plan ■ Economic Development Goal B.9 Work with property owners, developers and investors to seek appropriate redevelopment in underdeveloped and/or emerging business districts... ■ Economic Development Goal C.5 Pursue available incentives to foster appropriate redevelopment, where possible. ■ Sustainability Goal G. Develop housing policies, programs, and regulations designed to support and promote sustainability. Support and encourage a mix of housing types and styles which provide people with affordable housing choices geared to changes in life style. Seek to form public and private partnerships to retain and promote affordable housing options. ■ Comp Plan Econ Dev Element: - Appropriately sited and sized development/redevelopment projects increase: - Property tax receipts through the "new construction" provision that captures new construction value -based property tax for the first year a project is brought on line and adds that value to the city's future property tax baseline. o PROS Plan ■ "Combining a park/recreation facility with a much -needed community center and multi- family (affordable) housing development could be a potential approach, as would other public -private ventures" PROS Plan page 45, Gap Analysis ■ Recommendation #1: Acquisitions to Fill Park System Gaps: - "Explore options for acquiring property to create a satellite community center in the Lake Ballinger or South Edmonds area". -PROS Plan page 114, Project Recommendations/Action Initiatives o Subarea Plan Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 4 A sampling of relevant Hwy 99 Sub Area Plan Planned Action EIS mitigation measures: • Encourage and promote public open spaces through public/private partnerships where possible. • Implement pedestrian and bicycle transportation improvements to provide greater access • Acquiring park land in the Highway 99/SR 104 areas to provide adequate park service in redeveloping areas. • Create new civic spaces to enhance investment and revitalization while meeting recreation needs • Increasing connections to the Interurban Trail, using signage, sidewalks, curb extensions, and other pedestrian/bicycle enhancements o Community renewal plan Edmonds Highway 99 Community Renewal Plan FACILITATEAMI%ED-USE. MI%ED-INCOME DEMONSTRATION PROJECT exF7essedastrorxjdesire for agateKW.. A distinct transition point in andout of EcrOt1d; �� a ...•_•�.� -Subarea Plan Page 15, community feedback on m rva+ve.eM n. ra..w r�i the Gateway District EDMONDS HIGHWAY 99 SUBAREA PLAN -Subarea Plan, Page 65 Implementation Public —Private Partnership Pubkcprlvate partnerships for economic development typically involve the use of pudic financial assistance programs and other public levers or interventions in partnership with the private sector to facilitate development outcomes. Typically, these partnerships are used to support projects that align with public policy objectives, but that are not feasible without public participation or support (such as with infrastructure investment). These partnerships can advance community development but should be umed out with a partnership structured responsibly and with support from project stakeholders. These partnerships on be more effective if the following Is addressed: 1. Identify a compelling development strategy with demonstrable public benefit. 2. Generate support for development objectives from elected officials and stakeholders. 3. Identify priority sites and lay the groundwork for development through pre -development activities (preparing the site for development). 4. Get to know the development community, find a capable development partner, and form a publlcyrlvate partnership team. S. Identify public assistance tools and further understanding on the range of tools available. 6. Right size the amount of public assistance. 7. Structure a fair deal and monitor project performance. If this partnership will help advance the construction of a community facility, there are other considerations to address including an analysis of the site factors that will influence the facility use, such as access, proximity to complementary uses, infrastructure, and utilities, etc. The ownership models of a community facility vary and could Include nonprofit ownership or pubic ownership such as through a Public Development Authority. Edmonds Highway 99 Community Renewal Plan e Early Community Input: Poll Results o Online poll conducted by the City in Aug -September 2023 0 1,232 responses were received o To the comment the poll did not include an option to do nothing, intent was to explore what was possible on the site. uD to elected officials to decide whether to move forward �6 ».._ 184 138 lib 300 36 198 116 200 NR 127 170lop 13Z 123 88 97 0 62 0 97 nA O,hP COto' % " 't 9P, '�� e"' iG�di yo�P/ ^ P 4dcP 'O�d� d+ CP7 Tel 7� 4d CP 7' elf rP Oar L Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 5 • First Community Conversations Event- October 215t o Held at Edmonds - Woodway High School on Oct 21 st, 2023 o - 60 attendees 0 60% from Highway 99/ Lake Ballinger neighborhoods 0 7 small group discussions o Topics list Community Conversations Event o What should the site be used for? ■ Common themes: - Senior housing - Low-income housing - Work force housing - Retail - Coffee Shops - Community Center -flexible space - Hotel Public Spaces and Streets ■ Common themes: - Connection to Inter -urban trail - Stormwater drainage Improvements to 242nd / 240th - No through traffic - Streetlights and traffic calming - Concerns on accessibility to the site (Choose a more central location) o Partnership Models ■ Common themes: - How much will community/city contribute to the redevelopment? Concerns: - What control does city have on the private development with/without being part of the project? Making a community focused development o Responding to the communities along Hwy 99: ■ Community anticipating growth ■ Lack of amenities and community facilities along the corridor Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 6 ■ Learning from precedent studies ■ Established "International District" with specialized markets and commercial areas • Site Overview 0 10 Acres o Large format retail use, high vacancy o Zoned General Commercial o Current access from north and west, potential access from south • Summary of Site Principles o Normalized intersections o Site Access o Not to preclude integration of existing Auto Dealer • Landmark 99: Opportunity for placemaking and added value • Master Plan Design Options o Concept Development The Town Square The Village Green The Neighborhood o Site Plan The Town Square The Village Green reetlen «tU wpuetk enter y and w0uxk curter library unhy Pa ,ca canter 3. Id Gmn a Detell uses«u eeum 6 IletLl uaea cwN Pu«k Plan «au k+wkal once emlam:. n.aia«n «.0 waam,l onk. edtana ail ana x.�aemul an.ne In nwrc�n�te� _ Park / WYYI«aM . MN9DD«DooU Park / Ola)groln li rae.kn sweet Iic Open Sgrn 14 Community Uses Retail Uses Open Space Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and subject to change with further design study • Comparison: Community Facilities The Neighborhood unit' Maource cmu� al5pac Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 7 �. P97 ; =!3 j r Total BUA 123 million SF Total BUA 1.09 Million SF Total BUA 0.92 Million SF Civic space 90,500 SF (735%) Civic space 70500 SF (6.4%) Civic space 41,400 SF (4.5%) Public Open space 2Acres Public Open Space 12Acres Public Open Space 0.9Acres Metrics are approximate, conceptual only and subject to change with further design study • Comparison: Built Up Area The Town Square The Village Green The Neighborhood 322,000 SF 91,430 5F 148,000 SF ?A3'SOO SF 375,7005E 33'`.�OO SF 99,000SF 370,000SF 362,000 SF ^ 203,300 SF . - - 105,0005E 30,800 SF f,. 90,500 SF CMC USE (7.35%) Range of DUs: 850-900 • Public Activation Public Art 1 Stage/Foodtruck pavilion i Amphitheater & gardens CommunityCenter & caaffess 114� • Public Investment Options 238,1005E � 37,600 SF Auto arrival and pick-up 70,500 SF 41,400 SF CMC USE 348,950 SF CMC USE (6.4%) (4.5%) Gi Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 8 o Negotiable Elements 1) Extent and Type of Public Uses & Amount of Property 2) Infrastructure - Utilities and Streets 3) Open Space- scale, ownership, asset management 4) Land Price & Terms, Timing, Phasing 5) Development Standards 6) Housing affordability Mr. Tatum reviewed: Precedent Studies: Program Elements Tukwila Village ; Woodinville Schoolhouse District ` f a � ISiAKT 1 1 1 'o 1 5 Area: 6.4 Acres Area: 4 Acres • Communityevent pavilion, plaza and new 8000 SF library 280 senior housing units, 3200 SF Retail, • Civic Uses • Upgraded YMCA Public spaces for Farmers market and festivals 34,000 SF food and "Wine Walk Row" retail 264 units of market rate housing • Precedent Studies: Implementation Tukwila Village Woodinville Schoolhouse District Site acquired through powers of urban renewal • Non-profit senior housing developer lead $131 million: $7M (City) $1M (WA Transportation grant) $113M: Developer financing ($20M low- income housing credits) Ms. McLaughlin reviewed: �S•" 7 Site: City acquired elementary school Developer RFP Property value: $14M; offset by $81M to get civic uses built by developer Burien Town Center Area: 8 Acres Centered on a 1-acre town square New City hall with library +/- 300 housing units (seniors and condo), 40,000 SF Retail Federal Way Town Center Area:10 Acres • Centered around 1 acre town square- public park & indoor -outdoor event pavilion. • New City Hall with Community Center (Classrooms and Meeting soacel 1000+ housing units, 30,000 SF Retail, hotel option Burien Town Center Federal Way Town Center I 1 1 1 1 1 — 1 - iiG 1 1 I, 1 • 1 1 � r' - 1 1 1 1 1 1 Catalyst pilot project for I Site: City owned with 1 downtown r existing performing arts • Developer lead RFP facility Catalyst pilot project in an i "Opportunity Zone" Developer lead - 4 phase Development Agreement Second Community Conversation Feedback on design options o Received 47 responses, 32 generally positive but 24 of those still had questions, 9 opposed o "There is too much residential" o "I'm excited about the possibility of this development" o "they are all nice, but in this economy it won't work" o "Do not want access through 242"' o "Love the possibility of getting sidewalks" o "More housing = good" Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 9 o "Don't do it" o "Giving the community the level of walkability that is missing right now" o "This area of Edmonds is often neglected; most people don't realize the area between H-99 and Lake Ballinger is also part of Edmonds" o "All options will serve the community" • Second Community Conversation Feedback o Common preferences ■ Desire for more green space and pedestrian -friendly areas. ■ Emphasis on creating a balance between civic space, commercial space, and housing. ■ Support for local businesses ■ Need for sidewalks on the adjacent streets o Concerns/Suggestions ■ Traffic and access issues —especially on 242" d and 240th ■ Affordability ■ Parking ■ Requests for clarity on the use of spaces and how they would benefit the community. ■ Suggestions for involving non -profits in funding community development to reduce the financial burden on the city. ■ Concerns about the lack of information, financial plans, and validity of the proposed prices. ■ Safety Mr. Tatum reviewed: • Exnenditures to Date Purpose Amount Spent Option negotiation, appraisals, PSA negotiations $ 62,700 Communications, advertising, printing $ 30,200 Conceptual alternatives and public meetings $ 44,800 Total $137,700 • Outside Funding available o $75,000- In negotiations for Snohomish County grant o $300,000- Currently available from Affordable and Supportive Housing Sales & Use Tax • Appraisal and comparables o Two companies — SOVA and CBRE conducted the appraisal and review appraisal respectively. o The Landmark property's $37m price comes to a cost of $84.43/sq ft. COMPARABLE SALES SUMMARY AND LOCATION MAP Comparable land Sales sale Safe Sire Price/ Side ideintiloudon ntdon/ ZAL Prke 1dl d Zoning 1 20907 Highway 99 05/05/22 $2350,000 39.640 $59.28 CG 2 22315 Highway 99 04/13/22 $4,150.000 74,4b8 $55.71 CG 3 19022 Aurora Avenue 12/17/21 $6.750.000 71.981 $93 77 MB 4 20102 63st Place 10/13/21 $1,700,000 32.669 $52 04 RMl Sa 18551 Aurora Avenue N 04/30/21 $3 400.000 31.737 $107 13 MB 5b 12/12/19 $9,500,000 73,606 5129.07 M8 TotalAssefWoge S12,900.000 105,343 S12246 6 19533 Aurora Avenue N Pending $3,200,000 37,710 $94.86 MB Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 10 Mr. Tatum commented the negotiated price needs to be viewed in the context of a partnership which is the focus of the project. A development partner will bring their thinking in term of hundreds of millions of dollars so their calculation of price is different than the City's. While people have speculated about the market and the price of this property, a development partner will have a clear, up-to-date understanding of the feasibility of a project which includes the purchase of this property. A Request for Expression of Interest was sent out to many in the development community and is due by November 30. The REI stated the City has an option to purchase, options for what could be built on the site and seeking their level of interest in becoming a partner. By the December 5 meeting, staff will have information to share with council about the level of interest in the development community. Mr. Tatum continued: • What do comparables look like on the corridor? Sale 1 Sale 3 Sale 5 Sale 6 Smaller, awkward Massing potential, but Adequate massing Adequate massing lot awkward lot potential potential, but small lot size 0.91 acres 1.65 acres 2.42 acres 0.87 acres $59.28/sq ft $93.77/sq ft $122.46/sq ft $84.46/sq ft Priced below Priced above Landmark Priced above Priced in the range of Landmark Landmark Landmark Roadmap: Public/Private Partnership o PSA and Option Amendment o Request for Proposals o Due Diligence o Negotiate terms o Assignment of portion of right to purchase o Development agreement o Secure financing o Earnest money and closing Ms. McLaughlin reviewed: • Opportunities 1. This property's development WILL shape the future of the corridor 2. Deliver on City commitments in the Highway 99 neighborhoods 3. Community -centered design 4. Foster tax generating uses where they have stalled, on the property AND on the corridor 5. Enable the partnerships and development we want, rather than leave it to the market 6. Lower overall cost of acquisition and development — partner construction, impact fees, other financial tools 7. We get to leverage a developer's expertise and resources during planning and construction 8. Faster project delivery Mr. Tatum reviewed: • Risks 1. This property's development WILL shape the future of the corridor 2. Opportunity cost of not pursuing other avenues if this fails to achieve a partnership 3. Partnership fails to achieve desired results 4. Market downturn before construction 5. Political and regulatory risks 6. Financial risks: cost overruns and revenue fluctuations • Where we are heading Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 11 Decision for December 5th o Authorize the Mayor to sign an amended Option attaching the negotiated PSA as Exhibit B, and amending the timeline and "assignment clause" language. o This action results in: ■ $100,000 becoming nonrefundable ■ The option continuing, thereby allowing further consideration until we execute the option or we choose to discontinue pursuing this project ■ Staff advancing the project as described in this presentation Councilmember Nand said her comments are not intended to undercut the amount of work staff has done on this project. She has been taking a lot on the chin from the public because she grew up in the Highway 99 community and has a very personal perspective on changes to the corridor over the years. When thinking about the Highway 99 community, she compared it to other developments. Most people don't know Icicle, Washington, but many have heard of Leavenworth which was the result of two business owners in the 1960s who went to the University of Washington Community Development Bureau and expressed a desire to save their dying town. They came up with the idea of rebranding themselves as a Bavarian village. Business owners started remodeled building by building and doing tree lighting ceremonies; it was entirely driven by the community who were concerned their town was dying because they no longer had the salmon fishery economy they used to. Councilmember Nand continued, most people have not heard of Jodhpur, Indonesia, but they may have seen pictures on social media of the Color Village which is very popular and gets millions of shares. Everyone in that humble little village decided to paint their houses different colors to try to attract Instagrammers and now it is a huge tourism destination. The point of her comments is that was entirely community driven, the community approaching government and the private sector and asking for resources, help, guidance and leadership to save their town from poverty, crime and a lot of dire circumstances. She hoped to add to the conversation about the corridor, noting she has seen extremely ugly comments online; including people saying things like the whole of Highway 99 should be made illegal or there will be 11,000 illegal immigrants on Highway 99 when they add 11,000 people. As a counter narrative, she explained this property owner's story is not available because they requested privacy, but they approached the City saying this part of town is dying and expressing interest in revitalizing it. This is similar to the Mee property which could have been sold for development, but the owners wanted to contribute to the vision for parks and open space for the community. Councilmember Nand continued, Edmonds has such a grounded history and identity in its different nodes, from Perrinville to Firdale to the International District to the historic downtown district. Before Edmonds was incorporated into one jurisdiction, those were separate towns and they still have that identity. She hears so many voices from the Highway 99 community, a community that has been largely silent in the larger Edmonds discussion, that is starting to assert itself and say, we want to change things in our part of town, we feel like it's dying and want it reborn. That is not to knock the leadership that staff has provided in Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 12 responding to these property owners and these community activists expressing interest in making things better. Councilmember Nand continued, she is enthusiastic about project. She has been accused of wanting to go into commercial development; that is not true, her perspective is the Highway 99 and Lake Ballinger community where she grew up, people don't feel safe letting their kids walk to Mathay Ballinger Park, a park she played in as a child. She clarified she was not one of the negotiators on the project, but she is a lawyer and negotiates by trade. She has talked and spit -balled with her fellow councilmembers about scenarios. If the council exercises the option for $100,000, how concrete are the deal terms at that point. She referred to the offer that started this conversation, purchasing the three acres of open land, and asked if there would be the flexibility to potentially acquire the other parcels in the future. Mr. Tatum answered he did not know, that question would have to be asked. Councilmember Nand asked if there is a plan to possibly acquire the other 11 parcels in the future instead of in one fell swoop which could potentially be more expensive for the City. Mr. Tatum responded he did not want to speak for the owner, but his understanding of the owner's intent was to get the property sold by the City's timeline so splitting up the properties may be more problematic. Councilmember Nand asked if it would be possible to counter offer, tell the owner that the City is not interested in proceeding, request they shop the property on the open market and see if they get a firm offer for $37 million and come back and renegotiate with the City. That would address the concerns about the economic downturn potentially affecting real estate prices which she noted did not appear to be happening. Mr. Tatum said that would put the option beyond the December 31, 2023 timeline and without the council taking action, the option would be void. Councilmember Nand reviewed that scenario, the option is void, the property owner goes to the open market, if the property owner does not get another firm offer for $37 million, renegotiate a possibly more favorable price for the City for all 11 tax parcels. Mr. Tatum reiterated the owner wants to have the property sold by the end of 2025. If the council said no, the option is void, the property goes on the market, the seller still plans to sell by the end of 2025, the City still has the same amount of work to do such as finding a partner. The timeline would be seriously constricted which would increase the level of risk and result in a lot of unknowns with regard to a partnership at that point. Councilmember Buckshnis commented this process was handled incorrectly. The City does not have the money to pursue this. The citizens have been provided a false sense of hope and taxpayers' money is being gambled. The presentation states only $137,000 has been spent; she asked the amount of staff salaries for the past five months. Mayor Nelson requested councilmembers express their questions with courtesy and respect to all who are participating in meetings and not make personal attacks on City staff. Councilmember Buckshnis said she was not making personal attacks, she wanted to know the amount of money that has truly been spent. She recalled Councilmember Teitzel asking whether the amount spent was under $100,000 and staff said yes. The $137,000 didn't take into account the time spent by three directors on this project for all these months. She appreciated the work that has been done, the project looks wonderful, but the City does not have the money which is the bottom line. If the City doesn't have the money, this false sense of hope cannot continue to be provided to the citizens. She observed more than $137,000 had been spent considering the bandwidth it has taken to put all this together. To address Councilmember Buckshnis' comment about providing a false sense of hope and pointing that at staff, Mr. Tatum said the council voted in favor of the option. Staff investigated the option and are presenting that to council tonight. Councilmember Buckshnis said she did not intend to point at staff. Mr. Tatum said he felt it was pointed at them. Councilmember Buckshnis reiterated it is a false sense of hope. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 13 She has never received so many emails from citizens in the 13 years she has been on council. Mr. Tatum explained the option stops with a no vote from council. To the comment that directors have spent a lot of time in a concerted effort to figure out a way to do what the plans have asked for and compel development in a way that fits the community character along Highway 99, staff has certainly done that. If staff has spent too much time, the council can vote and tell them to stop working on it. He agreed here had been staff time spent on this. Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out Article 9 is an as -is PSA which means the property will potentially be purchased as -is and if there is any contamination on the property, the City is buying it as -is. City Attorney Jeff Taraday answered Article 9.1 is almost a full page long. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed concern this is the first time the council has seen the PSA. The council is being led to believe they are all up to date, yet some of the information, some of which is very important, hasn't been provided. She asked Mr. Taraday to read Article 9 and provide an opinion in the future. Considering that council supposedly told staff to move forward, council did not see the PSA until now and that is serious thing to have in a PSA. Mr. Taraday answered one of the reasons the PSA is in the packet is to understand what questions the council has and get those questions answered. The PSA is 30 pages long and it would be helpful to understand what the questions are so he can respond to council before next week. Councilmember Buckshnis said when this was originally presented, the council was not given all the data and council was under the impression that everything would be great, but didn't really understand the City would probably have to borrow money next year to fund the workforce. Council needs to realize right now that the City does not have the cash to pursue this. The project looks great and it is a great sense of prosperity that could happen in the future, but the City does not have the money right now. Councilmember Paine expressed appreciation for the presentation which clarified some of her questions. In looking at the risks, she was pleased to see that there are options and if the City were in the driver's seat, it could shape what was ultimately included in the development agreement (DA). It is a very true statement that this property, no matter who purchases it, will shape one of the most visible gateways into Edmonds. She asked how many 10 acre properties with easy access to Highway 99 and 1-5 there are in the region. She recalled during the November 18 meeting she heard options that gave her very great pause, an Amazon fulfillment/distribution center would be the opposite of what she would like to see, and she was unsure how the neighbors or community would like that. The other option mentioned was an Ikea which would kill a lot of local economic development. The biggest international business in Edmonds is a handful of Starbucks, everything else is hyper local which everyone takes pride in. She reiterated her question about how many 10 acre sites there in Snohomish County with this level of proximity to major freeways. She acknowledged there are some large car lots in Lynnwood on Highway 99 but did not think they were for sale. One of the risks that is not identified is things that could be built on that site that could have a negative impact. She suggested the consultant research that for the Puget Sound region. Mr. Tatum advised that could be researched. Councilmember Paine referred to the old Lynnwood High School site, 30 acres across from a large mall, the biggest site on the west coast during 2008/2009 when there was interest in redeveloping it when she was on the school board. That made the school board pause and think through exactly what they did and did not want see there. The board had envisioned something like University Village, but the downturn happened. She asked about the timeline for that level of development and hoped that would be provided by the letters of interest. She envisioned a 10 year timeline. Councilmember Eck found the presentation extremely helpful and holistic. With any significant potential endeavor like this, it is prudent to spend time doing due diligence. It appears if staff weren't taking time to work with the appropriate folks to dig in and understand the potential, they wouldn't be doing an adequate job. She thanked staff for the deep dive they have done over the last few months. This potential investment Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 14 in this community and neighborhood meets many of the identified needs she had heard. She has heard people say the council doesn't have to be desperate, this won't be the only chance to potentially build something like this on Highway 99. She asked how often this size property on Highway 99 in Edmonds comes up for sale. Ms. McLauglin displayed the slide, What do comparables look like on the corridor, commenting that is an indicator of the type of parcels on the corridor and the challenges associated with some of them. The parcels are a range, Sale 1 is a small awkward lot which is often the case due to the way Highway 99 was cut through resulted in awkward size parcels with oblique angles that are challenging to development. Sale 3 is also an awkward lot. Sale 5 has adequate massing potential, but is quite small at 2 acres so it would not accommodate this integrated community development. Sale 6 is also a small lot. The Landmark 99 site is unique for many reasons, but particularly the size, it does not have as many oblique angles, and wouldn't be as difficult to develop. Councilmember Chen expressed appreciation for Ms. McLaughlin and Mr. Tatum's time and effort to explore the opportunities and risks associated with this project. As Mr. Tatum said, it was a council majority decision that directed staff to do this work. Councilmember Chen disclosed he lives in the area and his business is located in the area, but he is a councilmember for the entire city so his questions and decisions are based on the entire city, not just one area. He referred to the sales price of $37 million, relaying his understanding there were 2 appraisals were done, but no negotiations have occurred with regard to the asking price. Mr. Tatum agreed there have not been any negotiations with regard to price. There was negotiation regarding the price prior to developing this option that negotiated the price of $37million. Councilmember Chen continued, he has voiced concern about the price since the beginning and had hoped there would be some development in the price negotiations during the past five months. In the original purchase option documents, the seller demanded that 75% of the space be for public uses and 25% for private uses. Going from 75% to the best of the three design concept which is 7.6% is a dramatic reduction in the space for public use. He pointed out selecting any one of the design concepts which have 7.6%, 6.4% and 4.5% public space already violates the original option. Mr. Tatum agreed it would violate the original option that the council approved in June, but the option as amended and the PSA as negotiated removes the 75%/25%. Councilmember Chen commented the revised option and the PSA have not yet been signed. Ms. McLaughlin commented while the percentage of civic uses range from 4% to 7%, that does not take into consideration affordable housing. Housing was one of public uses that would have been eligible in that 75%. She displayed the slide with comparisons of the built up area, recognizing opportunities for housing on the site. The level of diverse housing types was not specified in the original option. The benefit of public uses was broadly or not defined in the 75%/25% split, so based on these concepts, if housing were considered as a public benefit, it would be close to the 75%/25% split. That calculation has not been done because it is no longer relevant. Councilmember Chen said that was not his original understanding. If one uses that logic, a design with 100% housing could be considered public use which would exceed the 75% public use. The original understanding was 75% would be for public uses such as community center, open space, etc. Mr. Tatum answered staff heard the council's concern with the 75%/25% and raised that with the land owner. The PSA and the amended option have been discussed with the seller for some time. When the master planning options were prepared, staff had already spoken with the seller about the 75%/25% split and reached an understanding with the seller who was amenable to changing that. Mr. Taraday recalled when the option was first presented to council in June, it was acknowledged that the parties had not yet agreed upon what constituted a public or private use and that there was a possibility that affordable housing could be considered a public use and that that would be worked out over the next six months. In the course of those negotiations it became apparent to the seller that to get into the weeds of Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 15 what constitutes a public versus a private use would be so complicated that the seller agreed to completely eliminate that requirement. He concluded there is no longer that constraint in the option or the PSA. With regard to the funds spent so far, $137,700, Councilmember Chen observed that was for the first 5 months. Staff salaries are already paid so he did not include that. He asked the estimated additional consultant costs for due diligence, community outreach, design, etc. through March 2025 if this moves forward to the next phase. Ms. McLaughlin said she would not be able to provide an exact dollar amount. The first step as Mr. Tatum mentioned is a RFP for a development partner. That exercise doesn't come at a cost. The amount of work that has been done so far created a great package to share with a development partner for a RFP. When a development partner comes on, then costs for due diligence, and other work that needs to be done to advance this proposal will be negotiated. She did not envision a lot of consultant fees in the first or second quarter and by the time a development partner comes on, those fees will be more transparent. There are funding sources available that were not previously realized in 2023 such as $300,000 currently available from Affordable and Supportive Housing Sales & Use Tax. In addition, there is the potential for $75,000 via a Snohomish County grant. The $375,000 for 2024 would absolutely cover the consulting costs, particularly with a development partner on board. With regard to the cost of staff time, Mr. Tatum acknowledged if the council votes to continue, this will certainly be a lot of work for staff, the directors will be engaged, so that is something the council will continue to see. Councilmember Chen referred to the $300,000 affordable housing grant via funds collected by Snohomish County, asking if those funds are not spent on this project, would the City still be entitled to those funds for use on other projects. Ms. McLaughlin answered yes, advising the $300,000 is from the state's Affordable and Supportive Housing Sales and Use Tax; the $75,000 is potentially available from the Snohomish County. Councilmember Chen asked if those funds would be available for use on other projects even if this project does not move forward. Ms. McLaughlin answered yes, if there was an affordable housing component; for example, exploration of a community center would not qualify. Councilmember Olson validated staff's indication that their time and effort has been spent on this in accordance with the council vote. She questioned the amount of money exceeding the contracting authority over $100,000, but that is a conversation for another day. She has a lot of reservations and concerns about the money and the money this will continue to obligate the City to in the long term; not just the initial expense of getting up and running, but bond service for the City's share of participation in this and depending on the uses, and the more uses the community wants, the more it will cost the City. She felt if there was ever a time to do this, this is most definitely not that time. To the extent that the council doesn't want staff to spend time on this going forward, council needs to take that into consideration when voting next week whether to proceed. She relayed two other areas of reservation, having a parcel to fit things into during the upcoming comprehensive plan versus going through the comprehensive plan update and identifying needed amenities and where they'd best be located and then looking for the right places to locate those uses. She felt this process was the cart driving the horse instead of the other way around. With this being such an imminent moment in time for the comprehensive plan process, she feared an opportunity would be missed by forcing things to happen in this place instead of letting the process unfold organically and finding the right places for those uses. Councilmember Olson continued, regarding the opportunity for 10 acre parcel, many of the uses in the concepts are not public uses so 10 acres is not necessary for public use. She appreciated and understood the opportunity for synthesis and being a part of the development process and how that might make the City's share of the public use less expensive. When the City gets to the point where it can afford a project, she could understanding considering that, but in fact a 10 acre parcel is not required for public amenities to meet the needs of the community. With regard to asking the public what they want, it is a naked question Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 16 unless the question includes the cost and how long it will take. She referred to the public conversation about the Ebb Tide connection, and although people are interested in having that connection, they may not understand the cost. Councilmember Olson continued, when people are asked if they want an indoor aquatics center, they are not told the City won't have the money to continue the Yost Park pool. If the pros and cons of an indoor aquatics center are provided to the community, they might agree it is time to make that change, but they can't be asked if they want something and rely on their affirmative response without them knowing everything that question encompasses. That is a huge reservation for her; she asked that question in the context of 2021 budget conversations, how attached are you to Yost Pool because it will be a huge investment to redo the pool on that site, and it was unanimous in all five neighborhoods where she did budget talks that people wanted to retain that amenity. Those questions have to be asked on the front end of a process like this, not at the back end when the City proceeds with an aquatics center and there is an uproar because people did not know what that meant. In terms of the policy framework, Ms. McLaughlin explained there is direction regarding where and what from decades of planning that talks about the southern gateway and the need for a community center; the collective community voice has been heard and been documented over time. With regard to the community conversation, some assumptions were made with regard to square footage and building footprints. Community outreach asked for desirable uses and the footprints were developed for site orientation and how things could fit together. With regard to actual uses in the building footprint, that is malleable. For example the recreation center could be scaled down or coupled with a children's museum or another use the community wants. That will be part of the 15 month conversation that would occur if the project is pursued post December 5' Councilmember Olson said this is not a discussion for today, but she felt council should hear and have a further conversation regarding what it will mean to the Edmonds community that the Edmonds Waterfront Center is going into a management partnership with the Lake Ballinger Center. She was aware their board has discussed the catchment area in Edmonds, the upgrades, amenities, and new offerings there and what, if anything, that will mean to the Edmonds community in terms of meeting that community center need. Mr. Tatum appreciated Councilmember Olson's comment about not knowing all the financial details upfront. To the public, he apologized if that didn't seem very upfront at the beginning. It was a big lift to understand how this project would come together, how to put a framework together and there were a lot of internal conversations which may have prevented the amount of outward public facing conversation to manage expectations at the beginning of the project. Staff has been very aware of that and are trying to get that part to the front as quickly as possible. Council President Tibbott expressed appreciation for staff s work on behalf of the City and on behalf of a potential project. He looked forward to hearing what the public has to say so his comments will focus on questions that help him and others. When this effort first started, the concept of Landmark 99 was largely a blank slate and unknown what the public would say. Since then, affordable housing, senior housing and workplace housing and other uses have emerged as desirable uses. As a result, some grant funding has surfaced that could be used to help move this project forward. He asked what kind of partnerships might be available if the City pursued that type of housing, whether the City would be doing it on its own or fighting tooth and nail to get it or were there partnerships and grant funding available. Ms. McLaughlin answered affordable housing is arguably the region's greatest need and the state also recognizes the need. There is a lot of grant funding available that has not yet been explored. The availability of local funds was a welcome find. She was optimistic there would be grant funding available particularly for affordable housing. Edmonds has a record of building great partnerships such as development of the Waterfront Center, Civic Park, contributions from the Hazel Miller Foundation, etc. The City has a track record of securing grants as well as partnerships. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 17 Mr. Tatum responded there could be a number of different ways this project comes together; one of those could be a master developer who brings in other partners, or a partnership of partnership which is the way several projects have happened in the past. For example, there is a master planned site and there are partners for market rate housing, low income housing, etc. Staff is not exactly sure how it will come together; more will be known once the RFP responses are received. Ms. McLaughlin advised Matthew Roewe is available online; his background is in developing public - private partnerships in the local area. It would be helpful for him to speak to that prior to the public hearing so the public can hear his perspective. Councilmember Buckshnis raised a point of order, asking that staff announce who this person is. Ms. McLaughlin advised he is the master planning consultant who helped develop the design concepts and can speak to his experience in developing partnerships. Matthew Rowe referred to Councilmember Chen's comment about 7% of the total constructed project being civic uses in the town center option. That is based on the entire square footage, calculating the percentage of public uses or open space in the site area that would be 20-30% of the property. In response to the question about public -private partnerships, in the ones he has been involved in, a variety of things are negotiated as Mr. Tatum stated when reviewing the precedent projects. For example in Federal Way, the city is selling the parcel to a developer, but getting back $5 million because they want to own and build the park. The developer is building all the internal streets and paying for the park design and many utilities. A lot of moving parts arise in negotiations and until the RFP is out and responses and proposals are received, it is a bit of a moving target. The City would have to see what developers bring to the table and who they want to partner with such as a nonprofit affordable housing developer or a senior housing developer. A medical office building would make sense at this location and there is interest in that. The RFI process will provide that information by the end of the month. Related to mitigating risks, Council President Tibbott said the slide regarding risks did a good job of outlining six items that would be negotiated. There are a lot of moving parts that represent risk and in order to make this viable, those risks need to be mitigated. He asked staff to address points of negotiation and how the city has done that in the past on other projects such as Civic Field, where a lot of negotiations occurred before reaching an action plan. That is what everyone is anxious about, what actions will be required and how much will it cost. Ms. McLaughlin answered there are some local examples, but they are all unique and may not provide comparables. She offered to come back on December 5 with details regarding the City's contribution versus the partners' contributions related to the Waterfront or Civic Field. Landmark 99 is a different scale, more complex, and would have a different level of private investment that previous examples did not. For example, the Waterfront Center is largely a community center and Civic Field is a park. Council President Tibbott observed the complexity is why the City would want a master developer on board as early as possible to bring that expertise to the project. Otherwise, the City could get to end of 15 months and not have mitigated any of the risks and the negotiations could be up in air and the City would walk away. Ms. McLaughlin agreed, advising this is step zero in the exploration because what's feasible is unknown until the City knows what a developer is willing to do, the value for them on the site, what the City could gain, and balancing those opportunities and risks. There have been efforts to talk to the community about what they want and where their values lie, so if council votes to proceed, the starting line is known in January, and the type of civic uses and public spaces and the community's concerns such as access from 242" d would be negotiated. The conversation starts when the City engages a developer. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 18 With regard to risks, Mr. Tatum advised the way the RFP is designed will shape responses. The RFP needs to be thoughtful about what the City wants to get from the partnership. Those risk mitigation measures can be included in the RFP in the way it is presented to the development community and before negotiations begin on the DA, there needs to be a clear understanding of the absolute objectives. He summarized one of the biggest risk mitigation measures is getting everyone on the same level of understanding of available tools and the end product. Council President Tibbott summarized there are a lot of moving parts. Councilmember Nand requested staff provide information regarding timelines. Councilmember Buckshnis commented she hasn't seen the second appraisal. Mr. Tatum advised it was included in the same email; he will send it to her tomorrow. 10. PUBLIC HEARING 1. PUBLIC HEARING ON THE LANDMARK 99 PROPOSAL Mayor Nelson opened the public hearing. Carl Zapora, Edmonds, representing himself, said he has a lot of concerns about expenses. When he hears $137,000 has been spent already and another tiptoe into this project commits another $100,000, that $237,000 equates to the salary for 1-2 staff members. He was concerned about that level of irreversible spending especially in a budget year or two when funds will be really tight. He asked about the process; relaying he has heard interest in a police substation, a community center, meeting rooms, etc. There are a lot of ways to accomplish that versus buying one big parcel. He agreed with the council comment that the City should have started with what do we need, what's available, how could we best meet that need versus buying one huge parcel and undertaking a massive expenditure. There are underutilized spaces in the Highway 99 corridor. For example SCF may take ownership of the Valley Village property; if that comes to fruition, has the City discussed with SCF sharing space as there are a lot of synergies of a police department working side by side with a fire department. The second floor of the 5-6 year old Swedish Edmonds emergency room building is vacant. There is a lot of free parking and it would be located next to hopefully a new fire station. There are synergies working with the hospital district, SCF, or Swedish Edmonds. He asked whether the City had considered those types of options rather than looking at one big parcel for all kinds of uses. He recalled 5-6 year ago the hospital district gave the City of Edmonds, in partnership with the school district, $1.5 million to rebuild the playfields at the old Woodway High School. Those are the kind of partnerships the City should be looking for and not necessarily in one big parcel. He questioned whether there was other space available, not necessarily in Edmonds. It could be in Esperance or in Mountlake Terrace; the use of Ballinger Park is a good example of a partnership. He