Loading...
2017-07-12 Planning Board MinutesCITY OF EDMONDS PLANNING BOARD MINUTES July 12, 2017 Chair Rubenkonig called the meeting of the Edmonds Planning Board to order at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex, 250 — 5 h Avenue North. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT Carreen Rubenkonig, Chair Matthew Cheung Daniel Robles Mike Rosen BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT Nathan Monroe, Vice Chair (excused) Todd Cloutier (excused) Alicia Crank (excused) Phil Lovell (excused) READING/APPROVAL OF MINUTES STAFF PRESENT Rob Chave, Planning Division Manager Rob English, City Engineer Phil Williams, Public Works and Utility Director Jerrie Bevington, Video Recorder Karin Noyes, Recorder BOARD MEMBER CHEUNG MOVED THAT THE MINUTES OF JUNE 28, 2017 BE APPROVED AS SUBMITTED. VICE CHAIR MONROE SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ANNOUNCEMENT OF AGENDA The agenda was accepted as presented. AUDIENCE COMMENTS No one in the audience indicated a desire to comment during this portion of the meeting. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIRECTOR REPORT TO PLANNING BOARD Chair Rubenkonig referred the Board to the written report that was provided by the Development Services Director. There was no discussion relative to the report. PUBLIC HEARING ON 2017 COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN Chair Rubenkonig reviewed the rules and procedures for the public hearing and then opened the hearing. Tom Lindberg, Murray Smith & Associates, reviewed that the City's Water Comprehensive Plan was last updated in 2010. Until the new regulations changed in January of 2017, water utilities were required by the Department of Health (DOH) to update their plans every six years. Now the DOH allows water utilities the option of updating the plans every 10 years, and that is what the City has chosen to do. He emphasized that the plan will remain a 20-year plan, with a 20-year forecast. He commented that the plan is intended to meet the State's regulatory requirements and to provide the City with a useful working document to guide planning, scheduling, and budgeting of water system improvements. It brings together a lot of useful data that was analyzed carefully. He provided a brief overview of the plan elements as follows: • Chapter 1— Introduction. This chapter introduces the reader to the water system • Chapter 2 — Water System Description. This chapter describes each facility and provides background and historic information relative to the system. It concludes by providing a brief overview of the adjacent water systems. • Chapter 3 — Land Use and Population. This chapter summarizes the City's internal planning, identifying land uses, as well as population trends and forecasts. Population data was used to project the water system demands for the plan. • Chapter 4 — Water Demands. This chapter summarizes past water demands and future projected water demands for the City's system. The information in this chapter was used to analyze the existing water system facilities and formed the basis for sizing future water system improvements. • Chapter 5 — Policies and Design Criteria. This chapter outlines the laws, policies and design criteria that are applied to operating, maintaining and planning improvements for the water system. • Chapter 6 — Water Source and Quality. This chapter describes the City's existing water source and current water - quality regulations. It also discusses the City's water -quality monitoring program, monitoring requirements, and results of past water -quality monitoring. • Chapter 7 — Operations and Maintenance. This chapter summarizes the operations and maintenances activities of the City's Water Division, including a brief description of the personnel and their duties for operating and maintaining the water system. • Chapter 8 — Water System Analysis. This chapter presents an analysis of the City's existing water system. Individual components were analyzed under existing and future water demand conditions to determine their ability to meet policies and design criteria. • Chapter 9 — Water System Improvements. This chapter presents water system improvements that the City plans to implement within the next 20 years to resolve existing system deficiencies and meet the future demands of the water system. It also presents criteria used for prioritizing the capital improvements, identifying planning level project cost estimates, and developing an implementation schedule. • Chapter 10 — Financial Plan. This chapter outlines a financial plan that generates enough revenue to cover the operating and capital costs associated with providing water utility service to the City. The chapter analyzes the past six years of financial performance and looks ahead at how to implement improvements through rates, connection charges, and reserves. • Appendices. The appendices are mostly required by the DOH, and they were attached to the plan as reference documents. Mr. Lindberg advised that the Water Use Efficiency Rule was adopted in 2007, requiring all public water systems to calculate and report on an annual basis the distribution system leakage on a 3-year rolling average as a percentage of total supply. An action plan is required if the leakage exceeds the established 10% threshold. The City is currently able to meet this requirement, and will continue to do so in the future. Based on data the City has collected over the past six years, overall water usage, on a per capita basis, has decreased from 104 gallons per day in 2003 through 2008 to 95 gallons per day in 2009 