Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
07-24-2006 - Agenda Packet
MEDINA CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION AGENDA July 24, 2006 6:00 p.m. 501 Evergreen Point Road Medina, WA A. CALL TO ORDER 6:00 p.m. B. ROLL CALL (Adam, Biglow, Blazey, Lawrence, Phelps, Rudolph, Vail-Spinosa) C. EXECUTIVE SESSION - Discussion of Labor Negotiations. D. ANNOUNCEMENTS 1. Mayor 2. Council 3. Staff E. DISCUSSION 1. SR-520 Bridge Replacement & HOV Project 2. Tree & Vegetation Ordinance 3. Permit Process Action Plan Implementation Status Report 4. St. Thomas Church/School Notice of Decision 5. 2007 Budget Targets 6. Business License Program 7. Council Agenda Calendar F. ADJOURNMENT PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The Medina City Council encourages public participation and values input from citizens. In an effort to conduct meetings in a fair, but efficient manner, the City Council will follow previously adopted procedures, which are available in the City Clerk's Office. All comments shall be addressed to the Council as a whole in a courteous and respectful manner. Citizens wishing to address the Council should complete a speaker card and submit it to the recording secretary prior to the start of the meeting. Speaker cards are on the podium prior to the start of the City Council meetings. Meeting Agenda is subject to change prior to approval of the agenda during the meeting. Persons interested in a specific agenda item may wish to call the City Clerk at (425) 233-6400 before 4:00 p.m. on the date of the meeting to confirm agenda items. ITEM D-3 CITY OF MEDINA Evergreen Point Road, Medina, WA 98039 (425) 233-6410 www.medina-wa.gov MEMORANDUM DATE: July 19, 2006 TO: City Council, City Manager FROM: Joe Willis Sr., Director of Public Works RE: Street Improvement Projects Report On June 12, 2006, the City Council awarded the 2006 Residential Street Overlay contract to Watson Asphalt. The bid price for the work was $ 84,930. The approved budget for this work (77" Ave NE and Rambling Lane street overlays) is $ 180,000. The third street improvement project that was included in the budget for 2006 is the restoration of the 500 block of Overlake Drive East. I reviewed the street condition with a representative of Watson Asphalt to determine the cost to restore that portion of the roadway which has settled and contains patches. Watson Asphalt has proposed to complete the overlay paving of the roadway at an estimated cost of $44,959. In addition, since the City has received a very reasonable price for asphalt work, I requested proposed costs from Watson to complete other pavement repairs throughout the City: Install crosswalk at NE 24th and 84th Ave NE cost = $ 2,843 Thickened edge to control street runoff 73rd PI NE cost = $ 1,190 Patch NE 16th east of 79th PI NE cost = $ 890 Repair rutted area Evergreen Point Road north side of SR 520 Bridge = $ 8,515 The proposed total for all of the work is $ 143,327 (well below the adopted budget) With Councils approval I would like to authorize a Change Order to the Watson Asphalt Contract that would add this additional work at an estimated cost of $ 58,397. City of Medina AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA ITEM TITLE: MEETING DATE: DATE THIS ITEM WAS LAST CONSIDERED BY COUNCIL: ITEM .E - 1 SR - 520 Bridge Replacement & HOV Project. July 24, 2006 2005 SUMMARY OF ISSUE/TOPIC: WSDOT Project Director John Milton will attend the July 24t" Study Session to provide an update on the SR — 520 Bridge Replacement & HOV Project. In addition, Design Advisory Group (DAG) representatives Paul Demitriades and Dave Martin will report on the DAG report and final document. COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: ❑ APPROVE ❑ DISAPPROVE ❑ SEE COMMENTS CITY MANAGER: ❑ APPROVE COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: ❑ DISAPPROVE M SEE COMMENTS This is an informational report only. ❑ NIA ® No Action Requested ❑ Action Requested BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $ ❑ BUDGETED ❑ NON -BUDGETED FUND: ❑ ® N/A RECOMMENDED MOTION: (ADOPT/APPROVE/AUTHORIZE) No Action Required. If Council Members have questions, you are urged to call the staff person who prepared this agenda statement prior to the council meeting. P:12006 Agenda Packets10724200611tem E-1, SR520 Project Agenda Statement.doc City of Medina AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA ITEM TITLE: MEETING DATE: DATE THIS ITEM WAS LAST CONSIDERED BY COUNCIL: Tree and Vegetation Code July 24, 2006 May 22, 2006 ITEM E - 2 SUMMARY OF ISSUE/TOPIC: The attached report provides follow up on various code change ideas requested by the City Council. COMMISION RECOMMENDATION: ❑ APPROVE ❑ DISAPPROVE ❑ SEE COMMENTS ® N/A CITY MANAGER: ❑ APPROVE ❑ DISAPPROVE ❑ SEE COMMENTS COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Staff report dated July 18, 2006 BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $n / a ❑ BUDGETED ❑ NON -BUDGETED FUND: ❑ RECOMMENDED MOTION: (ADOPT/APPROVE/AUTHORIZE) move If Council Members have questions, you are urged to call the staff person who prepared this agenda statement prior to the council meeting. Xurleyoubli62006 Agenda Packets107242006Vtem E-2, Tree and Vegetation Code cover.doc ITEM E — 2a CITY OF MEDINA Development Services 501 Evergreen Point Road, Medina, WA 98039 425.454.9222 www.modina-wa.gov MEMORANDUM DATE: July 18, 2006 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Joseph Gellings, AICP, Director of Development Services RE: Tree and Vegetation Code RECOMMENDATION: Review the staff follow-up in this report and provide further policy direction to staff. POLICY IMPLICATION: The patterns of landscaping in the streets and yards of a residential area play a key role in defining the community character. The City Council has the authority to enact landscape requirements that are deemed necessary to protect community character. BACKGROUND: This report is in follow-up to the May 22 discussion of the City Council on changes to the Tree and Vegetation Code (MMC 12.28). At that meeting, staff was asked to develop ordinance changes based on various ideas articulated by City Council members. This report contains several specific ideas. However, I would encourage the City Council to identify some degree of outcome -based direction with regard to the community character goals that are being sought through the Tree and Vegetation Code. This could be as simple as stating where the percentage of citywide tree canopy should be headed (increased, maintained, or slowing the loss). An alternative, but equally legitimate, outcome might be to preserve the large native species (Douglas fir and western red cedars) within important, iconic corridors in the City such as along Evergreen Point Road. The organization of this report follows a three-part categorization of all regulations in the current Tree and Vegetation Code. The three "divisions" are: 1) Private Tree Removal (during development and not), 2) Right -of -Way Tree Removal, and 3) