Packet - City of Mercer Island

Transcription

CITY OF MERCER ISLAND
CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA
Monday
March 21, 2011
7:00 PM
REGULAR MEETING
CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL
APPEARANCES
MINUTES
2011 Planning Session Minutes of January 21-23, 2011
Regular Meeting Minutes of March 7, 2011
CONSENT CALENDAR
Payables
$166,584.96 (3/10/2011)
Payroll
$622,628.99 (3/11/2011)
REGULAR BUSINESS
AB 4621 Briefing – MISD’s 21st Century Facilities Planning Committee
AB 4620 Design Commission Bylaws Revision (no presentation)
AB 4593 Affordable Housing Property Tax Exemption Ordinance (3rd Reading)
AB 4618 Island Crest Way Corridor Discussions
AB 4619 Chamber of Commerce – Business Revitalization Collaboration
OTHER BUSINESS
Councilmember Absences
Planning Schedule
Board Appointments
Councilmember Reports
ADJOURNMENT
Agenda times are approximate
Appearances is the time set aside for members of the public to speak to the City Council about any issues of concern. If you wish to speak, please consider the
following points: (1) speak audibly into the podium microphone, (2) state your name and address for the record, and (3) limit your comments to three minutes.
MAYOR
Jim Pearman
DEPUTY MAYOR
El Jahncke
COUNCILMEMBERS
Bruce Bassett, Jane Brahm,
Mike Cero, Mike Grady
and Dan Grausz
All meetings are held in the
City Hall Council Chambers at
9611 SE 36th Street,
Mercer Island, WA
unless otherwise noticed
PHONE
206.275.7600
EMAIL
[email protected]
WEB
www.mercergov.org/council
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
ANNUAL PLANNING SESSION
JANUARY 21-23, 2011
CALL TO ORDER:
Mayor Jim Pearman called the meeting to order as follows in the Groveland Room at the Community Center at
th
Mercer View (8236 SE 24 Street, Mercer Island, Washington):
• January 21, 2011, 5:00 pm - 6:30 pm, 7:45 pm - 9:00 pm
• January 22, 2011, 8:30 am - 5:00 pm
• January 23, 2011, 8:30 am - 12:00 pm
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers Bruce Bassett, Jane Brahm, Mike Cero, Mike Grady, Dan Grausz, Deputy Mayor El Jahncke and
Mayor Jim Pearman were present.
The attached memo, dated February 2, 2011, to the Mercer Island City Council from Ginny Ratliff with Agreement
Dynamics, Inc is hereby incorporated by reference as the minutes of the 2011 Mercer Island City Council Annual
Planning Session.
ADJOURNMENT:
12:00 pm, January 23, 2011.
_______________________________
Jim Pearman, Mayor
Attest:
_______________________________
Allison Spietz, City Clerk
City of Mercer Island 2011 Council Annual Planning Session Minutes
January 21-23, 2011
1
TO:
Members of the Mercer Island City Council
FROM:
Ginny Ratliff, Agreement Dynamics, Inc.
RE:
2011 City Council Planning Session
DATE:
February 2, 2011
Thank you for the opportunity to provide note-taking services for your January 22-23, 2011 planning session. It’s
always a pleasure to work with the City Council, staff and citizens of Mercer Island.
Friday, January 21, 2011
MAYOR’S OPENING REMARKS
Mayor Pearman welcomed the Council to the 2011 Planning Session. He checked in with the group on the status of
the agenda. There was agreement that any issues not on the agenda but needing discussion would be placed on
the agenda on Sunday morning’s “parking lot”.
COUNCIL OPERATIONS
Working with Facilitator Stephanie Bell, the Councilmembers and Department Directors discussed understandings
of protocols and “rules of engagement” between Council and staff and among Council members. After identifying
key areas of issues, the group agreed to continue the discussion to Sunday morning at 11 am.
CITIZEN OF THE YEAR
The Council made its selection for Citizen of the Year and Distinguished Services Awards.
Saturday, January 22, 2011
POOL PLANNING
Mayor Jim Pearman called the planning session to order at 8:40 a.m. by welcoming the City Council, staff and
community members to the meeting.
City Manager Rich Conrad provided an overview of the issues associated with Mary Wayte Pool. The Forward
Thrust pool is near the end of its life expectancy, is the only public swimming pool on the Island, is owned by the
school district and is housed on the high school grounds. It is operated by an outside vendor, through an interlocal
agreement and its operational expenses are subsidized by the City. The KJ Design review of the pool’s systems
determined the pool worthy of short term investments.
Mayor Pearman and Deputy Mayor Jahncke informed the Council that the School Board has no interest or space
for rebuilding a pool at the Mary Wayte site. They explained that, given the economic climate, the School Board is
focused on funding their core mission and does not see a place for it on their high school campus in the long term.
They said that the timeline for the school’s continued pool operation is between two and five years. They said that
the School Board is interested in being a tenant at another facility or building their own pool for the school’s swim
January 21-23, 2011
2
team and water polo club, but is not interested in providing public swimming facilities on Mercer Island. The School
Board sees the city as a natural convener of a collaborative decision-making process if there’s any opportunity for
joint facilities on the Island.
Next, the City Manager updated the Council on discussions the City has had with the Jewish Community Center
(JCC). JCC is going to reinvest in their facility and are interested in discussing a partnership with the city for a
bigger aquatics center. Under that scenario, he explained, the school would be a likely user. City Manager Conrad
went on to say that both groups acknowledge the need for additional land, and, there might be available land
between the JCC and the City Hall Maintenance site that could be purchased. City Manager Conrad explained their
timeline is about the same as the City’s. He said they are considering a multi-level parking structure and also
described possibilities of shared parking between JCC and City Hall at each entity’s off-peak times. The JCC Board
is willing to take the initial step of looking at the possible opportunities a public-private partnership could achieve.
After a productive meeting of brainstorming ideas and options, City Manager Conrad said that JCC Director Judy
Neuman is crafting a draft vision statement to share with her Board and the City Council. Staff will review, revise
and submit to the Council.
The Council discussed the advantages of a public-private partnership with the JCC. They also asked how many
public-pool swimmers there were on Mercer Island. Councilmember Cero estimated that one-quarter of Islanders
are members of private clubs that have pools. They also speculated whether a constituency broader than just
public-pool users would vote for a public pool. They asked Parks and Recreation Director Bruce Fletcher to
research resident pool user data.
In the spirit of PEAK, Councilmember Grausz suggested asking Youth Theater Northwest (YTN) to join the
discussion with the JCC and the City (possibly as a tenant in the building). Despite the School Board’s position
about no pool at the high school, Councilmember Cero suggested keeping open an option of remodeling the
existing pool since tight budgets may ultimately make that option more attractive to the schools and the City.
The City Manager spelled out the options for public swim on Mercer Island from least to most complicated:
1. Mary Wayte Pool closes and there’s no public swim option;
2. Pool built by the School District at the middle school and no public swim on Mercer Island;
3. JCC and City public-private partnership on a yet-to-be determined facility;
4. Remodel the existing Mary Wayte Pool;
5. Demolish and build a new pool at the existing site;
6. Stand-alone public pool on different site;
7. Regional public pool off Island.
City Manager Conrad explained that a Bellevue group is proposing a regional pool for multiple school districts on a
site in South Bellevue. While this might be one of the least expensive options, it could prove to be the most
complicated, he said.
When asked about how best to engage the community in this discussion, Development Services Director Tim
Stewart stated that good process results in good outcomes because it can serve as a vehicle for early issue
resolution and for creating project champions who help move a project forward. He recommended having a
preferred option to share with the community and focus discussions without precluding other options. The Council
discussed community process as well as survey methodology.
In response to Council questions about other pools in the region Parks and Recreation Director Fletcher described
the new $17 million pool Lynnwood is building. Unlike when the swim team overtakes the entire Mary Wayte pool,
Lynnwood has a number of components (hot tub, lazy river, cool pool, etc.) built into it that would allow for different
users at the same time. He also stated this type of pool would help tremendously with revenue, too. He noted that
energy-wise, new pools are more efficient.
The Council weighed in on the various options. Deputy Mayor Jahncke pointed out that the JCC option would solve
the City’s problem most expeditiously citing the benefits of a location and a ready partner. He stated that he
preferred the JCC option to a longer, “Northwest process-type deliberation”. Councilmember Bassett also stated
that he liked the JCC option. Councilmember Grady stated that Island demographics have changed and more
young families moving to the Island. He expressed concern about the school not supporting a pool and YTN. The
Council also discussed the school’s master planning process and how the pool fit into that timeline.
January 21-23, 2011
3
Agreements & Direction:
After deliberation, the Council agreed to leave all options open at this time, but to go forward with JCC discussions.
City Manager Conrad asked for and gained Council permission to talk with the adjacent land owner as a first step in
pursuing this option. The Council also agreed to include the YTN in those discussions. Finally, an Ad Hoc
committee was suggested by Mayor Pearman to represent the City in discussions with the JCC and the Council
concurred as long as the committee was kept small. Councilmember Brahm recommended it include a citizen
public pool user and Blair Rasmussen’s name was recommended by Councilmember Grausz.
TOWN CENTER
After a short break, City Manager Conrad updated the Council on the status of various building projects in the Town
Center. He indicated that there are a number of new retail and restaurant start-ups as well as multiple inquiries
about other development tracts signaling that the Town Center is perceived as a good place to invest.
He reminded the Council of last year’s discussion about public-private partnerships to acquire more Island
commuter parking. He explained that Deputy Mayor Jahncke and he met with four property owners who expressed
interest in the possibility of such a partnership. They also interviewed three development consultants to represent
Mercer Island in negotiations with these and/or other property owners. They chose Benjamin Pariser, a Mercer
Island representative, for that role.
City Manager Conrad urged the Council to press forward because Sound Transit is willing to partner with the City to
produce commuter parking (at their expense) yet decisions on East Link need to be concluded by the summer.
The Council, noting the early stage of such negotiations relative to Sound Transit’s timeline, recommended
presenting Sound Transit with a conceptual plan that has “a great deal of possibility.” The plan, identifying a
potential owner and location with costs/unit of parking, would include a proviso committing Sound Transit to a
specific level of funding, even if the City changed or added sites later. Recalling the MOU, the City Manager
explained that Sound Transit is still supportive of Mercer Island’s goal for commuter parking. Council and staff
discussed the number of parking spaces needed, site constraints, which owners are looking for additional height,
the negotiation process, and even a litigation option.
After some discussion, the Council agreed to hire Mr. Pariser as their representative in negotiations with the
owners. City Manager Conrad recommended paying for these services from the savings achieved from the Lake
Line Sewer Project. A proposal and contract would be brought to the Council for approval.
IMPACT FEES
Development Services Director Stewart praised the City as a model for attracting development at the Town Center.
He explained that one reason for this success was the City’s commitment to pre-invest in infrastructure as a
market-driven incentive to build.
At present, he said, the City uses SEPA to mitigate project impacts with staff negotiating on a project-by-project
basis with each developer. The problem with this approach, he explained, is felt by both developers and the City.
For the developer, there is uncertainty as to what mitigation will be required or how much it will cost. That
information comes through the SEPA process once the project permit has been submitted. As for the City, the staff
time to research, analyze and negotiate each project is enormous. He said there is always concern over equity
when an individual project is analyzed separately but the impacts are cumulative.
Given the budget and staff cuts, Development Services Director Stewart posed to the Council moving to impact
fees in the Town Center, which are authorized under the Growth Management Act. He explained that this fee would
allow the city to analyze costs for all capital construction to support development (transportation, schools, parking,
parks, police, fire, sewer, etc.) and then levy a fee accordingly. He said that there has to be a nexus between the
fee, its impact and the benefit for the development, and that fees have to be spent within six years.
January 21-23, 2011
4
Deputy Mayor Jahncke asked if an impact fee will be an incentive or a disincentive for development and affordable
housing. Development Services Director Stewart explained that this is an incentive for developers because they will
know the fee up front, rather than waiting until the environmental review process.
The City Manager gave the history of the City’s market driven strategy and now that City has made the investment
in infrastructure the City can use impact fees to pay for the City’s future needs. He also supported the concept that
that impact fees will not be a disincentive to development.
The Council discussed options for funding City projects into the future and the variability of mitigation and land
costs in construction. Councilmember Grady explained that because of concurrency, the mitigation costs under
SEPA place a greater burden on developments that occur in later stages of municipal build-out.
When asked if they wished to include impact fee deliberation on their work plan for 2011, the Council said they did.
AWARD-WINING SEWER LAKE LINK PROJECT
Assistant City Engineer Anne Tonella-Howe presented an award the City won from the American Council of
Engineering Companies for the Sewer Lake Link project. City Manager Conrad lauded the staff and Council on this
achievement, noting their largest public works project is on time, under budget, and now, award winning.
TRANSPORTATION
Deputy City Manager James Mason cited a letter sent by Mayor Pearman to Sound Transit reiterating a 1976
Memorandum of Agreement and subsequent agreements permitting Mercer Island’s single-occupant vehicles to
use the HOV lanes on I-90. He said that Sound Transit and the State are in agreement with Mercer Island, but that
the Federal Highway Administration disagrees. He said that the City will continue to press for this right and, if
necessary, raise the issue to the next level(s) to enforce this agreement.
Next Deputy City Manager Mason talked about timing concerns related to Option R8A. While Sound Transit has not
published their detailed construction schedule, there is preliminary information showing that in 2015 construction
will begin on I-90 for the East Link light rail system with an estimated completion date of 2021. He said the concern
is Sound Transit may start too early on the I-90 portion between the Island and Seattle. That would negatively
impact 50,000 drivers per day. He said the City will hold firm to the position that construction on I-90 (west of
Mercer Island) should not be started until all of the Bellevue construction is completed. City Manager Conrad said
he would draft and send a letter to the Sound Transit Board explaining the importance of this approach to Mercer
Island. When asked if the letter should include other entities, City Manager Conrad suggested including transit
agencies and the County noting minimizing downtime on I-90 is in everyone’s best interest.
Next the Council discussed tolling issues. City Manager Conrad explained that tolling on SR-520 will begin in the
Spring of 2011 but that tolling on I-90 has not been approved by the state Legislature. He said that if traffic or
revenue is found to be an issue in the SR-520 tolling studies, the Legislature may revisit the question of tolling I-90.
He speculated on the future of regional tolling. He stated that the Council has agreed that they could open R8A as
tolled or as hot-tolled lanes. Deputy Mayor Jahncke also pointed out the need to express opposition to tolling while
there’s no access to the center roadway.
Councilmember Cero stated that Mercer Islanders want free access or flat rate tolling on the I-90 bridges.
Councilmembers Grausz and Grady stated that there’s nothing to preclude Mercer Islanders from being tolled.
Councilmember Grady suggested it is best to negotiate where the transponders are and to negotiate a fair price for
the Islanders. City Manager Conrad said Mercer Island could try to negotiate a free toll, but that it would likely end
up in litigation.
Councilmember Bassett asked about the off-ramps from the HOV lanes. City Manager Conrad said Sound Transit’s
preferred option is the same as what the City has suggested, the Island Crest Way option. However, FHWA
regulations prohibit SOVs from using HOV exits. He illustrated that an SOV would have to exit the HOV lanes early,
January 21-23, 2011
5
th
cross several lanes of regular traffic and take the 77 street exit. The Deputy City Manager explained that this
problem has been pointed out to the engineers. From the responses he has received, Deputy City Manager Mason
suggested the need for policy-level intervention. Councilmember Bassett requested that staff sort this out and send
a letter to Sound Transit to fix it.
The City Manager drew Council’s attention to a City letter supporting METRO’s regional Task Force
recommendations. When asked why the City was involved in this, City Manager Conrad said that when METRO
shrinks service hours it proposes to concentrate their hours of service where their ridership is the highest. He said
based on that criterion, Route 302 will be preserved. That’s important to the Island because when the schools cut
bus service they channeled student riders to METRO Route 302.
On local transportation issues, Assistant City Engineer Tonella-Howe discussed a proposed timeline for Island
nd
th
Crest Way Resurfacing and signalized crossings at Island Crest Way and SE 42 and SE 47 Streets. The
th
rd
crosswalks will be installed by June 2011 and the Island Crest overlay phase 1 (86 to 53 ) is proposed to be
th
th
completed in 2012. Phase 2 work (40 to 86 ) is proposed to be finished in 2014.
The City Manager asked Councilmembers to inform the staff on what project the Council wanted designed and to
share their opinions on these projects. Councilmember Bassett suggested doing the resurfacing in two parts but
striping all at once. Deputy Mayor Jahncke expressed concern about experimenting with one of the Island’s main
arterials, and Councilmember Cero concurred. Councilmember Grausz suggested getting all the project work done
in one year to save money. Mayor Pearman asked the Council to support the timeline and approach proposed by
the Deputy City Engineer. The Council concurred. Assistant City Engineer Tonella-Howe said that the Council will
vote on bid authorization for the two signalized crossings at the February 7 Council meeting.
In response to an inquiry from the City Manager, Development Services Director Stewart said the designs for
lighting at Town Center are moving through the Design Commission and he will provide a status report as soon as
possible to the Council.
In response to an inquiry by Councilmember Cero, Maintenance Director Glenn Boettcher provided a map showing
2010 and 2011 pedestrian and bike plan projects. Ann described where signs have been installed. Councilmember
Cero expressed his opinion that signs similar to those on 78th are not adding value to the road and Councilmember
Grady agreed, saying that wayfinding signs are more effective and most cities are placing them now instead of
share the road signs. Councilmember Grausz suggested the City commission a map of existing and proposed bike
lanes and bike and pedestrian paths. Parks and Recreation Director Fletcher suggested that with a change of
directors, it might be the right time to analyze the City’s signage and consider other approaches for the future.
Councilmember Grady volunteered to drive the Island and assess the signs, and encouraged other
Councilmembers to do the same. Councilmember Grausz suggested directing staff to estimate the cost of the bike
trail from 84th to Island Crest Way. The Council agreed to place that in the parking lot for review the next day.
COUNCIL TOPICS
•
Civil Infraction for Property Owners Where Underage Drinking Takes Place
Councilmember Grausz received an email from one of his constituents explaining a Santa Cruz, California
ordinance that levies a civil infraction on property owners where underage drinking takes place. He posed the
question to City staff, “Can we do that?”
City Attorney Katie Knight explained the current State statue is a gross misdemeanor and the fine can be
$5,000 and punishable up to one year in jail. She said that a civil infraction, like the one in Santa Cruz, is often
easier to prove in court (beyond a reasonable doubt). She cited examples of parents who used the common
defense of not knowing the drinking was taking place in their home as a way to avoid penalty. She said a City
ordinance can’t conflict with RCWs protecting religious practices that allow minors to have alcohol. As for fines,
City Attorney Knight recommended $250-$500.
Police Chief Ed Holmes explained that under current law you can’t permit minors to drink on your property. But
owners use the “we didn’t permit this” defense to avoid punishment. He said a civil infraction is a tool for us to
“deal down” to. He also opined that it would force a conversation between parents and teens about alcohol.
January 21-23, 2011
6
Youth and Family Services Director Cindy Goodwin supported this idea stating that kids believe their parents
think its okay for them to drink. She went on to state that the city has made a commitment to address this issue
and this is another useful tool.
The Council discussed underage drinking on Mercer Island, options used by other communities, and whether
there is more drinking now than in the past. Cindy stated that drinking is different than in the past because
teens are drinking to get drunk now and that alcoholism has become an 18-22 year-old binge drinkers disease.
Councilmember Grausz suggested putting this infraction and related research on the work plan and the Council
concurred.
•
Solid Waste Services on Snow Days
Deputy Mayor Jahncke asked what is the City’s policy when snow days occur? He complained that, as a result
of heavy snow on his recycling pickup day, service was cancelled and his recycling was not picked up for two
weeks. City staff explained that the contract states if a collection is missed because of weather, they’ll pick up
on their next collection date (which, in the case of recyclables can be two weeks).
Councilmembers discussed language interpretations and contract vagueness. Maintenance Director Boettcher
said that robo-calling was supposed to have taken place notifying residents when their garbage would be
picked up but it appeared that it didn’t happen.
The City Manager asked if the Council wanted to put this on their work plan and they said “no.” However, the
Council instructed Maintenance Director Boettcher to talk to Allied Waste and ensure they enforce the contract
on snow days. They also asked for verification on the $10 pick up fee for missed service. The Council also
recommended that Allied communicate about service interruptions and alternate pickups on their website.
•
Island Crest Park Ball Field Turf
Mayor Pearman described an offer from a group of Mercer Island residents to turf the in-field and outfields at
Island Crest Field for the 2011 baseball season.
Councilmember Grady expressed concern about whether doing so would impact the impervious surface
ordinances and the cost of having to replace the turf over time. Deputy Mayor Jahncke expressed budgetary
concerns that this would divert time away from the Parks and Recreation Director’s other obligations.
Mayor Pearman suggested putting this on a fast track and encouraged other Councilmembers to support this
generous offer from local citizens, who were also PEAK donors.
Councilmember Grausz recommended that Parks and Recreation Director Fletcher meet with the group and
explain that the City has no staff resources to devote to this project. He encouraged the group to make a
proposal to the Council that includes hiring a consultant and developing a funding plan for long-term
maintenance. The Council concurred.
•
Development Code Improvements
The Development Services Director Stewart explained that the City’s Design Commission has articulated 3
suggested changes to their mission:
1. That the City not send wireless telecommunication permits to the Design Commission. The
Telecommunications Act restricts their authority and they suggested changing telecommunications
permitting to an administrative process.
2. That minor design issues in the Town Center be handled administratively. Staff agreed with the
Commission’s assessment that the City is putting businesses through a great deal of process.
3. That they change their meeting start time from 7:30 to 7:00 p.m.
January 21-23, 2011
7
The Council agreed to consider the Design Commission’s requests and added it to their work plan.
Next, Councilmember Bassett shared that in the course of redesigning his front yard, he found the city code
does little to encourage homeowners to reduce the extent of impervious surface on their property. Director Tim
Stewart noted that he sees room for improvement in the code. The Council was told that a change to this code
would only affect existing housing and wouldn’t allow for “mega houses.” The Council agreed to add this issue
to their work plan.
In response, Deputy Mayor Jahncke asked if the Council wanted examine housing scale on the work plan?
The City Manager cautioned that this issue would involve a large process and that staff will be consumed with
the shoreline master plan for the first half of the year. Mayor Pearman noted that since there is a lull in building
this might be the right time to consider this issue. The Council agreed and it was added to their work plan.
•
Definition of Senior Citizen for Community Center Uses
Deputy Mayor Jahncke stated that in the time of budget austerity, it doesn’t make sense to subsidize adults
ages 55-65. He stated that the City should concentrate and target senior dollars toward true senior users.
The Council agreed to add this issue to their work plan and the City Manager promised staff would research the
issue and present their findings to the Senior Subcommittee before bringing it to the full council.
The planning session adjourned at 5:00 p.m.
Sunday, January 23, 2011
FINANCIAL TOPICS
The Council session convened at 8:45 a.m. with Mayor Pearman welcoming everyone to the second day of the
planning session.
Finance Director Chip Corder was introduced. He led the discussion of financial matters stating that there is a
projected savings of $1.2 million over what the City budgeted for the Sewer Lake Line Project. With that savings
projected, he asked for Council guidance on how they wanted to fund the additional $780,000 needed for the
replacement of the First Hill Booster Pump Station. He suggested options like funding it through the savings,
funding it through debt or some combination of scenarios. He noted that the decision needed to be made in
February to keep the First Hill Water System project on track.
In response to Deputy Mayor Jahncke’s request for information on the outstanding debt, Finance Director Corder
said that at the end of 2010, the City had a $15.7 million debt (the 10-year, $6 million debt on Lake Line and a 20year, $9.7 million limited tax general bond). City Manager Conrad said the sewer rates will cover all Lake Line
debt, and any rate increases will be driven by METRO and other CIP projects that need to be funded.
Finance Director Corder acknowledged the City’s fiscally responsible approach of saving and paying for projects
but that it was difficult to do that for projects over $1 million. He also noted that bond rates are extremely low now,
making it a good time to borrow if that’s what the Council wanted to do to fund the First Hill Booster Pump Station
and Water system. He also forecasted that those rates will likely rise before the end of the year.
The Council discussed options for the Lake Line project savings. Deputy Mayor Jahncke suggested putting that
savings toward other utility projects. Councilmember Grausz noted that the interest rate on the debt for the Lake
Line project is the lowest the City will probably ever receive. Mayor Pearman asked whether or not it was good
policy to take sewer funds and put them into water projects.
January 21-23, 2011
8
Next, the Council and staff discussed budget practices, prioritizing repayment of the contingency fund, and their
preferred percentage rates for the contingency fund, which ranged from 10-20% of the budget. Finance Director
Corder defined the contingency fund as the “rainy day fund” and its use was for “unexpected major expenditures.”
Councilmember Grausz proposed allocating $400,000 from the Lake Line savings to the First Hill Booster Pump
Station and then borrowing $380,000 for the additional cost. The Council concurred and recommended borrowing
$1.2 million for the First Hill Water System Improvement project as soon as possible to get lower interest rates.
City Manager Conrad inquired about a funding source for the $35,000 parking and property consultant. Deputy
Mayor Jahncke recommended using money from the contingency fund and the Council concurred. Councilmember
Grady expressed concern about hiring consultants when the City is laying off in-house staff.
Finance Director Corder updated the Council on the status of the First Hill property sale. The LTGO Bond to
construct the City’s emergency well was renegotiated and will mature in June 2013. While the City intends to sell
the property at 2976 74th Avenue SE to pay off the bond, Finance Director Corder recommended putting off the
sale until at least June of 2012 because of low real estate values. The Council concurred.
Finance Director Corder also briefed the Council on LEOFF 1 Retiree Costs. He said the City hasn’t paid a longterm care bill since 2005. There are presently 36 retired LEOFF 1 employees, and while the actuarial valuation of
the liability is $2.07 million, the City has accumulated $913,108 toward funding this balance. He also said that the
employees on LEOFF 1 are relatively young. The City is required to conduct an actuarial study.
Councilmember Grady expressed concern about the $1.1 million shortfall and suggested the need to start a lineitem component in the budget to replenish the shortage. Councilmember Cero concurred. Cero then recommended
amending the 2012 budget to place a $1,000 payment into the fund. The Council concurred.
After a break, the group reconvened to other Council Concerns.
OTHER COUNCIL CONCERNS
First, Councilmember Grausz described nine lots of undeveloped land adjacent to Pioneer Park that form the
uplands of the Northstar Club. He said for another year and a half there are King County Futures matching grants
available to preserve open space. While not suggesting any use of City money, Councilmember Grausz said
private interests on the Island with the Trust for Public Lands might mount a campaign to purchase this land. He
recommended as a first step to talk to the Northstar Club to see if there is an interest in selling that portion of their
property. The Council concurred.
Councilmember Grady raised a concern that agendas are set at the end of each Council meeting and that the
length of meetings are a problem, too. Mayor Pearman, after conferring with the City Attorney, stated that
discussion items can be brought up, but action must be deferred to a future agenda. City Manager Conrad said he
schedules four agenda items per meeting, and that everyone needs to help keep meetings on schedule. Mayor
Pearman supported that and acknowledged that he didn’t like to cut off discussions but also encouraged the
Council to help tighten up meetings and to stay on task and on time.
On the electric vehicle charging stations, the Deputy City Manager Mason updated the Council as follows: There
are bids out for three locations on the Island (community center, PEAK parking lot, and at City Hall). He estimated
that by late spring they will be installed. He went on and said there has been no word from Sound Transit about
park and ride charging stations. Also, some charging station providers have approached commercial entities on the
Island including QFC, Starbucks and U.S. Bank.
Regarding ordinances for electric vehicle charging stations, Development Services Director Stewart said the City
allows Levels 1 and 2 charging stations under existing ordinances. The City wants to streamline these permits to an
over the counter process. Level 3 permits are only allowed at commercial enterprises like gas stations. He said
there would be a handout as well as information on the website about this form of permitting. Development
Services Director Stewart also promised to inform the Council when the first charging station is permitted.
January 21-23, 2011
9
Councilmember Bassett updated the Council on sustainability activities. He said that the Carbon Challenge
between the School Board and the City Council will be tallied in March and the winner will be announced. He said
the Green Ribbon Committee will attend an upcoming Council meeting to launch a larger challenge after Earth Day
inviting city, church/synagogue, school, and club participation on the Island.
Next, Councilmember Bassett raised the idea of allowing the school facilities meetings to be recorded and
broadcast on MI-TV. The City Manager explained that the Council Chambers has the only recording/broadcast
equipment, but the City policy prohibits other users of the Council Chambers. Mayor Pearman suggested the
school district record with its own equipment and be allowed to broadcast it on MI- TV.
2011 WORK PLAN
As a result of discussions during the planning session, City Manager Conrad added new tasks to the work plan for
2011. The year’s work areas include: I-90 (WSDOT/Sound Transit briefings and mitigation for mobility loss), Town
Center (partnership opportunities and financing future public improvements), updating shoreline master program,
Island Crest Way /Merrimount implementation, underage home drinking ordinance, Communities That Care,
performance measures (dashboard report), Board/commission work plan review, First Hill booster pump project
financing, Island Crest Ball Field turf project, City Code amendments (design commission, impervious surfaces, and
mega house ordinance), Senior Citizen definition for programs/services, North Star open space acquisition
program, and sustainability update.
In addition, with thumbs up, the Council agreed to add two parking lot items to this year’s discussions: Port Kendal
Apartment in Renton and ambulance sunset metrics.
The Mayor adjourned the planning session at 12:00 p.m.
January 21-23, 2011
10
CITY COUNCIL MINUTES
REGULAR MEETING
MARCH 7, 2011
CALL TO ORDER:
Mayor Jim Pearman called the meeting to order at 7:04 pm in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 9611 SE 36th
Street, Mercer Island, Washington.
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers Jane Brahm, Mike Cero, Mike Grady (arrived 7:08 pm), Dan Grausz, Deputy Mayor El Jahncke
and Mayor Jim Pearman were present. Councilmember Bruce Bassett was absent.
APPEARANCES:
th
Marty Gale, 9404 SE 54 Street, spoke about a subpoena for a deposition she received regarding current litigation
the City is engaged in with a former employee.
Nancy Lee, 4001 West Mercer Way, representing the Green Ribbon Commission, spoke to the Council regarding
the Carbon Challenge Project and “nudged” the Council to finish filling out their data.
MINUTES:
(1)
2011 Planning Session Minutes of January 21-23, 2011
The Council reviewed the proposed changes from Councilmembers Bassett and Cero and decided which
edits to incorporate. Staff was directed to bring back a clean copy of the minutes for adoption at the next
meeting.
Regular Meeting Minutes of February 22, 2011
It was moved by Councilmember Grady; seconded by Councilmember Brahm to:
Adopt the Regular Meeting Minutes of February 22, 2011 as written.
Motion PASSED 6-0.
CONSENT CALENDAR:
Deputy Mayor Jahncke moved AB 4613: Grant Eligibility Resolution for I-90 Boat Launch Dock Renovation Project
to the first item of Regular Business.
(2)
Payables:
$152,673.16 (2/17/2011) & $774.687.10 (3/2/2011)
Recommendation: Certify that the materials or services hereinbefore specified have been
received and that all warrant numbers listed are approved for payment.
Payroll:
$681,959.50 (2/25/2011)
Recommendation: Certify that the materials or services specified have been received and
that all fund warrants are approved for payment.
It was moved by Councilmember Brahm; seconded by Councilmember Grady to:
Approve the Consent Calendar and the recommendations contained therein.
Motion PASSED 6-0.
City of Mercer Island City Council Meeting Minutes
March 7, 2011
1
REGULAR BUSINESS:
(3)
AB 4613
Grant Eligibility Resolution for I-90 Boat Launch Dock Renovation Project
Deputy Mayor Jahncke asked about the costs associated with the project and the public comment
requirement.
The Mayor opened the public hearing at 7:33 pm.
st
David John, 8817 SE 61 Street, asked if the public was notified of the public hearing.
The Mayor closed the public hearing at 7:34 pm.
It was moved by Councilmember Grady; seconded by Councilmember Cero to:
Adopt Resolution No. 1441, authorizing the City Manager to apply for funding for a Boating
Facilities Program project to the Recreation and Conservation Office as provided in Chapter 79A.25
RCW.
Motion PASSED 6-0.
(4)
AB 4614
First Hill Booster Pump Station Improvements Project Bid Award
Utilities Engineer Rona Lin presented results from the call for bids for the First Hill Booster Pump Station
Improvements Project which will upgrade the Booster Pump Station in order to meet both domestic and fire
flow needs for the First Hill neighborhood.
It was moved by Councilmember Grady; seconded by Councilmember Cero to:
Award the First Hill Booster Pump Station Improvements project to R. L. Alia Company in the
amount of $538,521, set the total project budget at $955,000 with an appropriation for 2011-2012 of
$818,500 and direct the City Manager to execute the construction contract.
Motion PASSED 6-0.
(5)
AB 4615
First Hill Water Improvements Bond Ordinance (2nd Reading)
Finance Director Chip Corder presented a bond ordinance for second reading and adoption for debt
financing of $1.58 million plus bond issuance costs for the First Hill Booster Pump Station Upgrade and the
First Hill Water System Improvements projects.
It was moved by Councilmember Cero; seconded by Councilmember Grady to:
Adopt Ordinance No. 11-03, providing for the issuance and sale of limited tax general obligation
bonds of the City in the principal amount of no more than $1,750,000 to provide funds for the
construction of a booster pump station and water system improvements and for the costs of
issuing the bonds.
Motion PASSED 6-0.
(6)
AB 4611
Biennial Open Space Progress Report
Parks Natural Resource Coordinator Paul West presented the 2009-2010 progress report summarizing the
fifth and sixth years of implementing work conducted under the Mercer Island Open Space Vegetation Plan
(2004) and the allied Pioneer Park Forest Management Plan (2003, updated in 2009). He also presented
the 2011-2012 work plan and provided updates on the Engstrom Open Space vegetation work, the
seasonal open space and trails crew, school volunteer events and park boundary encroachments.
Councilmember Grausz expressed concern about the City not being able to facilitate the school volunteer
events because of current budget constraints. He suggested using adult volunteers to help run the school
volunteer events. Four Councilmembers concurred to have staff to research ways to encourage the
continuation of these events.
March 7, 2011
2
(7)
AB 4616
Affordable Housing Property Tax Exemption Sliding Scale Discussion
Development Services Director Tim Stewart presented information that staff gathered regarding a sliding
scale for affordable housing. He explained that there are a number of factors that might be considered in
the development of an affordable housing sliding scale and that there are also constraints. He presented
an alternative to the sliding scale that could provide some flexibility for development alternatives, but each
alternative would be required to be at or below the same level of benefit received in the standard program.
The Council discussed and debated the possible sliding scale options, whether a sliding scale should be
implemented and whether a property tax exemption for affordable housing should be implemented.
It was moved by Deputy Mayor Jahncke; seconded by Councilmember Grady to:
Direct staff to move forward with the Property Tax Exemption Program as generally described in
Exhibit 2.
Motion PASSED 4-2 (Cero and Grausz dissented).
OTHER BUSINESS:
Councilmember Absences:
Councilmember Bassett’s absence was excused.
Planning Schedule:
Councilmember Cero asked that there be more time between the discussion and the ordinance on an
Underage Home Drinking Policy.
Councilmember Grausz asked that the Northstar open space acquisition be moved up to earlier in year due
to possible grant funding.
Councilmember Grady asked if a Study Session would be scheduled for the Shoreline Management
Program.
Board Appointments:
There were no appointments.
Councilmember Reports:
Councilmember Grady spoke about the King County Climate Studies Steering Committee meetings
ADJOURNMENT:
The Regular Meeting was adjourned at 9:42 pm.
_______________________________
Jim Pearman, Mayor
Attest:
_________________________________
March 7, 2011
3
BUSINESS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
CITY OF MERCER ISLAND, WA
BRIEFING - MISD'S 21ST CENTURY FACILITIES
PLANNING COMMITTEE
AB 4621
January 13, 2011
Regular Business
Proposed Council Action:
Briefing - No action required.
DEPARTMENT OF
City Manager (Rich Conrad)
COUNCIL LIAISON
Bruce Bassett
EXHIBITS
1. Mercer Island School District Web page
APPROVED BY CITY MANAGER
AMOUNT OF EXPENDITURE
$
N/A
AMOUNT BUDGETED
$
N/A
APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
$
N/A
SUMMARY
The Mercer Island School District launched its “21st Century Facilities Planning Committee” mid-year in
2010. The Committee consists of representatives across a broad community spectrum. Councilmember
Bruce Bassett was appointed by the Mayor to represent the City Council. Janet Frohnmayer was appointed
to represent the School Board. The make-up of the Committee is shown in Exhibit #1.
School Superintendent Dr. Gary Plano and Boardmember Frohnmayer will provide a briefing to the City
Council on the near and long term facility issues facing the School District as well as the scope of the
Committee’s work in addressing those issues.
RECOMMENDATION
City Manager
MOVE TO:
Briefing only. No action required.
Page 1
District News
Page 1 of 1
search the district site
Home > News & Events > District News > 21st Century Facilities Planning Committee
District News Home
District News Publication
District Annual Reports
21st Century Facilities Planning Committee takes shape!
The District is pleased to announce the School Board appointments for the 21st Century Facilities Planning Committee (21FPC).
There was tremendous interest by our community to serve on this committee. The members were selected by the board at their June 24,
2010 meeting:
PTA Parent Education
Superintendent's Message
Emergency Information
Hillary Benson
Dick Benster
Amanda Clark
Brian Emanuels
Michael Finn
Carrie George
Carol Gullstad
Megan Hand
Einer Handeland
Bill Hochberg
Bert Loosmore
Frank Morrison
Walt Richie
Greg Steinhauer
Toby Suhm
Joan Wold
Janet Frohnmayer – representing the Mercer Island School Board
Bruce Bassett– representing the Mercer Island City Council
In addition, the following three students will share one seat:
Maxwell Erickson
Jason McRuer
Kay McRuer
The following Mercer Island organizations are being represented:
Present and past members of the Committee for Mercer Island Public Schools(CMIPS); Mercer Island Schools Foundation; Present and
past MISD School Board Directors; MI Boys and Girls Club; MI PTA; IslandVision; Islanders for Common Sense; Fine Arts Advisory Board;
Pixie Hill Preschool; MI Parks and Recreation; MI Rotary; MI City Council and MISD Title IX Steering Committee.
Kris Kelsay, Mercer Island resident, principal and founder of [Launch!], a full-service communication agency focused on helping
organizations bring new ideas to fruition, will be the facilitator of the 21CFPC. Kris is a proven communicator with over 25-years of
experience, including deep expertise in marketing communications, process management, facilitation and press relations. The first
meeting is set for Monday, September 20, 2010.
Top of Page| District Home | Contact Us | Copyright 2004-10 Mercer Island School District
http://www.misd.k12.wa.us/news/frontpage/21stfacilities.html
3/15/2011
DESIGN COMMISSION BYLAWS REVISIONS
AB 4620
March 21, 2011
Regular Business
Approve the revisions to the Design Commission
Bylaws.
DEPARTMENT OF
Development Services Group (Tim Stewart)
COUNCIL LIAISON
Bruce Bassett
EXHIBITS
1. Revised Design Commission Bylaws.
$
n/a
AMOUNT BUDGETED
$
n/a
$
n/a
SUMMARY
The Design Commission Bylaws provide the framework within which business of the Commission is conducted.
The current bylaws used by the Design Commission were adopted by the City of Mercer Island in 1972 and offer
guidance concerning officer duties, meetings, conduct of meeting, attendance, the agenda and staff reports, and
amendments to rules and regulations. The adopted bylaws are prescriptive as to when Design Commission
meetings may be held.
In early 2011 the Design Commission requested changed to the bylaws which would include flexibility in
determining meeting times so that meetings may be scheduled earlier. After incorporating the Commission’s
proposed changes, staff also proposed language that is consistent with the Mercer Island City Code and reflects
more gender neutral language. Article V. of the bylaws requires that any changes to the bylaws must be
approved by a majority vote of the Design Commission and are subject to the approval of the City Council.
At the March 9, 2011 Design Commission meeting, the Commission unanimously voted to adopt the revisions to
the bylaws as outlined in Exhibit 1 (in “strike and delete” format). The Commission is now requesting the City
Council’s approval of the revisions.
RECOMMENDATION
DSG Director on behalf of the Design Commission.
MOVE TO:
Approve the revisions to the Design Commission Bylaws as proposed in Exhibit 1.
Page 1
MERCER ISLAND DESIGN COMMISSION BYLAWS
ARTICLE I
GENERAL PROVISIONS
These bylaws are supplementary to City of Mercer Island Ordinances Nos. 297
and 298.
ARTICLE II
OFFICERS AND THEIR DUTIES
Section 1.
The officers shall consist of Chair and Vice Chair and shall be elected at the first
regular meeting of the calendar year.
Section 2.
In the absence of the Chair and Vice Chair, a Chair Pro tem shall be elected by
the remaining members of the Design Commission and shall serve only for the
meeting at which he/she is elected.
Section 3.
A scribe shall be provided by the City Planning Department to prepare minutes
and keep such record, attend to correspondence of the Design Commission, and
perform such other duties as may be deemed necessary.
ARTICLE III
MEETINGS
Section 1.
Regular meetings of the Design Commission shall be held on the second and
fourth Wednesday of each month at 7:00 P.M. or other such time as determined
by the Design Commission in the Mercer Island City Hall or such other place as
the Design Commission may determine. Any regular meeting may be canceled or
re-scheduled by the Chair or in his/her absence by the Vice Chair
Section 2.
If a regular meeting falls on a legal holiday that meeting shall automatically be
held on the next day which is not a holiday unless the Commission by formal
action sets an alternative day.
Section 3.
Special meetings of the Design Commission may be called by any of the
following; Chair or in his absence by the Vice Chair, City Manager, Mayor. The
scheduling and holding of all Design Commission meetings is to be done in
accordance with Washington State Statutes.
Section 4.
A majority of the Design Commission membership shall constitute a quorum. For
the conduct of business, a majority vote of the members present at a meeting
provided a quorum is present shall be sufficient to act. The Chair of the meeting
shall be a full voting member, but may not initiate or second a motion. The
motion which decides the issue or makes the recommendations shall be in the
form of findings of fact and shall state the reasons for the findings by the Design
Commission.
Mercer Island Design Commission Bylaws
Page 1
ARTICLE IV
CONDUCT OF MEETINGS
Section 1.
All meetings of the Design Commission shall be conducted in accordance with
the Roberts’ Rules or Order.
Section 2.
All meetings shall be conducted in accordance with the agenda.
Section 3.
Non-members of the Commission may address the Design Commission only after
being recognized by the Chair of the meeting and shall confine their remarks to
the subject before the Commission. The Chair of the meeting shall endeavor to
minimize the amount of cumulative redundant testimony by the public.
Section 4.
Minutes of all regular meetings shall be kept and made part of a permanent
public record. All actions of the Design Commission shall be considered
conclusive as to general import as of the date of such action. Details of
phraseology, conditions, etc., shall be subject to correction at the time of
considering and approving the minutes of the meetings at which such actions
were taken.
Section 5.
Any member of the Design Commission who has a material, direct or individual
interest in any matter before the Design Commission shall publicly so indicate,
shall then recuse him/herself from the meeting during the period of discussion
and action thereon and shall refrain from any prior discussion of such matter
with other members of the Design Commission.
ARTICLE V
ATTENDANCE
Section 1.
Attendance at regular and special meetings is expected of all Design Commission
members.
Section 2.
Any member anticipating absence from a meeting should notify the Chair or City
Planning Department.
Section 3.
Any absence may be excused by the Design Commission, even for an extended
period. Chronic unexcused absence of any member shall be referred by the
Design Commission to the Mayor.
Page 2
ARTICLE VI
AGENDA AND STAFF REPORTS
Section 1.
An agenda for every regular meeting shall be prepared and distributed by the
City Planning Department to each member not less than five (5) days prior to the
date of the meeting at which such agenda is to be considered. The agenda shall
be accompanied with a complete copy of the unapproved minutes of the
previous meeting, staff reports, and such material, illustrations, petitions, etc. as
may pertain to the agenda.
Section 2.
All matters requiring Design Commission consideration shall be filed with the
City Planning Department at least fifteen (15) days prior to the date of any
regular meeting. Under special circumstances this filing date may be waived by
the Chair or City Manager for Capital Improvement Projects, however, in no
instance shall the Design Commission take official action on any matter that is
not included on the agenda.
ARTICLE VII
AMENDMENTS TO RULES AND REGULATIONS
These bylaws may be amended by a majority vote of the entire membership of the Design
Commission, and are subject to the approval of the City Council.
Date Approved:
Design Commission: 4/26/1972
City Council: 4/24/1972
Date Revised:
Design Commission: 3/9/2011
City Council: 3/21/2011
Page 3
ARCH PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION TO
ENCOURAGE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
AB 4593
March 21, 2011
Regular Business
Adopt Ordinance No. 11C-02 and Resolution No.
1428
DEPARTMENT OF
Development Services Group (T. Stewart, A. Sullivan)
COUNCIL LIAISON
n/a
EXHIBITS
1. Proposed Ordinance No. 11C-02
2. Proposed Resolution No. 1428
$
n/a
AMOUNT BUDGETED
$
n/a
$
n/a
SUMMARY
The Mercer Island City Council 2010 Work Plan included the adoption of an Affordable Housing Tax
Exemption Ordinance (Work Plan Agenda Item #23) as one of the Council’s priorities. The State of
Washington authorizes the City of Mercer Island to adopt a Tax Exemption Ordinance and allows the City a
broad range of alternatives in how a specific program may be structured (see RCW 84.14 et seq.). The
Mercer Island Comprehensive Plan includes a number of goals and policies which support the creation of
affordable and diversified housing. The adoption of this ordinance and a fee resolution would complete a
Council Work Plan item, is authorized by state law, would implement the goals and policies of the Mercer
Island Comprehensive Plan, and would facilitate and encourage the development of affordable housing on
Mercer Island.
Background
On July 12, 2010 staff provided Council with detailed information about the affordable housing program and
received clear Council direction on the geographic boundaries of the program, the levels of affordability,
administrative issues and fees.
On September 20, 2010 staff proposed a draft Ordinance consistent with the direction provided by Council.
During Council’s review of the draft, Council asked staff to consider four specific areas of concern:
1. The enforceability of the agreement and covenants, especially during that period of time after the 8
or 12 year tax credit period.
2. The amount of staff time required for application review.
3. The open-ended nature of certain submittal requirements.
4. The confusion in the proposed definitions of “affordable housing” “affordable units” and “moderate
income units”.
Page 1
On November 1, 2010 staff returned with revisions to the draft Ordinance which addressed these issues.
Following discussion, Council moved to postpone indefinitely the main motion and directed staff to return
with a sliding scale amendment for Section 4.50.110 of Ordinance 10C-10.
On March 7, 2011 staff returned to Council seeking clarification of Council’s direction to staff regarding a
“sliding scale”. Following discussion, Council directed staff to move forward with the Property Tax
Exemption Program as generally described in Exhibit 2 (of AB 4616) by a vote of 4-2.
Ordinance 11C-02 (Exhibit 1)
Attached Ordinance No. 11C-02 (previously numbered Ordinance 10C-10) is this same Ordinance, with
three changes:
1) the words “for the life of the building” have been added at the end of 4.50.040(F),
2) a typographical error in 4.50.050(B) has been corrected, and
3) a typographical error in 4.50.060(A) has been corrected.
Resolution No. 1428 (Exhibit 2)
The attached Resolution No. 1428 proposes the following fees which would cover some, but not all, City
expenses required to administer the program:
Multifamily Housing Property Tax Exemption Fee:
Contract Amendment or Extension:
$2,040, plus cost of recording and assessor fee
$1,020, plus cost of recording and assessor fee
Currently the assessor fee is $150, and the cost of recording would be approximately $60.
Conclusion
The adoption of this Ordinance and Resolution would complete a Council Work Plan item, is authorized by
state law, would implement the goals and policies of the Mercer Island Comprehensive Plan to facilitate and
encourage affordable housing on Mercer Island and is consistent with the direction provided by the City
Council to staff on March 7, 2011.
RECOMMENDATION
Development Services Director and ARCH Staff
MOVE TO:
Adopt Ordinance No. 11C-02 relating to the development of multi-family housing; creating a
new Chapter 4.50 of the Mercer Island Municipal Code to implement Chapter 84.14 RCW to
provide for the exemptions from ad valorem property taxation for qualifying housing in
designated residential target areas within the City, designating certain areas as residential
targeted areas, and providing for annual program reporting.
MOVE TO:
Adopt Resolution No. 1428 establishing a fee to process a permit for affordable housing
property tax exemption.
Page 2
ORDINANCE NO. 11C-02
AN ORDINANCE RELATING TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF MULTIFAMILY HOUSING; CREATING A NEW CHAPTER 4.50 OF THE
MERCER ISLAND MUNICIPAL CODE TO IMPLEMENT CHAPTER
84.14 RCW TO PROVIDE FOR THE EXEMPTIONS FROM AD
VALOREM PROPERTY TAXATION FOR QUALIFYING HOUSING IN
DESIGNATED RESIDENTIAL TARGET AREAS WITHIN THE CITY,
DESIGNATING CERTAIN AREAS AS RESIDENTIAL TARGETED
AREAS, AND PROVIDING FOR ANNUAL PROGRAM REPORTING.
WHEREAS, Washington state law, Chapter 84.14 RCW, provides for the exemption from ad
valorem property taxation for the value of eligible improvements associated with qualifying
multi-unit housing located in residential target areas and authorizes the City to adopt necessary
procedures to implement the State law; and
WHEREAS, the stated purpose of Chapter 84.14 RCW is to stimulate the construction of new
multifamily housing and the rehabilitation of existing vacant and underutilized buildings for
multifamily housing in urban centers having insufficient housing opportunities that will increase
and improve residential opportunities, including affordable housing opportunities, within these
urban centers; and
WHEREAS, the City Council solicited public comment regarding the residential targeted areas
and the Ordinance at a public hearing on September 20, 2010 and November 1, 2010 and gave
notice of hearing in accordance with RCW 84.14.040; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the area designated as the residential targeted area in this
Ordinance is located within an urban center as defined in RCW 84.14.040, that the area lacks
sufficient available, desirable and convenient residential housing, including affordable housing,
to meet the needs of the public who would be likely to live in such area if desirable, attractive
and livable residences were available; and that the property tax exemption program implemented
by this Ordinance will encourage increased residential opportunities within the City and
stimulate the construction of new multifamily housing and the rehabilitation of existing vacant
and underutilized buildings for multifamily housing; and
WHEREAS, in designating a residential targeted area, the City Council may also consider other
factors, including whether additional housing in the residential targeted area will attract and
maintain an increase in the number of permanent residents, providing additional housing
opportunities for low and moderate income households would meet the needs of citizens likely to
live in the area if affordable residences were available, whether an increased permanent
residential population in the residential targeted area will help to achieve the planning goals
mandated by the Growth Management Act under Chapter 36.70A RCW, as implemented through
the City’s comprehensive plan; or whether encouraging additional housing in the residential
targeted area supports plans for significant public investment in public transit or a better jobs and
housing balance; and
AB 4593
Exhibit 1
Page 3
WHEREAS, certain areas within the City lack sufficient available, desirable and convenient
residential housing, including affordable housing opportunities to meet the needs of low and
moderate income households who would be likely to live in such areas if affordable residences
were available; and
WHEREAS, the City's goal is to preserve, when appropriate, existing multifamily low-income
housing in neighborhoods where such housing now exists, and to use the property tax exemption
program to support and not hinder this goal;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERCER ISLAND,
WASHINGTON HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
Addition of new Chapter 4.50, Multifamily Housing Property Tax Exemption.
A new Chapter 4.50, to be titled "Multifamily Housing Property Tax Exemption"
is added to the Mercer Island Municipal Code, to read as follows:
4.50.010 Purpose.
A. The purposes of this chapter are:
1. To encourage more multifamily housing opportunities within the city;
2. To stimulate the construction of new multifamily housing and the rehabilitation of
existing vacant and underutilized buildings for multifamily housing;
3. To increase the supply of multifamily housing opportunities within the city for low and
moderate income households;
4. To accomplish the planning goals required under the Growth Management Act, Chapter
36.70A RCW, as implemented by the city’s comprehensive plan;
5. To promote community development and affordable housing; and
6. To encourage additional housing in certain areas to support investment in public transit
projects.
B. Any one or a combination of these purposes may be furthered by the designation of a
residential targeted area under this chapter.
4.50.020 Definitions.
A. “Affordable Housing” means both “affordable units” and “moderate income units”.
B. “Affordable Unit” means a renter-occupied dwelling unit reserved for occupancy by eligible
households and affordable to households whose household annual income does not exceed sixty
percent of the King County median household income, adjusted for household size, as
determined by HUD, and no more than thirty percent of the monthly household income is paid
for monthly housing expenses (rent and an appropriate utility allowance). In the event that HUD
no longer publishes median income figures for King County, the city may use or determine such
other method as it may choose to determine the King County median income, adjusted for
household size.
AB 4593
Exhibit 1
Page 4
C. “Code Official” means the director of the City’s Development Services Group, or any other
city office, department or agency that shall succeed to its functions with respect to this chapter,
or his or her authorized designee.
D. “Eligible household” means one or more adults and their dependents who, as set forth in the
regulatory agreement referenced in Section 4.50.040(7), certify that their household annual
income does not exceed the applicable percent of the median household income for King County,
adjusted for household size, as determined by the United States Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD); and who certify that they meet all qualifications for eligibility,
including, any requirements for recertification on income eligibility.
E. “Household annual income” means the aggregate annual income of all persons over eighteen
years of age residing within the same household for a period of at least four months.
F. “Moderate Income Unit” means a renter-occupied dwelling unit reserved for occupancy by
eligible households and affordable to households whose household annual income does not
exceed eighty percent of the King County median household income, adjusted for household size,
as determined by HUD, and no more than thirty percent of the monthly household income is paid
for monthly housing expenses (rent and an appropriate utility allowance). In the event that HUD
no longer publishes median income figures for King County, the city may use or determine such
other method as it may choose to determine the King County median income, adjusted for
household size.
G. “Multifamily housing” means a building or townhouse project having four or more dwelling
units designed for permanent residential occupancy resulting from new construction or
rehabilitation or conversion of vacant, underutilized, or substandard buildings.
H. “Owner” means the property owner of record.
I. “Permanent residential occupancy” means multifamily housing that provides rental
occupancy for a period of at least one month, and excludes hotels, motels, and other businesses
that predominately offer rental accommodation on a daily or weekly basis.
J. “Rehabilitation improvement” means:
1. Modifications to an existing structure, the residential portion of which has been vacant
for at least twelve months prior to application for exemption under this chapter, that are made to
achieve a condition of substantial compliance with the applicable building and construction
codes; or
2. Modifications to an existing occupied residential structure or mixed use structure that
contains occupied residential units that add at least four additional multifamily dwelling units.
K. “Residential targeted area” means an area within an urban center as defined by Chapter 84.14
RCW and that has been so designated by the city council pursuant to this chapter.
AB 4593
Exhibit 1
Page 5
L. “Substantial compliance” means compliance with the applicable building and construction
codes contained in Title 17 of this code that is typically required for rehabilitation as opposed to
new construction.
4.50.030 Residential targeted areas—Criteria—Designation—Rescission.
A. Following notice and public hearing as prescribed in RCW 84.14.040, the city council may
designate one or more residential targeted areas, in addition to the areas stated in subsection (D)
of this section, upon a finding by the city council in its sole discretion that the residential targeted
area meets the following criteria:
1. The residential targeted area is within an urban center as defined by Chapter 84.14 RCW;
2. The residential targeted area lacks sufficient available, desirable and convenient
residential housing, including affordable housing to meet the needs of the public who would be
likely to live in the urban center if desirable, attractive and livable residences were available; and
3. Providing additional housing opportunity, including affordable housing, in the residential
targeted area will assist in achieving one or more of the following purposes:
a. Encourage increased residential opportunities within the city; or
b. Stimulate the construction of new affordable multifamily housing; or
c. Encourage the rehabilitation of existing vacant and underutilized buildings for
multifamily housing.
B. In designating a residential targeted area, the city council may also consider other factors,
including:
1. Whether additional housing in the residential targeted area will attract and maintain an
increase in the number of permanent residents;
2. Whether providing additional housing opportunities for low and moderate income
households would meet the needs of citizens likely to live in the area if affordable residences
were available;
3. Whether an increased permanent residential population in the residential targeted area
will help to achieve the planning goals mandated by the Growth Management Act under Chapter
36.70A RCW, as implemented through the city’s comprehensive plan; or
4. Whether encouraging additional housing in the residential targeted area supports plans
for significant public investment in public transit or a better jobs and housing balance.
C. At any time, the city council may, in its sole discretion, amend or rescind the designation of a
residential targeted area pursuant to the same procedural requirements as set forth in this chapter
for original designation.
AB 4593
Exhibit 1
Page 6
D. The following areas, as shown in Map 1 in this section, meet the criteria of this chapter for
residential targeted areas and are designated as such:
1. Mercer Island Town Center and adjacent Multifamily zones lots
MAP 1
E. If more than 50% of any legal lot is within a residential targeted area as shown in Map 1 in
this section, then the entire lot shall be deemed to lie within such area.
4.50.040 Project eligibility.
To be eligible for exemption from property taxation under this chapter, the property shall satisfy
all of the following requirements:
A. The property must be located in a residential targeted area.
B. The project must be multifamily housing consisting of at least four dwelling units within a
residential structure or as part of a mixed use development, in which at least fifty percent of the
space within such residential structure or mixed use development is intended for permanent
residential occupancy.
C. For new construction, a minimum of four new dwelling units must be created; for
rehabilitation or conversion of existing occupied structures, a minimum of four additional
dwelling units must be added.
AB 4593
Exhibit 1
Page 7
D. Existing dwelling units proposed for rehabilitation shall have been unoccupied for a
minimum of twelve months prior to submission of an application and have failed to comply with
one or more requirements of the building code.
E. No application may result in the net loss of existing affordable housing which receives
housing assistance through federal low or moderate income housing programs (e.g., HUD
Section 8 program).
F. Affordable housing shall be provided in the project as described in Section 4.50.100 for the
life of the building.
G. Prior to issuing a temporary or final certificate of occupancy, an agreement in a form
acceptable to the city attorney that addresses: price restrictions; eligible household qualifications
at time of initial occupancy and at annual recertification over the lifetime of the improvements
qualifying under this chapter; long-term affordability; remedies to the city for non-compliance
including taking action to require the Owner to perform its obligations or such other action
necessary to enforce the obligations of the agreement; and any other applicable topics of the
affordable housing , and shall be recorded with the county recorder’s office. This agreement shall
be a covenant running with the land and building, and shall be binding on the assigns, heirs and
successors of the applicant. Affordable units and moderate income units that are provided under
this section shall remain as affordable units and moderate income units for the life of the building.
H. The mix and configuration of housing units (e.g., studio, one-bedroom, two-bedroom, etc.)
used to meet the requirement for affordable housing under Section 4.50.100 shall be substantially
proportional to the mix and configuration of the total housing units in the project.
I. The project shall comply with all applicable zoning requirements, land use regulations, and
building and housing code requirements.
J. New construction of multifamily housing and rehabilitation improvements must be scheduled
to be completed within three years from the date of approval of the application, or within an
authorized extension of this time limit authorized in writing by the Code Official.
4.50.050 Application procedure—Fee.
A. The owner of property applying for exemption under this chapter shall submit an application
to the Code Official, on a form established by the Code Official, along with an initial application
fee. The owner shall verify the application by oath or affirmation. The application shall include:
1. A brief written description of the project, including phasing if applicable, and preliminary
schematic site and floor plans of the multifamily housing units and the structure(s) in which they
are proposed to be located;
2. A statement from the owner acknowledging the potential tax liability when the property
ceases to be eligible for exemption under this chapter;
3. Information describing how the applicant will comply with the affordability requirements
in Section 4.50.100; and
4. In the case of rehabilitation of an existing vacant structure under Section 4.50.020(I)(1),
verification from the fire and building departments of noncompliance with applicable building
AB 4593
Exhibit 1
Page 8
and housing codes as required under Section 4.50.020(I)(1), and an affidavit from the owner
verifying that the existing dwelling units have been vacant for a period of twelve months prior to
filing the application.
B. The Code Official shall notify the applicant within twenty-eight days of the application being
filed if the Code Official determines that an application is not complete and shall identify what
additional information is required relevant to the application for a property tax exemption before
the application will be complete. Within fourteen days of receiving additional information, the
Code Official shall notify the applicant in writing if the Code Official determines that the
application is still not complete, and what additional information is necessary. An application
shall be deemed to be complete if the Code Official does not notify the applicant in writing by
the deadlines in this section that the application is incomplete. If at any time the applicant does
not respond in writing to the Code Official request for addition information for 90 days, the
application shall be considered abandoned.
C. The application shall be submitted any time before, but no later than, the date that a
temporary or final certificate of occupancy is issued.
4.50.060 Application review—Issuance of conditional certificate—Denial—Appeal.
A. The Code Official shall approve or deny an application under this chapter, which shall take
place within forty-five days of the Code Official’s determination of a complete application,
unless extended by mutual agreement of the applicant and the Code Official. Any time waiting
for the applicant to respond for a request for additional information shall not count towards the
forty-five days. If the application is approved, the applicant shall enter into a contract with the
city regarding the terms and conditions of the project and eligibility for exemption under this
chapter. The Code Official shall execute the contract, and shall issue a conditional certificate of
acceptance of tax exemption. The conditional certificate shall expire three years from the date of
approval unless an extension is granted as provided in this chapter.
B. If the application is denied, the Code Official shall state in writing the reasons for the denial
and send notice of denial to the applicant’s last known address within ten days of the denial.
C. An applicant may appeal the Code Official’s denial of the application to the Hearing
Examiner by filing a notice of appeal with the city clerk along with the appeal fee as established
by resolution within thirty days of the date of the denial. The appeal before the Hearing
Examiner shall be based upon the record before the Code Official, and the Code Official’s
decision shall be upheld unless the applicant can show that there is no substantial evidence on the
record to support the Code Official’s decision. The Hearing Examiner’s decision on appeal is
final.
4.50.070 Amendment of contract.
A. Any applicant seeking amendment(s) to the contract may do so by submitting a request in
writing to the Code Official at any time within three years of the Code Official’s approval of the
application.
AB 4593
Exhibit 1
Page 9
B. The Code Official shall have authority to approve amendments to the contract between the
applicant and the city that are reasonably within the scope and intent of the contract.
C. Any applicant seeking amendments to the approved contract shall pay to the city an
amendment application fee as established by resolution.
4.50.080 Extension of conditional certificate.
The applicant shall submit a written request stating the grounds for the extension together with a
fee as established by resolution. The Code Official may grant an extension to the conditional
certificate for a period not to exceed twenty-four consecutive months if the Code Official
determines that:
A. The anticipated failure to complete construction or rehabilitation within the required time
period is due to circumstances beyond the control of the owner;
B. The owner has been acting and could reasonably be expected to continue to act in good faith
and with due diligence; and
C. All the conditions of the original contract between the applicant and the city will be satisfied
upon completion of the project.
4.50.090 Final certificate—Application—Issuance—Denial and appeal.
A. Upon completion of the rehabilitation improvements or new construction as provided in the
contract between the applicant and the city, and upon issuance of a final certificate of occupancy,
the applicant may request a final certificate of tax exemption. The applicant shall file with the
Code Official:
1. A statement of expenditures made with respect to each multifamily housing unit,
including phasing if applicable, and the total expenditures made with respect to the entire
property;
2. A description of the completed work and a statement of qualification for the exemption;
3. A statement that the work was completed within the required three-year period or any
approved extension; and
4. Information on the applicant’s compliance with the affordability requirements in Section
4.50.100.
B. Within thirty days of receipt of all materials required for a final certificate, the Code Official
shall determine whether the completed work and the affordability of the units is consistent with
the application and contract and is qualified for limited exemption under Chapter 84.14 RCW,
and which specific improvements completed meet the requirements of this chapter and the
required findings of RCW 84.14.060.
C. If the Code Official determines that the project has been completed in accordance with
subsection (A) of this section, the city shall file a final certificate of tax exemption with the
county assessor within forty days of receipt of all materials required for a final certificate.
D. The Code Official is authorized to cause to be recorded, or to require the applicant or owner
to record with the county recorder’s office the contract with the city required under Section
AB 4593
Exhibit 1
Page 10
4.50.060(A), and such other document(s) as will identify such terms and conditions of eligibility
for exemption under this chapter as the Code Official deems appropriate for recording, including
requirements under this chapter relating to affordability of units.
E. The Code Official shall notify the applicant in writing that the city will not file a final
certificate if:
1. The Code Official determines the project was not completed within the required threeyear period or any approved extension, or
2. The Code Official determines the project was not completed in accordance with
subsection (B) of this section; or
3. The Code Official determines that the owner’s property is not otherwise qualified under
this chapter, or
4. If the owner and the Code Official cannot agree on the value of the improvements
allocated to the exempt portion of rehabilitation improvements, new construction and multiuse
new construction.
F. Within thirty days of the date of notice of denial of final certificate, the applicant may file a
notice of appeal with the city clerk along with the appeal fee as established by resolution
specifying the factual and legal basis for the appeal. The appeal shall be heard by the city’s
hearing examiner pursuant to Section 4.50.120.
4.50.100 Exemption—Duration—Affordability requirements—Limits.
A. The value of new housing construction and rehabilitation improvements qualifying under this
chapter shall be exempt from ad valorem property taxation as follows:
1. In the Town Center for eight (8) successive years beginning January 1st of the year
immediately following the calendar year of issuance of the certificate for rental projects where at
least 10% of the units are affordable units.
2. In the Multifamily Area for eight (8) successive years beginning January 1st of the year
immediately following the calendar year of issuance of the certificate for rental project where at
least 5% of the units are affordable units.
3. In the Town Center for twelve (12) successive years beginning January 1st of the year
immediately following the calendar year of issuance of the certificate for rental project where at
least 10% are affordable units and an additional 10% are moderate income units.
4. In the Multifamily Area for twelve (12) successive years beginning January 1st of the
year immediately following the calendar year of issuance of the certificate for rental projects
where at least 5% of the units are affordable units and an additional 15% are moderate income.
If the percentage of affordable units or moderate income units is a fraction, then the number
of required units shall be rounded up to the next whole number (unit) if the fraction of the whole
number is at least 0.66.
B. The exemption does not apply to the value of land or to the value of improvements not
qualifying under this chapter, to increases in assessed valuation of land and nonqualifying
improvements, or to increases made by lawful order of the King County board of appeals and
equalization, Washington State Department of Revenue, State Board of Tax Appeals, or King
County, to a class of property throughout the county or a specific area of the county to achieve
uniformity of assessment or appraisal as required by law. In the case of rehabilitation of existing
AB 4593
Exhibit 1
Page 11
buildings, the exemption does not include the value of improvements constructed prior to
submission of the completed application required under this chapter.
4.50.110 Annual certification—Cancellation of exemption.
A. A property that receives a tax exemption under this chapter shall continue to comply with the
contract and the requirements of this chapter in order to retain its property tax exemption.
B. Within thirty days after the first anniversary of the date the city filed the final certificate of
tax exemption and each year for the tax exemption period, the property owner shall file a
certification with the Code Official, verified upon oath or affirmation, which shall contain the
following information:
1. A statement of occupancy and vacancy of the multifamily units during the previous year;
2. A certification that the property has not changed use since the date of filing of the final
certificate of tax exemption, and continues to be in compliance with the contract with the city
and the requirements of this chapter;
3. A description of any improvements or changes to the property made after the filing of the
final certificate or last declaration, as applicable;
4. Information demonstrating the owner’s compliance with the affordability requirements of
Section 4.50.100;
5. The total monthly rent of each unit;
6. The income of each renter household at the time of initial occupancy;
7. The value of the tax exemption for the project; and
8. Any additional information requested by the city regarding the units receiving a tax
exemption (pursuant to meeting any reporting requirements under Chapter 84.14 RCW).
C. Failure to submit the annual declaration may result in cancellation of the tax exemption
pursuant to this section.
D. If, during the duration of the exemption granted under this chapter, a violation of the zoning
or building code occurs, and if the designated city department issues a notice of violation or
notice of civil infraction, and if the violation is not resolved within a time period specified by the
city, then the tax exemption under this chapter shall be cancelled pursuant to this section.
E. In addition to any other requirements in this chapter, the affordable housing must continue to
meet the conditions of Section 4.50.100. In the event of a rental of an affordable unit or a
moderate income unit to a household other than an eligible household, or at a rent greater than
prescribed in the regulatory agreement referenced in Section 4.50.040(G), the property tax
exemption for the property shall be canceled pursuant to this section.
F. If the owner converts the multifamily housing to another use, the owner shall notify the Code
Official and the county assessor within sixty days of the change in use. Upon such change in use,
the tax exemption shall be canceled pursuant to this section.
G. The Code Official shall cancel the tax exemption for any property that no longer complies
with the terms of the contract or with the requirements of this chapter. Upon cancellation,
additional taxes, interest and penalties may be imposed pursuant to state law. Upon determining
AB 4593
Exhibit 1
Page 12
that a tax exemption shall be canceled, the Code Official shall notify the property owner by
certified mail, return receipt requested. The property owner may appeal the determination by
filing a notice of appeal with the city clerk along with the appeal fee established by resolution
within thirty days of the date of notice of cancellation, specifying the factual and legal basis for
the appeal. The appeal shall be heard by the hearing examiner pursuant to Section 4.50.120.
H. The city shall take such other action at law or in equity as may be necessary or desirable to
enforce any of the provisions or obligations, covenants, and conditions of the agreement referred
to in Section 4.50.040(G).
4.50.120 Appeals to hearing examiner.
A. The city’s hearing examiner is provided jurisdiction to hear appeals of the decisions of the
Code Official.
B. The hearing examiner’s procedures shall apply to hearings under this chapter to the extent
they are consistent with the requirement of this chapter and Chapter 84.14 RCW. The hearing
examiner shall give substantial weight to the Code Official’s decision and the burden of
overcoming the weight shall be on the appellant. The decision of the hearing examiner
constitutes the final decision of the city. An aggrieved party may appeal the hearing examiner’s
decision to superior court under RCW 34.05.510 through 34.05.598 if the appeal is properly filed
within thirty days of the date of the notification by the city to the appellant of that decision.
4.50.130 Annual reporting.
A. If the city issues tax exemption certificates pursuant to this chapter, the Code Official shall
submit the report required by RCW 84.14.100 to the Department of Commerce by December
31st of each year.
B. Annually, the Code Official or designee shall review the program established by this chapter
and provide a report to the city council outlining development activity, types and numbers of
units produced and their locations, rent and sales prices, information regarding the number of
low and moderate income households benefiting from the program, and other appropriate factors.
These reports may include recommendations on whether any neighborhoods should be added or
removed, whether affordability limits should be changed in certain areas. The annual report shall
be submitted to the city council no later than March 30th of each year the program is in effect,
starting in 2012; each report shall include information for the previous year.
Section 2:
Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or any
municipal code section amended hereby should be held to be invalid or
unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity of any other section, sentence,
clause or phrase of this ordinance or the amended code section.
Section 3:
Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date
of this ordinance is hereby ratified and affirmed.
AB 4593
Exhibit 1
Page 13
Section 4:
Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect and be in force on 30 days after
its passage and publication.
PASSED by the City Council of the City of Mercer Island, Washington at its regular meeting on
the 21st day of March, 2011 and signed in authentication of its passage.
________________________________
Jim Pearman, Mayor
ATTEST:
________________________________
Approved as to Form:
________________________________
Katie Knight, City Attorney
Date of Publication: ________________
AB 4593
Exhibit 1
Page 14
RESOLUTION NO. 1428
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF MERCER ISLAND, WASHINGTON
ESTABLISHING A FEE TO PROCESS A PERMIT FOR AFFORDABLE
HOUSING PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION.
WHEREAS, Revised Code of Washington 84.14.080 authorizes cities to establish a fee for
processing an application for Multifamily Housing Property Tax Exemption; and
WHEREAS, fees are charged for services provided by the Development Services Group (DSG)
for the development of land and construction of structures which includes the review of permit
applications, issuance of permits, field inspections, and related actions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council’s Management and Budget Policies indicate that development and
construction permit fees should be based on the costs of providing services; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 11C-02 requires that a permit be submitted for Multifamily Housing
Property Tax Exemption; and
WHEREAS, part of the cost recovery would include King County Recorder’s Office and King
County Department of Assessments fees pursuant to RCW 84.14.080; and
WHEREAS, future development fee increases will be tied to the First Half CPI-W (Seattle
Metro) Index, assuming it is positive, and will be effective January 1st of each year to provide
consistency with utility and other City fee structures.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF MERCER ISLAND, WASHINGTON, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1:
Development and Construction Permit Fee Schedule.
Consistent with the authority set forth in RCW 84.14.080, the fee to submit an application for
Multifamily Housing Property Tax Exemption decision shall be $2,040, plus the cost of
recording and assessor fees. The fee to submit an application to amend or extend an approved
contract established for a Multifamily Housing Property Tax Exemption application shall be
$1,020, plus the cost of recording and assessor fees. These fees shall be added to the
Development and Construction Permit Fee Schedule.
Section 2:
Future Fee Adjustments.
The fee set forth in this resolution shall be adjusted January 1 of each year, based on the First
Half CPI-W (Seattle Metro) Index, in order to align the fees with industry standards for fee
increases.
AB 4593
Exhibit 2
Page 15
Section 3:
Effective Date.
The fee established by this resolution shall take effect immediately.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MERCER ISLAND, WASHINGTON,
AT ITS REGULAR MEETING ON THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH, 2011.
______________________________
Jim Pearman, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
AB 4593
Exhibit 2
Page 16
ISLAND CREST WAY CORRIDOR DISCUSSION
AB 4618
March 21, 2011
Regular Business
Authorize staff to proceed with a revised scope and
schedule for the Island Crest Way resurfacing
projects.
DEPARTMENT OF
Maintenance (A. Tonella-Howe)
COUNCIL LIAISON
n/a
EXHIBITS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Vicinity Map
2011-2-12 Adopted Budget - Project Summary Listing
2011-2012 Adopted Budget - Individual Project Sheets
Street Fund Six-Year Plan (updated March 2011)
2011-2016 Transportation Improvement Plan
$
n/a
AMOUNT BUDGETED
$
n/a
$
n/a
SUMMARY
At the 2011 Annual Planning Session staff discussed the proposed timing for the Island Crest Way
Pedestrian Signal project and the two phases of resurfacing scheduled for Island Crest Way in 2012 and in
2014. Staff explained that the Pedestrian Signal project will install pedestrian signals at SE 42nd Street and
at SE 47th Street on Island Crest Way and will have no adverse impact on the operation of Island Crest Way
if the roadway is striped for three lanes in the future. The signals, when activated by a pedestrian, will cycle
to red to stop traffic on Island Crest Way when a pedestrian wants to cross the street. During all other times
the signal will rest in green allowing traffic to flow north and south on Island Crest Way unimpeded.
During this meeting Council discussed possible modifications to the resurfacing projects to facilitate the
reconfiguration of Island Crest Way from a four-lane section to a three-lane section and asked staff to
evaluate them. The modifications ranged from doing the resurfacing in two parts as described in the
adopted Transportation Improvement Plan but striping for three-lanes all at once (SE 53rd to Merrimount
Drive) to completing all the project work (resurfacing and striping) in one year to create economy of scale.
In response to Council’s discussion staff has evaluated several options and is seeking input from Council on
which, if any, modifications to make to the upcoming resurfacing projects.
Page 1
Island Crest Way Resurfacing Project Phases
There are two phases of Island Crest Way Resurfacing in the current 2011 – 2016 Transportation
Improvement Plan (TIP) as adopted by Council on June 21, 2010 and in the 2011-2012 Biennial Budget
adopted on December 13, 2010.
The current limits for Phase 1 are from SE 53rd Place to 86th Avenue SE. Design is scheduled to begin this
summer with a budget of $100,000. Construction is scheduled for 2012 with a budget of $1,045,500. A
companion Pedestrian and Bicycle Facility project is also scheduled for 2012 with a budget of $120,200.
Phase 1 work totals $1.27 million.
The limits for Phase 2 are from 86th Avenue SE to SE 40th Street. Design is scheduled for 2013 with a
budget of $100,000. Construction is planned for 2014 with a budget of $1,130,800, along with a companion
Pedestrian and Bicycle Facility project budgeted for $135,700. Phase 2 work totals $1.37 million.
The total estimated cost of both Phase 1 and Phase 2 work, including design and construction of both the
Street and PBF (Pedestrian and Bicycle Facility) improvements is $2.63 million.
Island Crest Way Corridor Project Description
The project to reconfigure Island Crest Way to three-lanes, as approved by Council on March 1, 2010,
included the following:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Striping a three-lane roadway from Merrimount Drive to SE 53rd Street with transitions to the fourlane roadway north of Merrimount Drive and to the two-lane roadway south of SE 53rd Street.
Three pedestrian crossings near SE 46th Street, SE 47th Street and SE 48th Street with center
median and crosswalk markings and a pedestrian signal at SE 42nd Street (note: the SE 47th Street
and SE 42nd Street Pedestrian Crossings will be constructed in 2011 as part of the Pedestrian Signal
Project).
Sidewalk connections on the east side to connect pedestrian crossing to the closest side street.
Updated street lighting with emphasis at pedestrian crossings.
Widening at bus zones to minimize traffic flow impedance.
Replacing curb returns with larger radius at Merrimount to facilitate large vehicle turning traffic.
Planted median north of 90th Ave SE in place of the two-way left turn lane to compensate for removal
of established, planted medians.
At the June 21st meeting Council downsized the scope of the corridor improvements and approved a new
project to install two pedestrian signals: one at SE 42nd Street and the other at SE 47th Street. The
remaining elements of the Island Crest Way Corridor Project as noted above are incorporated in the options
described below.
Options Evaluated
Staff evaluated the following options for implementing the Island Crest Way Corridor Project with the
resurfacing projects. These options include the bulleted items described above.
•
Option 1 – Phased Overlay and Phased 3-lane Configuration
This option retains the original two phases of Island Crest Way resurfacing with no changes to the
overlay limits or the project schedule. All elements of the corridor configuration would be completed
over the two phases. In 2012, Phase 1 construction would complete the three-lane striping from SE
53rd Place to 86th Ave SE with a transition to four-lanes north of 86th Ave SE. In 2014, Phase 2
construction would complete the three-lane striping from 86th Ave SE to Merrimount Drive. The
additional cost to the Phase 1 resurfacing project for the corridor improvements described above is
estimated to be $425,000.
Page 2
•
Option 2 – Phased Overlay to 86th; Full 3-lane Configuration
This option retains the original two phases of Island Crest Way resurfacing with no changes to the
overlay limits or the project schedule. All elements of the corridor configuration would be completed
during the Phase 1 resurfacing project from SE 53rd Place to Merrimount Drive.
This option implements the entire three-lane configuration by 2012 and maintains a level of flexibility
for staff to monitor and make minor changes at the Merrimount Drive intersection if needed, before it
is re-paved in 2014. Under this option construction activities occur at the Merrimount Drive
intersection during both project phases. The added cost to the Phase 1 resurfacing project is
estimated to be $490,000 which includes the same costs in Option 1 plus the added striping costs of
$65,000.
•
Option 3 – Phased Overlay to Merrimount; Full 3-lane Configuration
This option keeps the resurfacing in two phases but modifies the project limits. All elements of the
corridor configuration would be completed during the Phase 1 resurfacing project. The Phase 1
paving limits are increased beyond 86th Ave SE to the Merrimount Drive intersection. Phase 2 paving
limits are then decreased, from just north of the Merrimount Drive intersection to SE 40th Street.
This option implements the entire three-lane configuration by 2012 and construction activities at the
intersection occur only once, during Phase 1 construction. The added cost to the Phase 1
resurfacing project is estimated to be $700,000 which includes the same costs as Option 2 plus an
estimated $210,000 to pave the roadway from 86th Ave SE to the Merrimount Drive intersection. The
cost of the shorter Phase 2 resurfacing project is estimated to be reduced by $210,000.
•
Option 4 – Full Overlay & 3-lane Configuration in 2012
This option combines Phase 1 and Phase 2 together for construction in 2012.
This option implements the entire three-lane configuration by 2012. The City may benefit from a
highly competitive bidding climate with a much larger paving project; however combining these
phases and accelerating the project to 2012 will require a reprioritization of projects in the TIP and in
the water utility to be able to fund the project in this current biennium. (The water utility has a project
programmed in 2013 to replace the water main on Island Crest Way between SE 40th Street and SE
42nd Street, in advance of the Phase 2 resurfacing project. Refer to Exhibit 3 – Individual Project
Sheets). It is difficult to predict what the bidding climate will be in 2012 and in 2014 and how much, if
any, savings the City can anticipate by bidding the entire paving project in 2012. Additional staff
resources will be necessary to manage the increased workload for the biennium as well.
Accelerating Phase 2 increases the cost in the 2011-2012 biennium by an additional $1.8 million
($1.37 million to accelerate Phase 2 work already planned plus the added cost of $425,000 for the 3lane configuration as described under Option 1).
•
Option 5 – Full Overlay & 3-lane Configuration in 2014
This option combines Phase 1 and Phase 2 together into one project for construction in 2014.
While this option moves the project into the outer years, this option delays the Phase 1 paving of
Island Crest Way and will require additional maintenance on this section of roadway until it is paved.
This option also delays implementation of the three-lane configuration until 2014. Delaying Phase 1
moves the $1.4 million in funds programmed in the current biennium to the 2013/2014 biennium, for
a total estimated project cost of $3.1 million (does not include inflation or extra arterial preservation
costs associated with a delay).
Page 3
Schedule
Options 1, 2 & 3 are easily accomplished under the original project schedule with design of Phase 1 in 2011
and construction in 2012. With any of these three options a design consultant is expected to be retained by
summer 2011 and advertisement of the project for construction bids will occur in early 2012. Construction
would be scheduled for late spring/early summer 2012. The construction duration is expected to be 2-3
months. Phase 2 would have a schedule of design in 2013 and construction in 2014.
Option 4 is more complex because of a water main replacement project needing to be constructed prior to
the road resurfacing in the Phase 2 project limits. With this option a consultant for the water main project will
need to be retained immediately so that construction of the water main project can occur in early 2012 with
the resurfacing project construction following closely behind in summer 2012. The construction duration for
this larger project is expected to last 3-4 months (or more) and the impact to drivers is expected to be over a
much greater area.
With Option 5 design for the resurfacing project would begin in early 2013 with construction scheduled for
spring/summer 2014. Design for the water main replacement would begin in 2012 with construction in 2013
(as currently scheduled), well in advance of the road resurfacing.
Financial Impacts
There are financial impacts to the Street Fund with all of these options, some more significant than others.
With any of these options the TIP will need to be adjusted and, depending on the option selected, projects
may need to be reprioritized.
With Options 1, 2 & 3 staff has projected that the Street Fund can accommodate the added costs and the
biennium is forecast to end with a positive balance. Reshuffling of projects during the upcoming TIP process
may need to occur for years 2013 and beyond.
Option 4 is unaffordable without significant reductions in funding to other projects or significant delay of
projects. Under Option 4 the biennium is forecast to end with a negative balance so some projects planned
for the 2011/2012 biennium would need to be reduced, delayed or cancelled.
Option 5 defers construction costs to 2014. It is expected that under this option some reshuffling of projects
in the TIP will be necessary, and adding dollars to the Arterial Street Preservation project in 2012 and 2013
will be necessary for maintenance of the deferred section of Island Crest Way.
Street Fund Six Year Plan
The Six Year Plan for the Street Fund has been updated following adoption of the 2011-2012 Budget, as
follows:
•
•
•
•
The 2011 beginning fund balance has been updated to reflect revenue in excess of forecast and
expenditure savings realized in 2010.
The project budget carry-over for the Town Center Signals of $1,183,385 has been added to 2011
(Council will be asked to authorize this and other budget carry-overs at the April 18th meeting).
The ICW crossings project has been added to 2011 at the estimated cost of $350,600 and the TIB
grant of $241,587 has been added to 2011 revenue. At the same time, the $225,000 previously
reserved for this project was removed.
Fuel Tax has been reforecast to reflect reductions in revenue being experienced as a result of
declines in purchase as a result of the economy, rising gas prices, and the trend towards more fuel
efficient vehicles. This result (2011-2016) in $246,000 less than shown in the Street Fund Six Year
Plan included in the adopted 2011-2012 budget.
A revised Street Fund Six Year Plan (updated as of March 2011) is attached as Exhibit 4. It includes both
the Street Fund Balance and Detail of Expenditures (showing the individual projects planned for 2011Page 4
2016). Overall, the forecast 2012 ending balance for the Street Fund is $1,396,163. This has been revised
upward from the 2011-2012 adopted budget.
Recommendation
If modifications are to be made to the current resurfacing projects, staff’s recommendation for
implementation is Option 2. This option implements a three-lane configuration by 2012 at the lowest cost
and with the least disruption to other programmed projects. While this option would disrupt the intersection
of Merrimount Drive twice, it provides flexibility for staff to monitor the intersection and make modifications if
necessary before it is repaved in 2014.
The following table summarizes the criteria used for evaluating the options.
Criteria for Evaluation
Option
1
2
3
4
5
Funds
Available
in
Biennium
Impact to
other
projects
+
+
+
-
+
+
o
-
Fully
Adequate Minimal Implement
Staff
Disruption s 3-lane by
Resources to Drivers
2012
+
+
+
-
+
o
+
-
+
+
+
-
Legend: + Positive; - Negative; o Neutral
Staff also believes Option 3 is workable. While this option is slightly more expensive it is still affordable in
the current biennium and fully implements the three-lane configuration in 2012. This option impacts the
Merrimount Drive intersection only once; however it does not allow flexibility for staff to monitor the
intersection and make changes if needed as Option 2 allows. This option may also require more reshuffling
of projects during the upcoming TIP process for years 2013 and beyond to provide a balanced Street Fund.
RECOMMENDATION
Assistant City Engineer
MOVE TO:
Authorize staff to proceed with a revised scope and schedule for the Island Crest Way
Resurfacing project(s) as described in Option ________.
Alternatives:
• Option 1 – Phased Overlay and Phased 3-lane Configuration
• Option 2 – Phased Overlay to 86th; Full 3-lane Configuration
• Option 3 – Phased Overlay to Merrimount; Full 3-lane Configuration
• Option 4 – Full Overlay & 3-lane Configuration in 2012
• Option 5 – Full Overlay & 3-lane Configuration in 2014
Page 5
S E 50 th Pl
A
E
eS
Av
S
6t h
E
90th Pl SE
SE
t
re s
y
Wa
91st Ave SE
90th Ave SE
89th
Ave SE
C
nd
a
l
Is
SE 47th St
ley Ln
SE 48th St
Pl
Island Crest Way
Vicinity Map
Rd
rd
53
e
Fernridg
h
5
SE
3 d Pl
r
ve
88th
Pl SE
S E 47th P
l
86th Ave SE
84th Ave SE
90th
Ave SE
r oft Rd
88th Ave SE
SE 45th St
er
nc
89th Ave SE
87th Ave SE
Maple Ln
88th Ave SE
8
SE 4
8th
81st Ave SE
St
SE 44th Pl
kR
oo d
SE 44th St
Fernbr
SE
89th Ave SE
87th Ave SE
86th Ave SE
43
SE 47
th
95th Ave SE
Crestwood Pl
94th Ave SE
Sho
rec
l
91st Ave SE
91st Ave SE
93rd Ave SE
90th Ave SE
90th Ave SE
92nd Ave SE
S
rd
Butte
rw
o
J
SE
54th St
ub
90th
Greenbrie
SE 40th St
St
1st
SE 4
dD
rwoo
rce
e
M
Dr
82nd A
83rd Ave SE
89th Ave SE
Island Crest Way
83rd Ave SE
85th Ave SE
SE 43rd St
96 t h
A ve S
Fo
r
88th Ave SE
e SE
d Av
82n
ICW_VicinityMap.mxd
Map Date: 3/16/11
er
84th
Ave SE
st
M
ount
D
rim
SE 42nd St
SE
Ave
97th
E
ve S
hA
96t
e SE
st Av
Fore
re
r een Ln
SE 42nd St
E
Ev
er
g
SE 40th St
nd
42
SE
t
F
SE 46th St
St
Ln
SE 50th St
Lind
rt
AB 4618
Exhibit 1
Page 6
Pl
2011-2012 Adopted Budget - Project Summary Listing
Capital Reinvestment Plan
Parks, Recreation and Open Space
Project Costs (in thousands)
Project Description
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Source of Funds (in thousands)
2015
2016
Total
REET
Street
Utilities General
Fees
Contrib's Grants
Other
Total
Funded - No Changes
19
20
21
22
23
Open Space - Vegetation Management
Luther Burbank Minor Park Improvements
Recurring Park Projects
Homestead - Minor Improvements
Island Crest Park Minor Improvements
Open Space
Parks Improvements
Parks Repairs and Maintenance
444
422
378
471
490
509
529
2,799
1,797
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,002
2,799
110
110
110
110
110
110
110
660
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
660
660
120
120
120
120
120
120
120
720
720
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
720
0
0
68
250
0
0
0
318
318
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
318
0
0
68
0
0
0
0
68
68
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
68
Parks Improvements
Parks Improvements
0
8
0
584
520
100
275
1,487
1,487
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,487
0
0
68
0
0
0
0
68
68
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
68
35
47
0
0
100
0
140
287
287
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
287
0
0
0
68
0
83
759
910
151
0
0
0
759
0
0
0
910
0
0
0
15
50
0
0
65
65
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
65
0
0
383
0
0
0
0
383
338
0
0
0
0
0
45
0
383
709
707
1,195
1,618
1,390
922
1,933
7,765
5,299
0
0
0
759
0
45
1,662
7,765
Funded - Modified
24
25
26
27
Minor Park Improvements
Minor Park Improvement - Groveland Play Equipment
I-90 Park Improvements
South Mercer Playfields Park Improvements
Funded - New Project
28 Community Center Mercerview Grounds
Unfunded or Partially Funded
29 Island Crest Park Ballfield Lights Replacement
Total Parks, Recreation and Open Space costs
Streets, Pedestrian and Bicycle costs
Project Description
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
REET
Street
Utilities General
Fees
Contrib's Grants
Other
Total
Funded - No Changes
30 Arterial Preservation Program
31 Pavement Marking Replacement
Annual Street Maintenance Program
70
70
70
70
70
70
70
420
0
420
0
0
0
0
0
0
420
25
35
35
36
38
40
41
225
0
225
0
0
0
0
0
0
225
Arterial Street Improvements
Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
Town Center Street Reconstruction
1,080
378
471
707
509
764
550
3,379
0
3,379
0
0
0
0
0
0
3,379
0
0
0
644
1,231
588
265
2,728
0
2,728
0
0
0
0
0
0
2,728
0
100
1,045
0
0
0
0
1,145
0
1,145
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,145
0
0
120
0
0
0
0
120
0
120
0
0
0
0
0
0
120
0
0
0
109
136
206
70
521
0
521
0
0
0
0
0
0
521
0
0
0
0
100
647
0
747
0
747
0
0
0
0
0
0
747
0
0
0
680
0
0
0
680
0
680
0
0
0
0
0
0
680
0
102
0
0
0
0
0
102
0
102
0
0
0
0
0
0
102
1,175
685
1,741
2,246
2,084
2,315
996
10,067
0
10,067
0
0
0
0
0
0
10,067
Funded - Modified
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
Residential Street Overlays
Arterial Street Improvements (2013 - 2016)
Island Crest Way Resurfacing (86th to 53rd) - Phase I
PBF Reinvestment - Island Crest Way (86th to 53rd)
Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities (PBF) - Reinvestment
Town Center Streets - 80th Ave, SE 29th and 32nd
Town Center Streets - Overlay
39 Chip Seal Pilot Project
Total Streets, Pedestrian and Bicycle costs
LEGEND:
Projects included in the 2011-2012 Preliminary Budget are shown in bold text with gray background.
AB 4618
Exhibit 2
Page 7
Capital Improvement Program
General Government
Project Description
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
REET
Utilities General
Street
Fees
Contrib's Grants
Other
Total
Funded - No Changes
40
41
42
43
44
45
Fuel Clean Up
Firefighting Equipment
Computer Equipment Replacements
Website Redesign
Technology Strategic Plan
Server Upgrades
Other Equipment
Small Technology/Equipment
Technology
Technology
Technology
Technology
70
74
75
0
0
0
0
149
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
149
149
35
36
35
35
36
36
35
213
0
0
0
213
0
0
0
0
213
102
120
70
143
188
143
85
749
0
0
0
0
749
0
0
0
749
35
0
15
0
15
0
0
30
0
0
0
30
0
0
0
0
30
0
0
0
0
0
0
75
75
0
0
0
75
0
0
0
0
75
25
0
0
0
50
0
0
50
0
0
0
50
0
0
0
0
50
254
913
616
525
415
755
841
4,065
0
0
0
0
4,065
0
0
0
4,065
71
79
52
199
188
142
188
848
848
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
848
71
53
12
85
95
199
102
546
136
0
410
0
0
0
0
0
546
57
14
22
44
51
41
30
202
0
0
0
0
0
202
0
0
202
113
35
54
83
53
88
79
392
392
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
392
11
22
15
24
32
31
28
152
152
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
152
48
46
48
57
41
40
36
268
268
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
268
49
132
88
71
67
48
48
454
454
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
454
Funded - Modified
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
Fleet Replacements
City Hall Building Repairs
Maintenance Building Repairs
Thrift Shop Repairs
North Fire Station Repairs
South Fire Station Repairs
Luther Burbank Admin Building Repairs
Community Center Building Repairs
High Accuracy Orthophotos
Financial System Upgrades
CIP Database Enhancements
Mobile Asset Data Collection
Maintenance Management System Refresh
Document Management
Other Equipment
Public Buildings
Public Buildings
Public Buildings
Public Buildings
Public Buildings
Public Buildings
Public Buildings
Technology
Technology
Technology
Technology
Technology
Technology
0
0
45
0
0
30
0
75
0
0
0
75
0
0
0
0
75
30
0
0
25
0
0
0
25
0
0
0
25
0
0
0
0
25
0
0
0
50
0
0
0
50
0
0
0
50
0
0
0
0
50
0
0
0
60
0
0
0
60
0
10
20
30
0
0
0
0
60
0
0
10
0
20
150
0
180
0
0
0
180
0
0
0
0
180
73
65
65
70
70
0
0
270
0
0
0
270
0
0
0
0
270
0
10
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
55
55
65
65
240
0
0
0
240
0
0
0
0
240
0
31
31
32
32
42
42
210
0
0
0
210
0
0
0
0
210
0
0
0
15
15
15
15
60
0
0
0
60
0
0
0
0
60
1,044
1,630
1,253
1,573
1,423
1,825
1,669
9,373
2,250
10
430
1,508
4,824
202
0
149
9,373
60
61
62
63
Fuel System Update
Self Contained Breathing Apparatus Replacement
CCMV Technology & Equipment Replacement
Phone System Upgrades
Technology
Technology
Total General Government costs
Sewer Utility
2010
Project Description
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
REET
Street
Utilities General
Fees
Contrib's Grants
Other
Total
Funded - No Changes
64 Sewer System Emergency Repairs
Sewer System Rehabilitation
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
300
Sewer System Improvements
180
434
515
500
200
844
757
3,250
150
50
0
0
0
0
0
50
70
0
140
0
150
0
160
450
50
55
55
60
60
65
65
0
0
0
75
500
0
500
589
760
685
960
959
0
0
300
0
0
0
0
0
3,250
0
0
0
0
0
50
0
0
0
0
0
450
0
0
0
360
0
0
360
0
0
0
575
0
0
575
0
1,032
4,985
0
0
4,985
0
0
0
300
0
0
3,250
0
0
50
0
0
450
0
0
0
360
0
0
0
0
575
0
0
0
0
4,985
Funded - Modified
65
66
67
68
General Sewer System Improvements
Sanitary Sewer System Telemetry
Sewer System Generator Replacement
Sewer System Pump Station Repairs
69 East Mercer Way Sewer Replacement
Total Sewer Utility costs
AB 4618
Exhibit 2
Page 8
H-14
_____________________________
City of Mercer Island 2011-2012 Budget
2011-2012 Adopted Budget - Project Summary Listing
Storm Drainage Utility
2010
Project Description
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
REET
Street
Utilities General
Fees
Contrib's Grants
Other
Total
Funded - No Changes
70 Neighborhood Drainage Improvements
Neighborhood Drainage Improvements
60
70
70
80
80
90
90
480
0
0
480
0
0
0
0
0
480
Other Storm Drainage System Projects
Watercourse Projects
70
65
251
0
0
0
0
316
0
0
316
0
0
0
0
0
316
0
0
0
70
380
20
480
950
0
0
950
0
0
0
0
0
950
2,626
Funded - Modified
71
72
73
74
75
Storm Water System Replacements
Conveyance System Improvements (2013-2016)
Storm Water Basin Improvements (2013-2016)
Medium/Large Basin and Conveyance System Impvmts.
Sub Basin 6.3 Watercourse Stablization Project
Total Storm Drainage Utility costs
0
0
0
819
475
890
442
2,626
0
0
2,626
0
0
0
0
0
0
70
713
0
0
0
0
783
0
0
783
0
0
0
0
0
783
75
995
0
0
0
0
0
995
0
0
995
0
0
0
0
0
995
205
1,200
1,034
969
935
1,000
1,012
6,150
0
0
6,150
0
0
0
0
0
6,150
Water Utility
2010
Project Description
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
REET
Street
Utilities General
Fees
Contrib's Grants
Other
Total
Funded - No Changes
76 Water Model Updates/ Fire Flow Analysis
77 Water System Plan Update
78 Hydrants and Other Water System Components
Other Water System Projects
Water System Improvements
0
0
20
0
25
0
20
65
0
0
65
0
0
0
0
0
65
0
0
0
60
60
0
0
120
0
0
120
0
0
0
0
0
120
55
60
60
65
65
65
65
380
0
0
380
0
0
0
0
0
380
Funded - Modified
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
Meter Replacement Program
First Hill Water System Improvements
88th Ave. SE & 86th Ave SE Water System Impvmts.
Sandy Cove Water System Improvement
ICW/SE 40th to 86th Ave Water System Impvmts.
EMW 5400 to 6000 Block Watermain & PRV Stations
Mercerwood Drive Water Main Replacement
Undersized Main Replacement Program
25
40
40
45
45
45
45
260
0
0
260
0
0
0
0
0
260
0
200
1,200
0
0
0
0
1,400
0
0
1,400
0
0
0
0
0
1,400
571
0
0
0
100
471
0
0
571
0
0
571
0
0
0
0
0
0
348
0
0
0
0
0
348
0
0
348
0
0
0
0
0
348
0
0
112
528
0
0
0
640
0
0
640
0
0
0
0
0
640
0
0
0
129
723
0
0
852
0
0
852
0
0
0
0
0
852
0
0
0
0
138
785
0
923
0
0
923
0
0
0
0
0
923
0
39
0
0
0
0
0
39
0
0
39
0
0
0
0
0
39
0
0
0
0
0
198
1,113
1,311
0
0
1,311
0
0
0
0
0
1,311
0
0
0
0
0
0
155
155
0
0
155
0
0
0
0
0
155
0
0
0
0
0
335
381
716
0
0
716
0
0
0
0
0
716
481
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
97th Ave SE 2-in Galvanized Watermain Replacement
Mercerwood Neighborhood Water System Improvements
93rd Ave and SE 72nd St Water Main Replacement
Watermain Replacement Projects (2013-2016)
85th Ave SE Watermain Replacement
ICW/86th Ave to 53rd Pl Water System Impvmts.
Street Related Water CIP Projects
Total Water Utility costs
Total Capital Reinvestment Plan
0
0
0
481
0
0
0
481
0
0
481
0
0
0
0
0
0
302
0
0
0
0
0
302
0
0
302
0
0
0
0
0
302
0
148
65
0
128
250
250
841
0
0
841
0
0
0
0
0
841
80
1,137
1,497
1,408
1,655
1,678
2,029
9,404
0
0
9,404
0
0
0
0
0
9,404
3,713
5,948
7,480
8,499
8,447
8,699
8,671
47,744
7,549
10,077
20,969
1,508
5,583
202
45
1,811
47,744
AB 4618
Exhibit 2
Page 9
Capital Facilities Plan
Parks, Recreation and Open Space
Project Description
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
REET
Street
Utilities General
Fees
Contrib's Grants
Other
Total
Funded - No Changes
93 Regional Trail Connections (KC Prop 2 Levy)
72
72
73
75
0
0
0
220
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
220
220
72
72
73
75
0
0
0
220
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
220
220
Parks Improvements
Total Parks, Recreation and Open Space costs
Streets, Pedestrian and Bicycle costs
Project Description
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
REET
Street
Utilities General
Fees
Contrib's Grants
Other
Total
Funded - No Changes
94 Safe Route to School
0
100
0
100
0
Other Transportation Projects
25
0
35
45
263
0
25
0
25
0
45
45
45
45
305
0
326
0
353
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
0
323
450
170
471
0
200
0
200
0
0
0
0
0
0
200
0
50
0
50
0
0
0
0
0
0
50
45
270
0
270
0
0
0
0
0
0
270
0
984
0
984
0
0
0
0
0
0
984
0
260
260
0
260
0
0
0
0
0
0
260
0
0
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
100
70
398
305
1,864
0
1,764
0
0
0
0
0
100
1,864
Funded - Modified
95 Guardrail Development
96 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Plan Implementation
97 East Mercer Way Shoulders, Phase 7 - 9
98 SE 53rd Place PBF Improvement
99 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Plan Implementation
Total Streets, Pedestrian and Bicycle costs
General Government
2010
Project Description
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
REET
Utilities General
Street
Fees
Contrib's Grants
Other
Total
Funded - No Changes
100 Small Technology/Equipment Items
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
300
0
0
0
300
0
0
0
0
300
Technology
30
10
0
10
0
10
0
30
0
0
0
30
0
0
0
0
30
0
80
0
0
0
0
0
80
0
0
0
45
0
35
0
0
80
20
0
0
460
4,140
0
0
4,600
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4,600
4,600
100
140
50
520
4,190
60
50
5,010
0
0
0
375
0
35
0
4,600
5,010
Funded - Modified
101 City Information via Web Based GIS
102 South End Emergency Shelter
Public Buildings
103 Fire Station 92 Replacement
Public Buildings
Total General Government costs
Storm Drainage Utility
2010
Project Description
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
REET
Utilities General
Street
Fees
Contrib's Grants
Other
Total
Funded - Modified
104 Low Impact Development Opportunity Projects
Total Storm Drainage Utility costs
Total Capital Facilities Plan
Grand Total
AB 4618
Exhibit 2
Page 10
H-16
0
50
250
0
0
0
0
300
0
0
75
0
0
0
225
0
300
0
50
250
0
0
0
0
300
0
0
75
0
0
0
225
0
300
495
712
543
1,066
4,260
458
355
7,394
0
1,764
75
375
0
35
225
4,920
7,394
4,208
6,660
8,023
9,565
12,707
9,157
9,026
55,138
7,549
11,841
21,044
1,883
5,583
237
270
6,731
55,138
_____________________________
Island Crest Way Resurfacing (86th to 53rd) - Phase 1
Project Manager:
C. Morris
Approved ID WR120R
Total Exp (thousands): $ 1,145
Project Description: This project will repair and resurface the existing asphalt roadway from 86th Avenue to SE 53rd
Place.
Project Image/Map:
Business Need: Island Crest Way is the City's main arterial, serving the entire Island. This portion of roadway is
nearing the end of its pavement life and will need resurfacing.
Existing Conditions: This four-lane portion of Island Crest Way was last resurfaced in 1990. In 2010, the roadway is
planned for a reconfiguration to three lanes.
Prior Council Review: 2011 - 2016 Transportation Improvement Program, 2009-2010 Budget
Expenditure ($1,000's)
Description
2010
2011
2012
Construction
Design Services
Project Management
0
0
0
0
84
16
924
30
91
Total
0
100
Description
2010
Street Fund
0
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
924
114
107
1045
0
0
0
0
1145
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
100
1045
0
0
0
0
1145
Revenue ($1,000's)
Project Duration
Staff Responsible: C. Morris
Labor Hours: 800
H - 34
Start Date: 05/01/2011
AB 4618
Exhibit 3
Page 11
End Date: 10/01/2012
Public Involvement:
As Needed
PBF Reinvestment - Island Crest Way (86th to 53rd)
WR140F
Approved ID
Project Manager: C. Morris
Total Exp (thousands): $ 120
Project Description: Repair and reconstruction of existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities (PBF) on Island Crest Way
from 86th Avenue to SE 53rd Place. This project will be linked to the arterial street resurfacing
project of this same section of Island Crest Way.
Project Image/Map:
Business Need: As arterial roadway pavements wear and need resurfacing, portions of sidewalks and other
pedestrian and bicylce facilities also need repair and replacement.
Existing Conditions: Most of the sidewalks along this project were constructed in 1990. Some portions may not
meet current standards for pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
Prior Council Review: 2011-2016 Transportation Improvement Program, 2009-2010 Budget
Description
2010
2011
2012
Construction
Design Services
Project Management
0
0
0
0
0
0
97
10
13
Total
0
0
Description
2010
Street Fund
0
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
97
10
13
120
0
0
0
0
120
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
0
120
0
0
0
0
120
Revenue ($1,000's)
Project Duration
Labor Hours: 150
AB 4618
Exhibit 3
Page 12
End Date: 10/01/2012
Public Involvement:
As Needed
H - 35
Arterial Street Improvements (2013 - 2016)
Total Exp (thousands): $ 2,728
Approved ID
Project Manager: C. Morris
Project Description: Repair and resurfacing of existing arterial streets that have reached the end of their pavement life.
Roadways planned for these future years include portions of SE 40th Street (2013) and Island
Crest Way (2014), Mercerwood Drive (2015), and SE 53rd Place (2016).
Project Image/Map:
Business Need: Some arterial streets are approacing the end of their pavement life and will need resurfacing.
Existing Conditions: Arterial streets are primary segments of the City's transportation network. As sections of
arterials wear and age, they need resurfacing. The Island's arterial pavements are expected to
last 25 years.
Prior Council Review: 2011 - 2016 Transportation Improvement Program, 2009-2010 Budget
Description
2010
2011
2012
Construction
Design Services
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
0
0
Description
2010
Street Fund
0
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
544
100
1131
100
588
0
265
0
2528
200
0
644
1231
588
265
2728
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
0
0
644
1231
588
265
2728
Revenue ($1,000's)
Project Duration
Labor Hours:
AB 4618
Exhibit 3
Page 13
End Date: 10/01/2016
Public Involvement:
As Needed
H - 33
Project Manager:
A. TonellaHowe
Approved ID
Project Description: Repair and reconstruction of existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities (PBF) in conjunction with
arterial street improvement projects. Locations include SE 40th Street (76th Avenue to ICW),
ICW (86th Ave. to SE 53rd), ICW (SE 40th to 86th Ave.), Mercerwood Dr. (Gallagher Hill Rd. to
EMW) and SE 53rd Place (ICW to EMW).
Project Image/Map:
Business Need: Ongoing effort to upgrade existing non-motorized facilities as part of implementing the
Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities Plan.
Existing Conditions: There are existing facilities in need of rehabilitation to improve non-motorized routes
throughout the island.
Prior Council Review: 2011 - 2016 Transportation Improvement Program
Description
2010
2011
2012
Construction
Design Services
Project Management
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total
0
0
Description
2010
Street Fund
0
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
94
10
5
115
14
7
178
19
9
59
7
4
446
50
25
0
109
136
206
70
521
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
0
0
109
136
206
70
521
Revenue ($1,000's)
Project Duration
Labor Hours: 75
H - 36
AB 4618
Exhibit 3
Page 14
End Date: 12/31/2012
Public Involvement:
As Needed
ICW/SE 40th to 86th Ave Water System Impvmts.
WW114R
Approved ID
Project Manager: R. Lin
Project Description: Replace the 6-inch asbestos cement (AC) water main with an 8-inch ductile iron (DI) water main.
Fire hydrants, valves, and water services will be replaced as well.
Project Image/Map:
Business Need: Investment in these improvements will provide a safe and cost effective water distribution
system.
Existing Conditions: Replace aging pipe before the overlay of Island Crest Way begins.
Prior Council Review: 2009 -2010 Budget and 2010 TIP Updates
Description
2010
2011
2012
Construction
Design Services
Project Management
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
75
37
Total
0
0
2010
0
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
450
0
78
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
450
75
115
112
528
0
0
0
640
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Total
0
112
528
0
0
0
640
Revenue ($1,000's)
Description
Utilities - Water
Project Duration
Staff Responsible: Rona Lin
Labor Hours: 750
AB 4618
Exhibit 3
Page 15
End Date: 08/30/2013
Public Involvement:
As Needed
H - 83
This page intentionally left blank AB 4618
Exhibit 3
Page 16
AB 4618
Exhibit 4
Page 17
450,000
115,000
139,958
Pedestrian & Bicycle Facilities - New Facilities
Other Transportation Activities and Management
-
144,817
140,000
45,000
120,000
1,115,000
$
$
200,000 $
$ 1,396,163
-
472,997
147,900
120,800
471,200
108,700
713,700
304,030
$
200,000 $
504,030
$
1,596,163 $
(1,092,133)
-
461,172
100,000
156,050
151,900
45,000
135,700
(388,328)
(84,298) $
200,000 $
$
504,030 $
115,702
-
447,337
164,700
133,300
397,800
205,800
658,000
115,702 $
(941,111) $
200,000 $
(741,111) $
(856,813)
-
431,680
1,793,985
173,700
140,000
305,000
70,000
335,000
-
550,400
(289,546)
200,000
(89,546)
651,565
(741,111)
$ 1,574,100
764,400 $
646,800
2016
Forecast
$ 2,225,665
1,666,650 $
$ 2,970,800
508,800 $
1,300,800
2015
Forecast
$ 2,113,987
1,548,750 $
$ 2,398,250
706,700 $
679,600
2014
Forecast
$ 2,009,922
1,383,470 $
$ 2,948,600
2,059,830 $
(463,667)
2013
Forecast
$ 1,856,467
471,000 $
$ 1,596,163
200,000 $
$ 1,859,830
$
Need to completely remove EMW Shoulders for this to balance.
Maintains STREET funding policy of Inflation + 1%
Available Fund Balance
Working Capital Reserve
Reserves
(1,302,981)
$ 2,059,830
-
482,650
1,089,500 $
$ 2,035,817
3,362,811 $
Change in Fund Balance
$
Ending Fund Balance
Beginning Fund Balance
Fund Balance
$ 2,888,943
350,600
Pedestrian & Bicycle Facilities - Reinvestment
Total Street Fund Expenditures
170,000
1,183,385
2012
Budget
$ 1,572,150
480,000 $
$
Expenditures
Residential Streets Preservation Program
241,587
$ 1,585,962
Total Revenues
Grants - TIP (Transportation Improvement Board)
854,375 $
490,000
$
2011
Budget
Fuel Tax
Real Estate Excise Tax - 2nd Quarter Cent
Revenues
Description
2011 - 2016
Street Fund Balance
Detail of Expenditures
2011-2016
Description of Projects
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
Budget
Budget
Forecast
Forecast
Forecast
Forecast
Residential Street Overlays
$
Chip Seal Pilot Program
Sub-total Residential Street Preservation
378,000
$
471,000
102,000
$
-
$
480,000
$
$
1,183,385
$
471,000
706,700
$
$
706,700
508,800
$
$
508,800
764,400
$
550,400
$
550,400
$
764,400
-
Town Center Street Improvements
Town Center Streets - Traffic Signals (carry-over)
Town Center Streets - Overlay
- $
-
-
Town Center Streets - 80th Ave., SE 29th and 32nd
-
Sub-total Town Center Street Reconstructn
$ 1,183,385
$
-
$
$
70,000
- $
679,600
-
$
- $
- $
-
-
-
-
100,000
646,800
-
679,600
$
100,000
$
646,800
$
-
70,000
$
70,000
$
70,000
$
70,000
Arterial Streets Improvements
Arterial Preservation Program
SE 40th Street (76th Ave to ICW) (N11)
70,000
$
-
-
543,700
-
-
-
100,000
1,045,000
-
-
-
-
Island Crest Way (SE 40th to 86th Ave) - Phase 2
-
-
100,000
1,130,800
-
-
Mercerwood Drive (Gallagher Hill to EMW) (N13)
-
-
-
100,000
588,000
-
SE 53rd Place
-
-
-
-
-
265,000
170,000
$ 1,115,000
$
713,700
$ 1,300,800
- $
108,700
Island Crest Way (86th Ave to 53rd Place) - Phase 1
Sub-total Arterial Street Improvements
$
$
658,000
$
335,000
Pedestrian & Bicycle Facilities - Reinvestment
SE 40th Street (76th Ave to ICW) (N11)
$
Island Crest Way - Pedestrian Crossings
- $
$
- $
- $
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
135,700
-
-
350,600
-
-
Island Crest Way (86th Ave to 53rd Place) - Phase 1
-
120,000
-
Island Crest Way (SE 40th to 86th Ave) - Phase 2
-
-
-
Mercerwood Drive (Gallagher Hill to EMW) (N13)
-
-
-
-
205,800
-
SE 53rd Place
-
-
-
-
-
70,000
Sub-total PBF - Reinvestment
$
350,600
$
120,000
$
45,000
$
45,000
$
108,700
$
135,700
$
205,800
$
70,000
45,000
$
45,000
$
45,000
$
45,000
Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities - New Facilities
PBF Plan Implementation
$
Safe Routes to School
100,000
-
100,000
-
-
East Mercer Way Shoulders - Phase 7-9
305,000
-
326,200
-
352,800
-
-
-
-
-
-
260,000
SE 53rd Place
Sub-total PBF - New Facilities
-
$
450,000
$
45,000
$
471,200
$
45,000
$
397,800
$
305,000
$
35,000
$
35,000
$
36,400
$
37,900
$
39,400
$
41,000
Pavement Marking
Guardrail Development
Maintenance - Right of Way Tree Maintenance
Sub-total Other Transportation Projects
-
25,000
-
25,000
-
-
80,000
80,000
84,400
89,000
93,900
99,000
$
115,000
$
140,000
$
120,800
$
151,900
$
133,300
$
140,000
$
109,583
$
113,267
$
119,900
$
126,500
$
133,500
$
140,800
Other Transportation Activities
Other Project Management Expenses
DSG - Right of Way Inspections
Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program Developmt
Sub-total Other Transportation Activities
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS
$
25,375
26,550
28,000
29,550
31,200
5,000
5,000
-
-
-
139,958
$ 2,888,943
$
144,817
$ 2,035,817
$
147,900
$ 2,948,600
$
156,050
$ 2,398,250
$
164,700
$ 2,970,800
32,900
$
173,700
$ 1,574,100
NOTE: Project cost estimates above are preliminary budget estimates and are subject to change depending on final definition of project scope and design. Detailed
engineering estimates are made after City Council and general public review and input has occurred and been incorporated into the project scope and designs.
AB 4618
Exhibit 4
Page 18
SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM
Detail of Expenditures for 2011 - 2016
Forecast
PROJECTS
A.
COMMENTS
UTIL WORK
2 Years funding combined for 2010
Water / Storm
Proposed Biennial Budget
2010
2011
1. Residential Street Overlays
1,078,538
2. Chip Seal Pilot Program
2014
2015
2016
378,500
470,500
706,700
508,800
764,400
550,400
$1,078,538
$480,000
$470,500
$706,700
$508,800
$764,400
$550,400
Town Center Street Improvements
1. 78th Avenue SE Town Center Plaza
4,291
2. Town Center Traffic Signals (SE 27th Street)
3. Town Center Streets - Overlay
4. Town Center Streets - 80th Ave., SE 29th, and SE 32nd
1,186,020
679,600
Project pushed out 1 year - Redevelopment timing
Construction split and Phase 2 delayed to 2017
100,000
646,800
$1,190,311
$0
$0
$679,600
$100,000
$646,800
$0
83,487
5,000
70,000
70,000
70,000
70,000
70,000
70,000
100,000
1,045,500
1,130,800
100,000
588,000
$1,300,800
$658,000
Water / Storm
Sub-total Town Center Street Reconstruction
C.
2013
101,500
Sub-total Residential Street Preservation Program
B.
2012
Arterial Streets Improvements
1. Arterial Preservation Program
2. SE 40th Street Corridor Improvement Construction
3. 72nd Avenue SE (SE 24th to SE 32nd)
4. Island Crest Way Corridor Project
5. SE 40th Street (76th Ave to ICW)
6. Island Crest Way (86th Avenue to 53rd Place) - Phase 1
5,000
225,000
Scope reduced to signals at SE 42nd and SE 47th Streets
543,700
Project pushed out 2 years
Water Main
7. Island Crest Way (SE 40th to 86th Avenue) - Phase 2
8. Mercerwood Drive (Gallagher Hill Rd to EMW)
100,000
Water Main
Water Main
9. SE 53rd Place
265,000
Sub-total Arterial Street Improvements
D.
$318,487
$170,000
$1,115,500
$713,700
1. Island Crest Way (SE 71st to SE 78th)
2. SE 40th Street (76th Ave to ICW)
10,134
108,700
Project pushed out 2 years
3. Island Crest Way (86th Avenue to 53rd Place) - Phase 1
120,200
4. Island Crest Way (SE 40th to 86th Avenue) - Phase 2
135,700
5. Mercerwood Drive (Gallagher Hill Rd to EMW)
205,800
6. SE 53rd Place
70,000
Sub-total Pedestrian & Bicycle Facilities (PBF) - Reinvestment
E.
$10,134
$0
$120,200
$108,700
$135,700
$205,800
$70,000
35,000
45,000
45,000
45,000
45,000
45,000
45,000
Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities (PBF) - New Facilities
1a. PBF Plan Implementation
1b. PBF Plan Implementation - CPPW Grant Funded
1c. PBF Plan Implementation - To be defined (currently unfunded)
Funding level increased to $45K starting in 2011.
3. East Mercer Way - Phase 6 (SE 53rd Place to approx. SE 56th)
45,000
Project will only be done if grant is received.
100,000
Unfunded (or fund with savings from Sewer Lk Line Project)
2. Safe Routes to School
6,926
Adjusted to reflect Bid Award by Council on May 3, 2010
100,000
100,000
304,500
326,200
312,689
4. East Mercer Way - Phase 7 - 9
352,800
5. SE 53rd Place
260,000
Sub-total Pedestrian & Bicycle Facilities (PBF) - New Facilities
F.
$354,615
$494,500
$145,000
$471,200
$45,000
$397,800
$305,000
34,043
35,000
35,000
36,400
37,900
39,400
41,000
125,989
132,900
140,200
147,900
156,000
164,600
173,700
$192,657
$167,900
$200,200
$184,300
$218,900
$204,000
$214,700
128,215
142,015
149,825
188,066
166,760
175,932
185,608
1. Pavement Marking Repacement
2. Mercerway Signage
5,000
3. Guardrail Development
Reduced to reflect Bid Award on EMW Shoulders on May 3, 2010
4. ROW - Tree Maintenance
Sub-total Other Transportation Projects
G.
$335,000
27,625
25,000
25,000
Other Transportation Activities and Management
1. Other Project Management Expenses
2. Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities (PBF) Plan
6,038
3. DSG - Right of Way Inspections
27,990
29,600
31,200
32,899
34,700
36,600
38,600
4. DSG - Transportation Manager
38,375
40,500
42,700
45,100
47,600
50,200
53,000
5,000
5,000
5. Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program Development
Sub-total Other Transportation Activities and Management
TOTAL PROJECT COSTS
INFLATION FACTOR (Applied to all Projects) - Inflated projects are shown in bold print.
$200,618
$217,115
$228,725
$266,065
$249,060
$262,732
$277,208
$3,345,360
$1,529,515
$2,280,125
$3,130,264
$2,558,261
$3,139,532
$1,752,308
1.5%
3%
4%
4%
4%
4%
AB 4618
Exhibit 5
Page 19
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE - BUSINESS
REVITALIZATION COLLABORATION
AB 4619
March 21, 2011
Regular Business
Receive report. No action required.
DEPARTMENT OF
City Manager (J. Mason)
COUNCIL LIAISON
n/a
EXHIBITS
1. Mercer Island Green Business Program Package
$
n/a
AMOUNT BUDGETED
$
n/a
$
n/a
SUMMARY
At the January 2010 Planning Session, Council directed staff to work with the Mercer Island Chamber of
Commerce to develop opportunities for property owners, retail businesses and the City to improve the
business environment in the Town Center.
In the past year, the Mercer Island Chamber has held several discussions with property managers and
business owners to identify the challenges that impact local businesses. The Chamber met with a group of
businesses several times last year to discuss ways to improve business visibility and improve retail traffic. In
these discussions, the group urged the Chamber to focus on activities that incorporated several elements:
1. Identify ways to include activities that include community outreach and local charities;
2. Focus on opportunities that utilize existing community resources and volunteers; and
3. Identify a specific focus that businesses can work on collaboratively with the Chamber, the City and
community organizations to positively impact their operations.
The Chamber focused on several specific activities within the last year to improve the visibility of our Island
businesses.
Supporting Local Youth
In November 2010, the Chamber worked with local businesses to support Island youth non-profits: the
Mercer Island Boys and Girls Club, Mercer Island Youth and Family Services, Youth Theatre Northwest,
and the Mercer Island Schools Foundation. Residents were encouraged to shop locally and support both
the local businesses and these organizations. Local businesses displayed the fundraising campaign posters
and asked Island patrons to support local youth with local dollars. A portion of the revenues from
participating businesses were divided equally among these four organizations and were used to support
their current services and on-going activities.
The business members on the Chamber’s subcommittee who worked on the campaign favored the idea of a
fundraising program that allowed all businesses to participate. There are many businesses who would want
to do another fundraising endeavor that could potentially bring Island shoppers to the downtown, but they
Page 1
need a person or group willing to take this on. This year, the Chamber, MIYFS and businesses will discuss
the possibility of revisiting a program with a more coordinated effort and more consistent protocols. In all,
this effort brought in under $1000.
Shopping from the Heart
This February, in cooperation with Mercer Island Youth and Family Services (MIYFS), the Giving from the
Heart (GFTH) campaign included local business participation in a "Shopping from the Heart" day. This
year's GFTH breakfast not only raised the needed funding for community service programs, but partnered
with local businesses to encourage the community to eat, shop, or get a service at an Island business.
Since this was the first year, GFTH limited the opportunity to participate in “Shopping from the Heart” to ten
businesses. Each business agreed to give 25% of their proceeds for that day to the MIYFS Foundation.
The efforts of MIYFS and local merchants encouraged citizens to explore retail options around the Island
and realize that patronizing local businesses helps support the community. As a result, MIYFS raised a total
of $5,000 through the Shopping from the Heart day and of the ten participating Mercer Island businesses
several reported a significant increase in foot traffic and sales activity during the campaign.
Third Thursday Art Walks
The Mercer Island Third Thursday Art Walk is a fun, family event designed to promote local artists and walkability in the town center. Last year the event ran every third Thursday from May to October. A partnership
between the Mercer Island Visual Arts League, the Mercer Island Arts Council, the Chamber and local
businesses, the Art Walks encourage people to meet local business owners, enjoy food, entertainment and
local culture.
Last year more than 15 businesses participated in the monthly event, however it did not result in a
measurable increase in business activity. The Chamber, the Arts Council and local businesses are using
the lessons learned from last season to develop a more robust program that includes better publicity and
added music and entertainment. There will be four Third Thursday Art Walks this year. Each monthly event
will also focus on a specific area (quadrant) of the business district. The smaller walk-able areas will
encourage more interaction between attendees and participating businesses. In addition to showcasing
businesses in the Town Center during the traditional Art Walks, the business in the South End Shopping
Center will host the first Third Thursday event, in May, focusing on the family atmosphere of the
neighborhood. This reflects an ongoing effort to include the South End businesses in the greater business
community on the Island.
Take Time to Read
From February to May this year, the King County Library System’s “Take Time to Read” campaign features
more than 100 gigantic book cover posters placed in the windows of businesses in eight King County
communities including Mercer Island. Each poster is accompanied by an audio tour guide available by cell
phone or MP3 download as a part of the first-ever book cover walking tour. This effort is turning local
businesses into outdoor art galleries.
Placed by the King County Library System (KCLS) in collaboration with the Mercer Island Chamber and
local businesses this effort to promote reading will also encourage residents and visitors to get out and walk
around the Town Center as a part of the tour. The hope is that this campaign will help to attract additional
business activity in The Town Center. The Take Time to Read program is sponsored by the King County
Library System Foundation and six local Island businesses are currently displaying posters from March 1 to
May 30 as a part of the campaign and walking tour.
Mercer Island Green Business Program
The Mercer Island Green Business Program involves a partnership with the Mercer Island Chamber of
Commerce, the City of Mercer Island, the Green Ribbon Commission, Island Vision, local businesses and
the community. Members of this partnership are working together to help small businesses take action to
conserve resources, prevent pollution, minimize waste, attract local patrons and to be environmentally
Page 2
responsible. The Green Business program promotes and encourages the adoption of best management
practices by businesses with the aim to reduce their environmental footprint. Business are encouraged to
submit information regarding their sustainable activities from a variety of achievable options in six
categories that include waste prevention, waste reduction and recycling, energy conservation, pollution and
hazardous waste, water conservation, and transportation. Businesses that submit one or more categories
will be recognized as a Mercer Island Green Business. Exhibit 1 details the program guidelines.
The group has reviewed several national and local green business programs to identify a template for a
successful program. Through outreach and communication with local business the Mercer Island Chamber
has identified specific challenges that relate to waste reduction and energy efficiency.
The Green Business program provides a mechanism to accomplish several objectives:
• Help businesses identify ways to reduce waste and energy use;
• Help businesses realize savings through these reductions;
• Develop a forum for discussion on sustainability and green businesses activities to share information
and ideas and build collaboration between businesses;
• Encourage residents to be economical, socially and environmentally sustainable by shopping locally
and patronizing green businesses; and
• Promote businesses through a MI Green Business web page that will be linked to other websites
including the City’s, Chamber’s, GRC, Island Vision and several others yet to be determined. This
promotional partnership benefits all participants and offers free publicity to businesses and
organizations alike.
As a part of the Green Business program the Chamber and the City are also facilitating discussions
between Allied Waste and local businesses to find ways to reduce barriers to recycling and make it more
cost effective for both property owners and individual businesses. Allied Waste is committed to community
education and to provide the assistance to help our businesses identify and achieve their waste reduction
goals. This program supports those businesses that want to be environmentally responsible by recycling
and reducing waste and energy consumption. This program will promote shopping locally on Mercer Island
and taps into the growing interest in supporting sustainable efforts across the community. The goal is to
empower businesses and help them increase their bottom line through improved efficiencies and increased
customer patronage.
There has been significant interest in the Green Business Program from the local business community and
we anticipate that there will be approximately 25 businesses certified as Mercer Island Green Businesses
when the program is launched at the April 7 Mercer Island Chamber luncheon. In coming months the City
and the Chamber along with volunteers from the Green Ribbon Commission and Island Vision will continue
outreach to expand our green business network and will begin promotion of a shop local program focused
on our green businesses.
Next Steps
There has been positive feedback from businesses as a result of the communications and outreach.
Several businesses have communicated that they are pleased to have the opportunity to discuss their
issues and are encouraged that they have a voice with the City and the Chamber. Throughout 2011 the City
will continue to work with the Chamber and community organizations to assist businesses and identify
strategies that will increase their visibility and stimulate the business environment. Later this year the
Farmers Market will be working on collaborative efforts with local businesses.
RECOMMENDATION
Deputy City Manager
No action required. Discuss report
Page 3
MERCER ISLAND GREEN BUSINESS
Welcome to the
MERCER ISLAND GREEN BUSINESS Program!! MERCER ISLAND GREEN
BUSINESS is sponsored by the M
Mercer Island Chamber of Commerce and the City of Mercer
Island, with support by the MI Green Ribbon Commission and IslandVision.
The
MERCER ISLAND GREEN BUSINESS program has grown out of the City's commitment
comm
to
Sustainability. The City and C
Chamber would like to support and encourage our local
businesses that are showing rresponsibility to the environment, by aiding them in how to be
a green business.
Within this program you will find a variety of achievable options to get your business
certified and recognized as a MERCER ISLAND GREEN BUSINESS. This program supports
support
those businesses that want to do the right thing environmentally by acknowledging you
for starting to recycle, educating your employees on how to reduce waste and more.
more This
program promotes 'shopping locally' on Mercer Island and tap
taps into the growing interest in
supporting sustainable efforts across the community. Greening your business can save you
money and attract new customer business.
HOW WILL PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS BE RECOGNIZED?
Participants will be recognized in a variety of ways.
•
•
•
•
•
•
Mention in Mercer Island
sland Chamber of Commerce e-newsletter
Listing on City of Mercer Island website
Recognition at City Council meeting
Spotlight at Summer Celebration! booths
Certificates Awarded
Window Clings to post in business
WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS?
You get FREE advertising from the city and the Mercer Island Chamber of
Commerce!
You SAVE MONEY on your trash, water and energy bills by learning how to conserve
resources.
The program gives you a BETTER IMAGE by showing the community that you care
about being green.
You receive FREE assistance that’s convenient and time
time-saving!
Your employees will enjoy a safer workplace and will have one more reason to take
pride in working for you.
AB 4619
Exhibit 1
Page 1
WHAT DOES IT SAY TO THE COMMUNITY IF YOU ARE A GREEN BUSINESS?
It says “We are actively working to show our environmental responsibility to our
community by complying with all environmental regulations. We are making every effort to
conserve paper, energy and water while practicing measures that prevent pollution and
waste. We are an environmentally responsible business.”
HOW DOES THE PROGRAM WORK?
The program has six categories for eligibility. You choose one or more categories to
complete and you will receive a Green Business certification.
•
•
•
WASTE PREVENTION
WASTE REDUCTION AND RECYCLING
ENERGY CONSERVATION
•
•
•
POLLUTION AND HAZARDOUS WASTE
WATER CONSERVATION
TRANSPORTATION
We applaud you for taking action to run your business more environmentally! As this
program is new to the city, we plan to watch it grow and pledge to work with your
individual business on how to best suit the program to you! We welcome feedback and
encourage you to take as many steps as you can to green your business.
If your business already has a green certification from an organization like Envirostars or
Green Seal Certification, our program will accept your certification from them and award
you a
MERCER ISLAND GREEN BUSINESS Certificate. At the end of the application you can
find a list of programs we accept. If you have certification from a program not listed, please
contact us with the name and we will review and consider it.
GREEN CERTIFICATION PROGRAMS WE ACCEPT
Envirostars
Green Seal Certification
Blue Sky Cleaners
Others will be considered
Sponsored by:
Mercer Island Chamber of Commerce
City of Mercer Island
Supported by:
MI Green Ribbon Commission
IslandVision
AB 4619
Exhibit 1
Page 2
CATEGORY 1 - WASTE PREVENTION (Ideal for Offices)
Waste prevention is any activity that eliminates or reduces solid waste that would
otherwise be thrown out or recycled.
Check all that apply. A minimum of (6) activities from any of the three sections are
required to qualify for this category.
Section 1: In Office Areas
Make double-sided copies or reuse single-sided pages for drafts and note paper.
Before printing copies, proof read on your computer and do a one page test of
copier settings.
Avoid making extra copies. Make extras later if you need them.
Post recycling signage on every waste bin and at every copier.
Reuse office supplies such as old letter head, file folders, binders, and envelopes,
and set up a “reuse station”.
Make telephone directories or certain reference manuals available online
instead of buying paper copies.
Make memos and reports available online, such as through email.
Share publications or memos rather than having several copies.
Store old documents on CDs or DVDs to minimize the number of hard copies
needed.
Encourage employees to communicate via email.
Ask to be removed from unwanted mailing lists to be reduce junk mail.
Keep your mailing lists up-to-date by requesting corrections and offering the
recipient the option of being removed.
Avoid cover sheets for faxes. Use a rubber stamp especially made for fax
transmittal.
Create a central filing system instead of maintaining duplicate files for each
employee.
Provide information on recycling and waste reduction for new staff training.
Include recycling collection as part of janitorial duties.
Other:
Involving employees, customers, suppliers and or the public in preventing waste, recycling
and using recycled products can increase the impact of your efforts.
AB 4619
Exhibit 1
Page 5
Section 2: Purchasing and Shipping Practices
Purchase products in concentrated form or bulk.
Reuse packaging materials from incoming shipments – such as boxes,
newspaper, tissue, foam pads, and polystyrene “peanuts” – as alternatives to
buying new packing materials.
Return, reuse, and repair wooden pallets and crates.
When billing customers offer an option to pay online.
Repair rather than replace equipment. Buy energy efficient ones if you need to
replace it.
Invest in equipment that prevents waste, such as: high quality, durable,
repairable equipment; copiers that automatically make double-sided copies;
computer printers that do not discharge unused sheets of paper; and dish washing
equipment (along with durable cups, dishware, and fax cartridges).
Use rechargeable batteries for electronics; use solar-powered calculators.
Purchase durable, reusable products instead of disposables; use refillable pens
and pencils; install reusable furnace and air conditioner filters.
Other:
Section 3: General
Recycle your alkaline, NiCad, cell phone, and button batteries or use
rechargeable batteries. ***See Resource Page
Donate used equipment, furniture, and supplies to charitable organizations or
schools.
Start a “reusable exchange” in your building or office park.
Advertise items on www.craigslist.com or www.freecycle.org.
Advertise surplus and reusable items through the Industrial Materials. Exchange
(IMEX) for free.
Other:
Congratulations! You have completed the Waste Prevention Category.
Please review your application and submit to the Mercer Island Chamber of
Commerce. Staff will review your application and contact you soon.
AB 4619
Exhibit 1
Page 6
CATEGORY 2 - WASTE REDUCTION/RECYCLING
(Great for Businesses, Restaurants and Coffee Shops)
Waste reduction and recycling not only saves your business money in disposal costs, but
they are good for the environment. Recycling lessens garbage, conserves resources, reduces
pollution and saves water.
Check all that apply. Please complete items from 3 sections listed below to
qualify for this category.
Section 1: Recycle a minimum of (3) of these items, check all that apply:
Mixed Paper
Yard waste
Cardboard
Food scraps** See Section 3
Aluminum cans
Tin/steel cans
Ferrous metals
Wood debris/pallets
Glass bottles/jars
Plastic bottles/tubs
Other:
Other:
Section 2: Purchase a minimum of (2) “recycled content”* products, check all
that apply.
Copy paper
File folders
Letterhead
Garbage bags
Envelopes
Cardboard boxes
Toilet paper
Paper towels
Other
Other
*Recycled products are made from recycled materials. Look for the label “recycled-content”
on products you have.
AB 4619
Exhibit 1
Page 7
Section 3: Coffee Shops/Restaurants (Food establishments Only). Minimum of
(2), check all that apply.
Discontinue use of styrofoam and non-recyclable To-Go containers.
Use recyclable or compostable to-go containers.
Begin composting.
Other:
Composting is the same as recycling, but for food. Both Cedar Grove and Allied Waste can
collect your food scraps and turn them into rich soil for planting. This keeps waste out of
the landfills and recycles our food. You can compost any type of food scrap from melon
rinds, muffins, chicken, ice cream to avocado pits and anything in between. (List of what is
compostable attached.) You can also compost napkins, paper towels, wax lined boxes and
cups like pizza boxes and more. ***See Resource Page
Involving employees, customers, suppliers, and/or the public in preventing waste, recycling,
and using recycled products can increase the impact of your efforts.
Congratulations! You have completed the Waste Reduction/Recycling Category.
AB 4619
Exhibit 1
Page 8
CATEGORY 3 - ENERGY EFFICIENCY
Energy efficiency can be an integral part of the success of any business.
Enhancements to energy systems and implementing sound energy management
practices can improve comfort and productivity, as well as save energy and money.
Section 1: Energy Reduction Action Items. Complete a minimum of (3)
required to qualify, check all that apply.
Set thermostat below at 69 degrees.
Install a programmable thermostat.
Replace half of your businesses’ incandescent bulbs with energy efficient bulbs.
Install one low flow kitchen or bath fixture.
When an old appliance dies, replace it with an energy star or high efficiency unit .
Use energy efficient exit signs, LED are a great option.
Eliminate the use of personal heaters.
Sign up for Green Power through PSE:
http://www.pse.com/energyEnvironment/renewableenergy4/Pages/GreenPowerProgram.aspx
Other:
Section 2: Ways to start reducing energy use today. Complete a minimum of
(4) required to qualify, check all that apply.
Turn off the lights when you leave a room.
Unplug phone chargers, appliances and other cords when the object is not in
use. (“Phantom Load” is when something is not in use, but plugged in (like a cell
phone charger) and continues to draw electricity.)
Turn computer off or to sleep mode when you are not using it.
Dress in temperature appropriate clothes so you don’t have to adjust the
thermostat out of scale with the season.
Use your window coverings to keep heat in or cold out.
Complete PSE’s online energy audit.
Turn off the lights in your business when not needed
Reduce heating and air conditioning during unoccupied hours.
Turn off machines and equipment when not needed.
Make sure all automatic controls are set properly.
Other:
AB 4619
Exhibit 1
Page 9
Section 3: Grants and Rebates (Optional). Check all that apply.
Complete a qualifying rebate from Puget Sound Energy.
Complete a customized grant from Puget Sound Energy.
Qualify for Energy Star certification .
Other:
Complete a qualifying rebate from Puget Sound Energy. Puget Sound Energy offers
financial incentives for various cost-effective projects and new equipment
purchases that save energy. If you have questions about possible rebate or grant
opportunities that do not fall under the categories listed below, please call a PSE
Energy Advisor at 1-800-562-1482.
Rebate programs which increase the efficiency of your facility include:
• Small Business Lighting
• Occupancy Sensors & Lighting Controls
• High-Efficiency HVAC Unit
• Premium HVAC Roof-top Service
• High-Efficiency Commercial Kitchen Equipment
• High-Efficiency Motors and Variable Speed Drives
-ORComplete a customized grant from Puget Sound Energy. Common qualifying
projects include:
• Customized incentives are available for any energy-saving project that meets
PSE’s cost-effectiveness criteria, including switching energy use from
electricity to natural gas for the same end use. The following incentives are
available for qualifying projects:
• $.30/kWh and $5/therm of annual energy savings – up to 70 percent funding
on mechanical retrofits that save electricity or natural gas.
• $.20/kWh of annual energy savings – up to 50 percent funding for lighting
upgrades
• Lighting Retrofits
• HVAC Systems & Controls
• Building Envelope Upgrades
• Other measures that save electricity or natural gas
-ORENERGY STAR® benchmarked in the top 25 percent for your business type.
Congratulations! You have completed the Energy Efficiency Category.
AB 4619
Exhibit 1
Page 10
CATEGORY 4 – POLLUTION PREVENTION
Pollution prevention is any practice which reduces the amount of a hazardous substance,
pollutant, or contaminant from entering the waste stream or otherwise released to the
environment prior to recycling, treatment, or disposal; and reduces the hazards to public
health and environmental impacts associated with the release of such substances. ***See
Resource Page for some Best Management Practices (BMP’s) that may apply to your
business.
Please complete items from both sections listed below to qualify for this
category.
Section 1: Surface Water Pollution Prevention. Minimum of (2) required,
check all that apply.
Establish a business-specific spill prevention/response program.
Clean catch basins and drainage infrastructure on property once per year.
Stencil “Dump No Waste/Drains to Lake” next to catch basins in parking lot
(stencil available from Public Works Department.
Use commercial car washes to wash business vehicles.
Make sure all business vehicles are in good working order & not leaking fluids.
Garbage and recycling containers lids are closed; are not leaking; and are
located away from storm drains.
Cover and contain any materials stored outdoors.
Implement pesticide-free biological (beneficial insects), cultural (composting,
mulching), or mechanical (hand pulling, pruning) controls in your landscape.
Other:
Section 2: Green Cleaning. Minimum of (2) required, check all that apply.
Use low VOC (volatile organic compound) paint products.
When replacing flooring, install carpet products certified by Green Guard or the
Carpet and Rug Institute. For more information on Green Guard-certified carpet
products.
Use refillable spray bottles instead of disposable aerosol cans.
Require the use of green cleaning products in janitorial contracts.
Use green equivalent alternative recipes to commercial cleaning products.
Sweep rather than hose off outside paved areas.
Other:
Congratulations! You have completed the Pollution Prevention Category.
AB 4619
Exhibit 1
Page 11
CATEGORY 5 - WATER CONSERVATION
Participation in the water conservation category is likely to result in an overall decrease in
your business’ water bill and sewer charges over time, or a stable bill as rates increase over
time. You can also lower your energy bills by reducing the amount of water heated or
cooled. But the benefits of participation go beyond monetary rewards: water conservation
on the part of residents and businesses in our communities ensures a clean, safe, and
reliable water supply for everyone. ***See Resource Page For more information on water
conservation rebates available through the Cascade Water Alliance.
Check all that apply. A minimum of (4) activities are required.
Section 1: Good Housekeeping/Behavior Change.
Employee education – include water conservation policies and procedures in
staff training/orientation.
Recognize employees for offering water conservation ideas and changing
behaviors.
Establish a water conservation suggestion box.
Encourage employees to report leaks.
Encourage employees to wash personal and company vehicles at commercial
carwashes that recycle their water.
Post signage in business encouraging water conservation.
Serve drinking water only upon request (in restaurants and bars).
Monitor and post water usage rates – identify high consumption areas and
develop a reduction plan.
Encourage dry cleanup (sweeping/vacuuming) before using water for final
washing.
Use waterless hand cleaners.
Other:
Section 2: Indoor Improvements
Install faucet aerators/low flow, flush valve, or infrared controlled toilets and
urinals.
Install efficient pre-wash spray valve(s) in commercial kitchen.
Improve kitchen dishwasher efficiency (run only when full, hand scrape, fill
racks to capacity).
Other:
Congratulations! You have completed the Water Conservation Category.
AB 4619
Exhibit 1
Page 12
CATEGORY 6 - TRANSPORTATION/COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION
Commute trip reduction programs in King County result in about 20,000 less vehicles on the
road each day. By participating in the Commute Trip Reduction category, your business will
play a key role in reducing pollution, climate change, energy consumption, and traffic
congestion
Section 1: To qualify, check off two (2) listed below.
Offer incentives to employees who Carpool.
Have all employees register with www.rideshare.com.
Provide incentives for employees who take the bus, light rail or bike.
Meet electronically when possible to eliminate a meeting commute.
Encourage employees to walk to lunch.
Use EcoShift to monitor your Transportation Carbon Footprint changes.
Put up a “ride share/information board” in the employee area.
Educate and encourage employees to sign up for the federal tax credits given to
those who use public transit 80% of the time or the Bike Commuter Tax Credit.
Provide a “transportation alternatives” page on your company’s website with
links to sites such as Metro/King County trip planning, trip reduction programs.
Provide bike racks, lockers and/or showers for employees who bike to work.
Other:
See Back For Section 2.
AB 4619
Exhibit 1
Page 13
Section 2: Optional suggestions.
10% or more employees participate in ridesharing, vanpool, mass transit,
and/or other alternative transportation programs.
Provide an information kiosk with bus schedules and promotional materials.
Designate an office commute trip reduction coordinator.
Offer teleworking or compressed work week schedules.
Offer Flexpass program to employees.
Offer FlexPark program to employees.
Offer Commuter Bonus – voucher for purchase of bus/ferry tickets.
Offer or provide information to employees about the Home Free guarantee.
Offer Preferential Parking – reserved spaces for rideshare/vanpools.
Offer lunch hour/doctor appointment use of company vehicle(s) to employees
using alternative transportation.
Offer lockers/showers for bikers, runners, and walkers.
Offer bicycle parking.
Encourage employees to walk to destinations during breaks/lunches.
Purchase a high fuel efficiency vehicle when replacing business vehicles.
Display information on urban bike trails and other alternative transportation
routes.
Other:
Congratulations! You have completed the Transportation/Commute Trip Reduction
Category.
AB 4619
Exhibit 1
Page 14
All meetings are held in the City Hall Council Chambers unless otherwise noted. Special Meetings and Study Sessions begin at 6:00 pm. Regular Meetings begin at 7:00 pm. MARCH 21 Item Type Topic/Presenter Time Regular Business Briefing – MISD’s 21st Century Facilities Planning Committee – R. Conrad 20 Regular Business Design Commission Bylaws Revisions – G. Steirer 15 rd
Regular Business Affordable Housing Property Tax Exemption Ordinance (3 Reading) – T. Stewart 15 Regular Business Island Crest Way Corridor Discussion – A. Tonella‐Howe 60 Regular Business Chamber of Commerce – Business Revitalization Collaboration – J. Mason 45 APRIL 4 Item Type Topic/Presenter Time Consent Calendar Interlocal Agreements with SCORE and Snohomish County for Jail Services – E. Holmes ‐‐ Regular Business First Hill Water Improvements Bond Bid Update – C. Corder 15 Regular Business Open Space Conservancy Trust Annual Report – Debbie Bertlin/P. West 20 Regular Business CCMV Marketing & Branding – Jana Raasch 20 APRIL 14 (THURSDAY) – SPECIAL JOINT MEETING Item Type Topic/Presenter Time Joint Meeting with the Mercer Island School District Board (at MISD) APRIL 18 Item Type Topic/Presenter Consent Calendar Roadside Shoulder Improvements East Mercer Way Phase 7 Project Bid Award – C. Morris ‐‐ Consent Calendar Town Center Traffic Signals Project Bid Award – P. Yamashita ‐‐ Consent Calendar Chip Sealing Pilot Project Authorization to Bid – C. Morris ‐‐ Regular Business Shoreline Master Program Update ‐ Informational Session – T. Stewart 90 Regular Business Time th
4 Quarter 2010 Financial Status Report & Budget Adjustments – C. Corder Items highlighted in green are on the 2011 Council Work Plan All agendas and items are subject to change 1 30 Updated: 3/17/2011 10:13:04 AM MAY 2 Item Type Topic/Presenter Study Session PBF Plan Implementation Discussion – A. Tonella‐Howe 60 Consent Calendar ‐‐ ‐‐ Consent Calendar Kiwanis Fireworks Permit – C. Tubbs Interlocal Agreement for Shared Emergency Rapid Response Apparatus (SERRA) – S. Heitman Sub Basin 6 Project Bid Award‐ F. Gu Regular Business Shoreline Master Program Update – Informational Session ‐ T. Stewart 60 Regular Business Parks and Recreation Events Funding Report – B. Fletcher 30 Regular Business Town Center Partnerships ‐ Transit Parking Feasibility Study – J. Mason 45 Regular Business ARCH 2011 Housing Trust Fund Recommendations – T. Stewart 15 Consent Calendar Time ‐‐ MAY 16 Item Type Topic/Presenter Time Study Session WSDOT/Sound Transit Briefing – J. Mason 60 Consent Calendar 1st Quarter 2011 Financial Status Report & Budget Adjustments – C. Corder ‐‐ Regular Business Shoreline Master Program Update – Resolution Adoption ‐ T. Stewart 60 Regular Business Nordstrom Long Plat Alteration (1st Reading) – G. Steirer 45 Public Hearing Present Draft 2012‐2017 Transportation Improvement Program – P. Yamashita 90 JUNE 6 Item Type Topic/Presenter Time st
Regular Business Fire Marshall Code Revisions (1 Reading) – T. Stewart 15 Regular Business Shoreline Master Program Update – Resolution Adoption (if needed) – T. Stewart 15 Regular Business 2010 Mercer Island Dashboard Report – C. Corder 30 nd
Regular Business Nordstrom Long Plat Alteration (2 Reading) – G. Steirer 15 Regular Business 2012‐2017 Transportation Improvement Program Adoption – P. Yamashita 60 Regular Business Planning Commission Work Plan – T. Stewart 30 JUNE 20 Item Type Topic/Presenter Study Session Sewer Code Discussion – G. Boettcher 60 Regular Business Fire Marshall Code Revisions (2nd Reading) – T. Stewart 15 Regular Business Regular Business Regular Business Time Ordinances for Amendments to MICC Title 19 Regarding Design Review of Wireless Communications Facilities (1st Reading) – G. Steirer Ordinances for Amendments to MICC Title 19 Regarding Minor Exterior Modifications in the Town Center (1st Reading) – G. Steirer Tent City – K. Knight/T. Stewart/E. Holmes Items highlighted in green are on the 2011 Council Work Plan All agendas and items are subject to change 2 45 45 45 Updated: 3/17/2011 10:13:04 AM JUNE 18 (SATURDAY) – SPECIAL MEETING 2011 Mini‐Planning Session JULY 5 (TUESDAY) Item Type Topic/Presenter Time Special Business King County Councilmember Jan Hague Visit 10 Regular Business Sewer Lake Line Maintenance Evaluation – G. Boettcher 30 Regular Business North Star – Open Space Acquisition Program – B. Fletcher 30 Regular Business Island Crest Park Ball Field Turf – B. Fletcher 45 Regular Business Recycle Center Site Future Use – J. Mason 40 JULY 18 Item Type Regular Business Regular Business Regular Business Regular Business Topic/Presenter Time st
Impervious Surface ‐ Single Family Residential (1 Reading)– T. Stewart 45 Ordinances for Amendments to MICC Title 19 Regarding Design Review of Wireless Communications Facilities (2nd Reading) – G. Steirer Ordinances for Amendments to MICC Title 19 Regarding Minor Exterior Modifications in the Town Center (2nd Reading) – G. Steirer PSE Gas Franchise – J. Mason 15 15 20 AUGUST 1 Item Type Topic/Presenter Time nd
Regular Business Impervious Surface ‐ Single Family Residential (2 reading) – T. Stewart 20 Regular Business Sustainability Work Plan – J. Mason 20 Regular Business Senior Citizen Definition for Programs and Services (Update) – B. Fletcher 20 Regular Business st
Small Works Ordinance (1 reading) – K. Knight/A. Tonella‐Howe 15 AUGUST 15 Potentially Canceled SEPTEMBER 6 (TUESDAY) Item Type Topic/Presenter Regular Business WSDOT/Sound Transit Mitigation for Mobility Loss – J. Mason Regular Business Time nd
60 2 Quarter 2011 Financial Status Report & Budget Adjustments – C. Corder nd
30 Regular Business Small Works Ordinance (2 reading) – K. Knight/A. Tonella‐Howe 30 Regular Business North Star – Open Space Acquisition Program – B. Fletcher 45 Items highlighted in green are on the 2011 Council Work Plan All agendas and items are subject to change 3 Updated: 3/17/2011 10:13:04 AM SEPTEMBER 19 Item Type Topic/Presenter Time Regular Business Communities that Care Update – C. Goodwin 40 Regular Business Underage Home Drinking Ordinance – Policy Discussion – S. Moloney 45 OCTOBER 3 Item Type Topic/Presenter Time Regular Business Long term Pool Strategy – Update Report – B. Fletcher OCTOBER 17 Item Type Regular Business Topic/Presenter Time st
Underage Home Drinking Ordinance (1 Reading) – S. Moloney 30 NOVEMBER 7 Item Type Topic/Presenter Time Regular Business Mega House Ordinance Discussion – T. Stewart 60 Regular Business Sustainability Work Plan – J. Mason 20 NOVEMBER 21 Item Type Topic/Presenter Time rd
Regular Business Regular Business 2011‐2012 Mid‐Biennial Budget Review: 3 Quarter 2011 Financial Status Report & Budget Adjustments; Write Off of Long‐Term Receivable from A Regional Coalition for Housing; 2012 NORCOM Budget Resolution; 2012 Water, Sewer, Stormwater, and EMS Utility Rates; and 2012 Property Tax Levy – C. Corder Underage Home Drinking Ordinance (2nd Reading) – S. Moloney 90 30 DECEMBER 5 Item Type Topic/Presenter Time Regular Business Financing Future Public Improvements – Town Center – T. Stewart 60 DECEMBER 19 Item Type Topic/Presenter Time Regular Business Mega House Ordinance (2st reading) – T. Stewart 45 OTHER ITEMS TO BE SCHEDULED: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENCES: Councilmember Brahm: March 21 Councilmember Jahncke: April 4 and May 2 Councilmember Grausz: June 6 Items highlighted in green are on the 2011 Council Work Plan All agendas and items are subject to change 4 Updated: 3/17/2011 10:13:04 AM

Packet - City of Mercer Island

Transcription

Similar documents

April 10th, 2016

fechaduras de madeira do corvo - centro regional de apoio ao

3_Adventure Playground.indd

HAND CAR WASH

Journey to Phuket (Thailand)

Enchanted by the Azores

features - Rhode Island Housing

Cumberland Harbour is a natural paradise.

2015 Wedding Show - Mission Point Resort

Conde Nast Traveller