through 2014. It is expected that water usage per capita will continue to decrease. He noted that, in addition to leaking water mains, "leakage" can be attributed to water uses by contractors, fire hydrant uses by the fire department, and other various uses that are not captured by the meters. Mr. Lindberg reviewed the components of the City's water system as follows: • Water Source. Currently, all of the water in the City's system is purchased from the Alderwood Water District (AWD), which in turn, purchases its water from the City of Everett. Water comes to the City via the Alderwood Supply Station. In addition, the City has an emergency intertie with Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) during emergency events. Recent analysis verified that the supply station has sufficient capacity to meet current and future needs, partly due to improvements the City did in 2010. Planning Board Minutes July 12, 2017 Page 2 • Storage Facilities. There are five reservoirs in the City's system, with a total storage capacity of 7.5 million gallons. All of these facilities combined provide sufficient storage to meet the needs identified in the 20-year planning period. • Pumping Facilities. The Five Corners Pump Station pumps stored water from the Five Corners Reservoirs for fire flow and during peak demand periods to maintain a relatively steady supply through the Alderwood Supply Station. Improvements were made to the pump station in 2010, including replacement of valves, pumps and pipes, and control modifications were done in 2016 to allow the station to operate in either pressure or flow control modes. The analysis indicates that capacity at this station is sufficient to meet the current and future needs of the system. • Distribution System. The City's distribution system consists of approximately 136 miles of water main, and a large percentage of them are reaching the end of their serviceable life. By following the current plan's aggressive program of replacing the older mains, the City has made and will continue to make good progress. Not only are the mains old, but they no longer meet the fire flow requirements. Following a thorough examination of the existing system, the proposed plan provides a good picture of what is needed in the system. Mr. Lindberg reviewed that since 2009, 12 miles of water main has been replaced, pressure reducing stations were replaced, the Five Corners Pump Station's control system was upgraded, the Alderwood Supply Station was upgraded, and minor improvements were made at the Seaview and Yost Reservoirs. Improvements identified in the updated plan include: replacing existing water main with new ductile iron pipe in accordance with the City's construction standards; replacing and/or improving aging Pressure Relief Valve (PRV) Stations, completing seismic and structural improvements at the Five Corners Reservoir, replacing the piping inside of the Yost and Seaview Reservoirs, installing a new supply station for the SPU Intertie, and upgrading the 10 emergency interties. Mr. Lindberg referred to the financial analysis, which was done by the FCS Group. He explained that the Financial Plan identifies the replacement costs for water main replacement and other improvements, as well as programs for funding the projects into the future. Improvements identified for the next 6 years are estimated to cost about $18.9 million, which results in an average expenditure of about $3.15 million per year. The financing plan contained in the plan is intended to fund planned improvements and ongoing operations and maintenance, while paying down debt. This is based on the City's preference to fund capital improvements from cash reserves without incurring new dept. As proposed, the improvements would be funded through a combination of cash reserves from system reinvestment, rate revenues and new water service connection general facility charges. However, ongoing rate adjustments are also necessary to provide sufficient revenue. As requested by the Board at their last meeting, Mr. Lindberg provided a comparison of the City's rates with those of other nearby systems. The City's rate is about in the middle when compared to others. Mr. Lindberg summarized that, following the public hearing and the Planning Board's recommendation to the City Council, the proposed plan will be presented for a public hearing before the City Council on July 18th. He noted that it was previously presented to the City Council's Public Works Committee on July 12`h. Once the City Council gives its blessing to the plan, it will be submitted to the DOH for review. The DOH review typically takes about three months to complete. The plan will then be updated to address comments received from the DOH, and it is hoped that it can be formally adopted by the City Council by the end of the year. Chair Rubenkonig reported that, in addition to tonight's presentation, she read the minutes from the last meeting and reviewed the materials provided in the Staff Report. She commented that Mr. Lindberg and staff did an excellent job presenting the technical information that is required to meet various government regulations in a way that is easy for the average citizen to understand. She said she particularly liked the explanation that was provided for how the City's water rates are based on the desire to fund operating and maintenance, as well future projects, without bonds. She appreciated that Mr. Lindberg responded to Vice Chair Monroe's request at the June 26th meeting for information about how the City's rates compare to neighboring systems. She suggested that the comparison data also be presented to the City Council. Board Member Robles asked what is the most common way that the pipes fail. Mr. Williams advised that leaks and breaks are caused by a number of things, including changes in ground temperature, changes in pressure, and ground settling. The older pipes are brittle. Board Member Robles asked how long the City anticipates the new ductile iron pipes will last. Mr. Williams explained that the older cast iron pipes are about 50 to 60 years old, and they expect a longer life from the new Planning Board Minutes July 12, 2017 Page 3 pipes because the material will be more durable. He notcd that the City has alrcady rcplaccd all of its stccl and asbestos cement pipes. Chair Rubenkonig asked Mr. Lindberg to explain why Edmonds is in such a good position to go from a 6-year planning cycle to a 10-year planning cycle. Mr. Lindberg responded that the DOH has been receiving pressure from systems to stretch out the planning cycle because six years isn't long considering how long it takes to gather and analyze the data and update the plans. The DOH finally decided to allow 10-year plans, recognizing that cities like Edmonds are taking care of their systems and the DOH does not need a report every six year. The City also reviews the water utility plan on a year basis as part of the Comprehensive Plan update. He noted that most other systems in the state have decided to adopt a 10-year plan, as well. Mr. Williams added that if considerable change was occurring in Edmonds, it would be more important to review and update the plan more frequently, but it is not anticipated that Edmonds will change much over the next 20 years. Chair Rubenkonig asked Mr. Lindberg to describe the types of comments they anticipated hearing from the public. Mr. Lindberg said he anticipated questions about rates, and many people are often surprised by the volume of water leakage. However, it is important to consider the amount in context with what other systems experience. Currently, the City is in line with other systems, and he anticipates the City's number will decrease as water mains are replaced. The City has also purchased equipment that allows it to test water mains on a yearly basis to detect leakage and catch problems before the pipes break. In addition, the City is working to replace water meters to make sure they are reading accurately. Mr. Williams added that, although 10% seems like a lot of water and people assume that it is all leakage, it also includes non -revenue water from a number of different sources. Mr. Williams advised that the trend of lower water consumption has been going on for quite some time in Edmonds. From its peak in 2000 at about 15 million gallons, it is now just over 10 million gallons in 2017. This is a significant difference in the amount of water the City is consuming, and the trend is common amongst most water systems in the area. The decrease has a lot to do with more efficient plumbing in homes, but the City has also made an effort to educate people about ways to conserve water. The City is a member of the Everett Consortium of Water Use Efficiency, and the City also provides its own equipment to survey all of the system to identify leaks. Replacing the older water mains will help. Chair Rubenkonig asked if there is one conservation measure or program that received a good response from citizens of Edmonds. Mr. Williams answered that the City sponsors a yearly campaign to give away gadgets for people to use in their homes to reduce the amount of water used. These programs have been very popular. Board Member Cheung referred to the rate comparison provided by Mr. Lindberg and asked if it was based on an average bill or is it in relationship to the size of the property. Mr. Lindberg answered that it was based on the standard measurement used by the Association of Washington Cities, which assumes that a single-family residential home uses 10 units of water per month. However, he acknowledged that this number is a little high for the City of Edmonds. Board Member Cheung said he was surprised that Shoreline and Lake Forest Park have the highest rates, even higher than the City of Seattle. He asked if water consumption is higher in these two cities or if the rates are just higher. Mr. Williams said he assumes that the average water use is about the same, but water from SPU costs more. He noted that the four cities with the highest rates are served by SPU. Mr. Lindberg reminded the Board that the City used to purchase water from SPU to serve its south end, but this was discontinued 17 years ago when the City reconfigured its system to serve the entire City via the AWD, which charges a lower rate. Board Member Robles asked if the City marks up the cost of the water after it is purchased from the AWD. Mr. Williams explained that the City purchases the water on a wholesale basis and marks it up to cover the operations and maintenance of the distribution system. He noted that operation and maintenance costs are about the same for all systems, and the labor requirements are about the same. The differences are typically based on how much is being reinvested into the system to replace aging infrastructure. The City is making a better than average commitment on the capital improvement side, and this has an impact on the rates. The rate increase is intended to bring in enough new money to replace the aging infrastructure with current capital rather than borrowing money. He felt this was the smartest approach long term. There was no one in the audience, and Chair Rubenkonig closed the public hearing. Planning Board Minutes July 12, 2017 Page 4 BOARD MEMBER CHEUNG MOVED THAT THE BOARD FORWARD THE DRAFT 2017 COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN TO THE CITY COUNCIL, WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL AS PRESENTED BY STAFF. BOARD MEMBER ROBLES SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. REVIEW OF EXTENDED AGENDA Chair Rubenkonig reviewed that, as requested by Vice Chair Monroe, an update on the Urban Forest Management Plan will be presented to the Board on July 26t1i. However, she noted that the extended agenda still does not include an update on a study regarding the economic impacts of art in Edmonds. Chair Rubenkonig recalled that Board Member Crank inquired at the last meeting about when the Board would meet jointly with the Economic Development Commission, and her understanding is that the joint meeting would not occur until the Five Corners feasibility study is available for discussion. She suggested that perhaps a tentative date could be placed on the extended agenda. She recalled that Board Member Crank also inquired about a joint meeting with the City Council, which would focus on affordable housing. In addition, the Board discussed the idea of meeting jointly with the Architectural Design Board, but a topic for discussion has yet to present itself. Mr. Chave suggested that the discussion could focus on the design review process and design review standards. The Board Members agreed that would be appropriate. Chair Rubenkonig advised that the agenda for the July 26th meeting includes a public hearing on the Planned Action Ordinance for the Highway 99 Subarea Plan and an update on the Urban Forest Management Plan. The August 9tb meeting agenda will include a presentation called "Taming Big Foot," regarding climate change. It will also include a presentation on the completion of the Sustainable Cities Partnership with Western Washington University. PLANNING BOARD CHAIR COMMENTS Chair Rubenkonig referred to the Planned Action Ordinance (PAO) for the Highway 99 Subarea Plan and asked if the transportation trip ranges and thresholds discussed are the same as those in Shoreline and Lynnwood. Mr. Chave answered no, and explained that the thresholds are based on specific information for the City's study area. Chair Rubenkonig also noted that on Page 5 of the PAO, the word "copted" should be changed to "co-opted." Lastly, she asked that when the PAO is presented to the Board for public hearing on July 26th, it would be helpful for staff to provide an example of how the PAO would impact a new business. Chair Rubenkonig reported that in the presentation to City Council that she and Vice Chair Monroe provided, she referred to the Board as the "front porch to the City Council." She recalled that the Board has had previous discussions about how to get citizens involved in the process. She said sees the Board as being less formal than the City Council, and she suggested that the Board entertain the idea of making the meeting setting less formal by perhaps changing at least some of their meetings to the Brackett Room on the third floor of City Hall. The room could be arranged in a configuration that makes the Board appear more approachable to the citizens. However, she acknowledged that there are also some disadvantages associated with the concept, such as the meetings could not be publicized on television. Board Member Robles suggested that it would be helpful to have a budget for advertising, marketing and perhaps even rebranding the Planning Board as being the "front porch to the City Council." Chair Rubenkonig noted that there is currently no student representative serving on the Board. As she read through the ordinance, she learned that it is actually referred to as a "youth representative." The representative does not need to be a student, but must be between the age of 16 and 25. Residency is required, as well. She said she will be discussing the recruitment process with various individuals over the next few weeks. She noted that, in the past, the representative was affirmed by the Board after being interviewed by a subcommittee of the Board. No approval is required from the City Council. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS Board Member Rosen referred to Chair Rubenkonig's earlier comments about creating an environment that invites and encourages public engagement. He commented that this struggle is not unique to the Planning Board. Engaging the public in Planning Board Minutes July 12, 2017 Page 5 discussions is difficult on all levels, even on issues that directly impact citizens. He suggested that the current system of public meetings tends to draw a more predictable crowd. He likes the vision of the Board being a "front porch to the City Council" where people are engaged in the conversation early and in an inviting environment. However, when considering how to meet people where it is most comfortable for them to engage, the City should try to incorporate more digital opportunities that are available all day, every day. He summarized that the vision of making the environment more comfortable is great, but it still focuses on the concept of "this place at this time," which is not necessarily convenient to how people engage in this day and age. He suggested the Board research how other cities are working to communicate and encourage participation. It needs to be more than changing the venue. At the Board's request, he agreed to put together some ideas to share with them at a future meeting. ADJOURNMENT The Board meeting was adjourned at 8:05 p.m. Planning Board Minutes July 12, 2017 Page 6