summarized the council should choose the best option, should not buy now, and should not borrow money or raise taxes to make this happen. Theresa Hollis, Edmonds, commented she was here out of frustration. Staff told the council they gathered public opinion on possible uses of the site, but it is the council's job to know whether the public wants the project. She didn't buy that line; as part-time councilmembers the council has no staff for public interaction and no analysists assigned to support their work efforts. Councilmembers filter through their emails but have no scoresheet that compiles the hundreds of emails sent to seven different councilmembers that tally the go or no go preference of the residents who email council. She has led a small group effort to design and test an online public opinion survey on this project that just asks about a go or no go decision. She launched the English version of it from her phone during tonight's meeting; the Chinese and Korean versions are coming. She brought flyers to distribute to residents with a QR code that can be used to take the survey. The survey is simple and takes about two minutes to complete. She encouraged the council to use the survey results in their decision making next week. She will provide a report late December 4t1' or early December 5t''. She relayed one councilmember told her not to do a public survey as every Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 19 councilmember had made up their mind already and made comments from the dais. If true, that's too bad and she assured many residents want this poll and are eager to learn the tabulated results. It's a shame this grassroots neighborhood effort was needed to get this done because the City chose not to do it. She thanked the individuals who helped her create the survey. Joel Steinke, Edmonds, said if the council is effectively engaging in real estate speculation, it is in the council's best interest to understand the current economic cycle. For example, it is late in the economic cycle. He comes from a family of successful real estate professionals. There is something called the 18 year real estate cycle that says land prices peak right before a downturn. The last downturn was in 2008/2009 so it soon will be 18 years. The theory of an 18 year real estate cycle says it is about this time in the cycle that municipalities look for lavish expenditures which he found very poetic and recommended the council read the book. If the council is engaged in real estate speculation, they should look to buy low, when the market is depressed and the cost of capital is low. The current economy has the highest cost of capital since 2003/2004. He summarized if the council is engaging in real estate speculation, the council should probably be knowledgeable about real estate and economic cycles. Matt Spaziani, Edmonds, said he and his wife moved to Washington from New Hampshire and were drawn to Edmonds' artistic downtown and it's beautiful sites and the community has embraced them. They have since learned that Edmonds is sometimes known as the gem of the Pacific Northwest; there is very good reason for that because it is very beautiful and they often joke their goal if they move in the future is just to get closer to the ocean but stay generally in the same area. Edmonds is known as the gem due to its long legacy of preservation and conservation. Urban sprawl is becoming more wide spread and faster growing than natural sprawl in recent years. Conservation/preservation has not happened without very strong efforts from advocacy groups and council. This is an opportunity to preserve land and create natural spaces for citizens of Edmonds and their children to enjoy which is part of the reason he and his wife came to Edmonds. There is obviously a long timeline on this project, but he referred to the saying, the objective of society is to plant the seeds for trees whose shade you will never sit beneath. This is an opportunity to do that. He recognized the concerns about money, but with financial consideration in mind, if there is a way to do this. He is strongly in support of the Landmark 99 project and strongly encouraged the council to take any steps necessary to make sure there are more public spaces and more shade for future generations to sit in. Strom Peterson, Edmonds, the City's representative on the Snohomish County Council and state representative for the 21s' District, congratulated Councilmember Eck on being sworn in tonight. To Councilmember Chen's question, he was here to present the council $75,000 from the Snohomish County Council to help in this effort, to do the due diligence. To Council President Tibbott, he asked great questions about the unknowns which is where a partnership with Snohomish County can come into play. Staff mentioned public -private partnerships a number of times for good reason; there are also opportunities for public -public -private partnership. There are a lot of opportunities to engage public investment in projects like this including funds from Snohomish County to get started. A lot of work is being done at the state as well the federal level related to the critical issue of affordable housing. One of the terms often used in Olympia is community oriented development. This is a perfect example of what could be in that philosophy; having the community drive this project and ensuring the community provides input, not just a private developer steering the ship. It is important to look at risks, certainly there are risks to the community and elected officials with moving forward with a project like this, but there are significant risks if the City does not; a project will move forward with input from for -profit investors, not from the community. This is an opportunity to create open spaces, places for future generations as well as build housing that is needed now. The area is in a housing crisis, especially affordable housing, and it is imperative on elected officials to have that vision, take this opportunity, and do the work they were elected to do. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 20 Patti Whitmarsh, Edmonds, said she was discouraged to see the amount of advancement in this project. She was at the November 18 meeting with more than 9 people who opposed Landmark 99. She suggested Ms. McLaughlin adjust her numbers and give the public the truth; there are more people opposed to this than what council is hearing. She opposes the project for several reasons including ingress/egress between SR 104 and SR 99 and the nightmare that construction would create as well as getting to I-5 or onto Highway 99. Staff is presenting this like this is a utopia, it's not; crime has not been mentioned. If a project like this moved forward, there would need to be structured parking which are very expensive and exceed what the City doesn't have in funding. Tree removal on the site would violate the City's climate action plan goals and the necessary canopy for Edmonds. The bottom line is the City doesn't have the money and she questioned why the City would spend money it did not have. Even if the $100,000 doesn't come from Edmonds, it is irresponsible to proceed with a project the City cannot afford. The concept is great, but the wrong place at the wrong time. She encouraged councilmembers to listen to the citizens and be respectful and mindful of the feedback they provide. She expressed appreciation to Theresa Hollis for doing a survey as it is important to hear from citizens. The City doesn't have the money, it's common sense and you cannot buy what you can't afford. She strongly encouraged the council not to proceed with this project. Jim Ogonowski, Edmonds, said he liked the presentation and the graphics and hoped the comprehensive plan had half as much of that. He was disappointed the staff table didn't include the economic development commission and planning board members who were supposed to have been partners in this discussion. He would like to heard their input about the project. From a risk standpoint, he agreed with some of the previous comments and questioned whether the City was assuming too much risk for only 7% or less in civic uses on the site, a disproportionate amount of risk for the space the City would potentially achieve. He questioned how much of this was included in the 2024 budget and if not, how much will staff be asking for. Janelle Cass, Edmonds, an environmental engineer, said she has always made decisions in accordance with SEPA and NEPA, a good framework and methodical process for considering big decisions for government. When comparing alternatives, those process require consideration of a no action alternative to compare and contrast the impacts of the proposal to not doing anything. That should be part of the preliminary discussions and public outreach as it is important data in making a decision. When these questions were being asked, which of these designs do you like, it limited the data that was provided to council as decision makers, a big flaw in what was presented tonight that did the council and the people at the top of the City's organizational chart a huge disservice. One of the things to consider is if there were a no action alternative and the council abandoned this project, there are small businesses in that space now. She questioned where they would go when this site was redeveloped into housing. If the site remained commercial, the City could offer tax deferral or tax relief if the developer allocated a percentage to the City as community space. That way a developer takes on the financial risks and the costs. There are ways to achieve the feel of a public -private partnership without the City taking on the burden, especially when facing such a dismal financial future. Asking the public about specific uses limits the creativity of the private sector and the people making comments. It seems intimidating to have a big box store on that site, but those provide jobs. Many Edmonds residents cross the street into Shoreline to shop at Costco and Home Depot and most of the small businesses in Edmonds are doing quite well. She suggested other uses could bring in good, local jobs which would also reduce commute times in accordance with the climate action plan. She urged the council to ensure their data was more inclusive when making decisions. Kevin Fagerstrom, Edmonds, encouraged the council to read the article in today's Seattle Times about the Woodinville project that is lauded as an example to follow. That project just blew up today to the point where the mayor says the city is considering pulling the permit on the entire project and shutting it down. This would be an enormous risk and given the City's current financial circumstances, the council is rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. He urged the council to think long and hard about that and to put this project to rest as soon as possible. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 21 Erik Nelson, Edmonds, commented the site is an absolutely beautiful property and many agree it could be made into something amazing. He attended two fabulous sales meetings on what it could be with beautiful pictures, verbal renditions of all the what ifs followed by a few doldrum bad things like big box stores that might be built there if the City doesn't act. He struggled with the council having discussions about a fiscal emergency at one meeting, real challenges and the need to raise taxes, but then tonight the council is talking about this level of spending and risk; the two don't mesh. He suggested the council remember that every dollar from all these free sources, money just raining down, came from the citizens in the city, county and state. He suggested sometimes the council forgets how hard people work to provide those taxes. He asked the council to consider one of the big risks that was not talked, the risk of the unknown. Highway 99 will never be like the bowl, Highway 99 is part of Edmonds and has its own personality and has a 4-5 lane highway running through the middle of it. He strongly recommended the council not sign anything that does not have the current landowners on the hook for any future pollution that is found. An as -is covers a lot of things; it shouldn't cover 30-year old pollution found below grade later. There has been a lot of conversation about developing Highway 99 with better community. He wishes the council and Representative/Snohomish County Councilmember Peterson had felt this strongly when Snohomish County hammered in the drug hotel that is opening cross the street from his business, a use that will be hugely detrimental to Highway 99. If the council feels this way about Highway 99 and wants to spend money to make it nice, they should have fought having a drug hotel down the street from this beautiful new project. He opposed the project and asked the council to vote no on December 5. Greg Brewer, Edmonds, said he attended the public outreach presentation for the Landmark property on November 18. The presentation put on by staff and VIA, the paid consultant, was underwhelming and alarming. It was his understanding the property was to be developed with a much higher civic function. Citizens near the proposed site anticipated amenities that would improve their quality of life; instead the presentation included three versions with civic amenities ranging from 5% to 8% of the total project. When looking at the development model as a whole, 90% of the property appeared to be private apartment buildings with approximately 800 units, some with commercial spaces. The public amenity portion of the project, which the City would be on the hook for building and maintaining, looked like an oversized clubhouse for the apartment complexes. He questioned why the City would sign on for that, whether it was the kind of incentive needed to lure a partner, and why citizens would settle for such a small piece of the pie. The access and parking would severely impact the surrounding neighborhood if built out to capacity with code complaint parking. Hundreds of cars will fill the adjacent streets and thousands of daily car trips would flow through 242" d Street SW which currently dead ends into the property to the south and 240t1i Street SW, a through street to the north. He wondered if the neighborhood fully realized and understood the impacts. The price of this property and the initial proposals are not giving citizens proper value. The price isn't worth it and the timing financially for the city couldn't be worse. He recommended regrouping, continuing to dream big for the Highway 99 as it has great potential and deserves careful planning. With the coming increased density along the corridor, amenity needs will also increase so this conversation is far from over. The need is there and it will only increase with time. To do the right thing, the entire City needs to participate. If only 6%-8% of the 10 acres was civic use, that was only 1-2 acres. This is a big risk for the City and he votes no. Tamara Nelson, Edmonds, urged the council to vote no on this project. The short timeline is very concerning, the presenters are pushing to rush and councilmembers who are in favor are pushing to rush. This is a lot of money and she didn't see anyone beating down the door to pick up this property if the council let the option go and continue to think about it. She did not recommend the council continue to think about it because it is financially irresponsible and rushing is crazy. She was at the sales event at Edmonds-Woodway High School and concurred with Patti Whitmarsh that the vast majority were dissenting comments, not approval. The presentation asked attendees whether they liked this or this, like they were toddlers choosing what to wear. This is not a project residents want for the most part, especially those who are already burdened by taxes. Everything single pocket the City wants to pick from is a citizen's Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 22 pocket. The projects she has seen Edmonds do most recently haven't turned out very well; they've been over budget, over time, and poor decisions. She urged the council to vote no, and questioned what they were doing in view of the City not having any money. Luke Distelhorst, Edmonds, a HASCO commissioner, said he also attended the November 18 meeting and had a very different feeling than the other commentors. He appreciated the opportunity City staff provided for that community forum to discuss the options, look at potential uses and have open, free form discussion with neighbors, many of whom do not live in the bowl but live in areas that do not have community assets, have not received as much City investment, and do not have the public spaces that downtown Edmonds has. He expressed appreciation to the 4-5 councilmembers who attended the meeting and engaged with citizens and got a holistic picture of the discussion. Having worked with some councilmembers and well as City staff, if this moves forward, he trusted them to negotiate the hardest bargain for the City. City staff are professionals and are conscious of taxpayer funds and want to see them put to good, public use. If this moves forward, and he hoped it would, he trusted staff to negotiate with the property owners and any potential development partners. In his role as a HASCO commissioner, he knew the executive director has approached the City about potential partnerships for affordable housing. Unfortunately HASCO lost the bid for a property in Edmonds and are very interested in partnering with the City on future affordable housing developments. He hoped the council would move forward and continue the community conversations to develop a new property and new vision and start to build assets throughout the city limits of Edmonds to benefit residents. Brook Roberts, Edmonds, spoke in support of the acquisition of the Burlington Coat Factory property. As Councilmember Paine mentioned, the council has to look at the possibility of what happens if the City does not acquire this property. A large factory or warehouse could come in and worsen the area for visitors and surrounding residents. Many people love the feel of downtown Edmonds, but what about the feel of Highway 99? The consequences of what happens if a private developer or big corporation takes complete control of this site and the impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods and the future of the City need to be considered. He questioned the City putting its full trust into a business whose goal was to do whatever possible to make a profit, to take complete control of a large parcel in an area the City is actively trying to make better and reshape. That would be the case if the City doesn't purchase this property. Purchasing this property is a long term investment for the City and will play a major role in attracting visitors, residents and businesses to Edmonds. The City has options for financing the property and it is important to explore all opportunities and partnership available. Natalie Seitz, Edmonds, commented on growth, zoning and encouraged the City to continue evaluation of the Landmark property. She referred to the City's past investments and current planning such as the Waterfront Center - complete, Civic Field - $19 million, complete, the Marsh — planned, wastewater treatment plant — planned, cultural corridor — planned, Yost Pool — planned, all adjacent to the view corridor, all high value investments, some contaminated sites and projected to be well in excess of the City's portion of the Landmark site if it were to proceed. She referred to where the City has allowed the vast majority of growth for many decades, the SR 99 and SR 104 corridors, which are currently experiencing some of the greatest per capita disparities in City services. The Highway 99 planned action called for walkable communities, commercial development, and 3-4 story apartment buildings and taller with mixed use. She feels the constant need to remind the council of these promises. The City rezoned the corridor CG which allows all these things and more importantly allows parcels to be developed as none of those things. The City has to take the lead in implementing the promises made to the Highway 99 community regardless so there is no loss of staff time or effort. The Landmark can help keep the vision of the promised walkable, enlivened commercial community, but more importantly it can help get the police annex that is so desperately needed and a desperately needed community center to prevent displacement currently underway and intensifying due to the city and state's actions. Landmark may not be the right solution, but the city should continue investigating this option and others that can help areas of the City most in need of attention. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 23 Ken Reidy, Edmonds, said earlier this evening Councilmember Buckshnis was asking questions about internal costs on this matter. The presentation stated $137,000 but her questions about internal costs were not answered and there was an uncomfortable moment where the director indicated staff is responding to council's direction in taking a deep dive on this project. He suggested looking at council's direction. The city has had a difficult time with decisions made under the provision of false, misleading, or incomplete information. During the November 6 council meeting, former Councilmember Teitzel explained on June 27, 2023 when the council approved pursuing the potential purchase of the 10 acre Burlington Coat Factory property, now called the Landmark property, he was the swing vote, voting in favor of pursuing it because he perceived it to be fairly low risk, requiring only a $100,000 refundable deposit that would be returned if the City backed out by December 31, 2023. He was not aware of the extent of the expense and the risk of the potential purchase, expenses such as legal costs, the city attorney has spent quite a bit of time on this, real estate experts, land use consultants and a lot of staff time by three directors. Mr. Reidy said that is a great example of the council voting under misleading, incomplete understanding of the situation. To the question of who many councilmembers voted on June 27' to move forward, a motion was made by Councilmember Nand and then suddenly council decided to go into executive session in the middle of a meeting without voting to enter executive session so that act of entering executive session really needs to be looked at. After the council came out of executive session, a different although similar motion was made, and the vote was 3-1-2, three councihnembers voted in favor and now one is saying he would not have done so had he known more about what was in front of him. He encouraged council to ensure they are provided with complete information before voting. He suggested requiring a majority vote of full council before pursuing a path like this; only three councilmembers got this thing started. Lora Hein, Edmonds, thanked staff and councilmembers who brought this compelling opportunity to this point. This City has been kicking the Highway 99 can down the road for decades and are beginning to see some long overdue improvements in that area of Edmonds. This is an incredibly golden opportunity. She is a resident of Westgate where residents have searched for a place to hold a public meeting and there is no such place; they have to go downtown into the bowl, the same situation from Westgate to the east Edmonds boundary. The potential partnership is a golden opportunity; she loved Councilmember Nand's comparison of the Landmark to Leavenworth. This an opportunity to be a benefit to the City. There will have to be some investment upfront, but there are all sorts of opportunities for partnerships. It is a potential revenue source, a community gathering space, and would provide pedestrian access along Highway 99 to an appealing and attractive place. With regard to the 5%-8% dedicated to civic uses, she clarified that is the built property, it is actually about 20% of the property if public open space, greenery, park and playgrounds are included. She urged the council not to close the door on this opportunity as it is unlikely to come again without cobbling together properties. She urged the council to continue exploring this possibility. With no further public comment, Mayor Nelson closed the public hearing. 10. COUNCIL BUSINESS - CONTINUED APPROVAL OF CONTRACT FOR FIRE SERVICES FEASIBILITY ASSESSMENT COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NAND, TO POSTPONE TO THE NOVEMBER 30 MEETING. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 2. COUNCIL 2024 BUDGET DELIBERATIONS COUNCIL PRESIDENT TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PAINE, TO POSTPONE TO THE NOVEMBER 30 MEETING.. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 11. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 24 Mayor Nelson had no comments. 12. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Paine hoped everyone had a great holiday weekend, commenting hers was action packed. Councilmember Nand thanked all the passionate voices who participated in tonight's meeting. The council needs a variety of opinions and to hear from all the stakeholders, that is how democracy works. She was proud of everyone in the City, especially for being civil in their civic engagement. She attend the Port of Edmonds Commission meeting yesterday and was able to see some of the commissioners in tonight's audience in action including Jay Grant and Janelle Cass. It is good to go to different organization's meetings and see them working hard to make this a great community. There are tough times ahead with the City's budget, the national economy, and global pressures, but as long as everyone keeps respecting each other and working together to make it a better community for ourselves and future generations, it can be done. Councilmember Chen wished everyone a happy holiday season. Although everyone is super busy with work and activities, he urged them to take time out of their busy schedule to call or visit their loved ones while they are healthy and before it's too late. Council President Tibbott commented tonight had been a long evening with a lot of input and he took a lot of notes. He echoed the appreciation for everyone's opinions and those who have been involved and studied the information. This is a very important decision for the future of Edmonds and very gratifying for the council to this type of community event. He referred to a card that he provided to councilmembers from the organization, yellowribbonsd.org, about suicide prevention. This is the time of year when it is dark and cloudy and people start missing their families. He encouraged people to be there for each other and if needed, the yellowribbonsd.org is a resource. Mayor Nelson welcomed Councilmember Eck. Councilmember Eck shared in the spirit of gratitude and thanksgiving for the opportunity to serve the residents of Edmonds highlighted by the deep engagement she sees across the City. She loved hearing from people who live in the neighborhood of the project being discussed and the opportunity to work with her new colleagues on council. Councilmember Olson welcomed Councilmember Eck. It was great seeing everyone enjoying the tree lighting ceremony in downtown Edmonds last Saturday. She thanked the Chamber of Commerce who hosted that event and the many vendors who participated, supported and contributed to making that a special event. Councilmember Buckshnis welcomed Councilmember Eck. She appreciated all the comments that are being made. She wanted to make it clear that the City is in a problematic financial situation. She has been hearing gossip that the council is called a tax and spend council; for the last nine years, the council has not been a tax and spend council. When she joined the council, the City had a fund balance of $2.3 million, by the time Mayor Earling left with Scott James at the helm as the finance director, the City had about $17 million and now at yearend the City will have about $800,000. She emphasized that is serious stuff. The idea and information in the presentation regarding Landmark 99 is great, but as Ken Reidy said, when this first came to council in June, the council did not know all these facts. Some councilmembers did know the facts and voted no. The City is in a serious financial situation and she wanted to be sure when the council thinks about moving forward on a $37 million purchase price that they realize that represents 3 years of police services. The council needs to be conscientious about spending taxpayers' money and take the budget very seriously. She had a very happy Thanksgiving in Oregon. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 25 13. ADJOURNMENT With no further business, the council meeting was adjourned at 10 pm. 5;$�7 SCOTT PASSEY; CLERK Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 28, 2023 Page 26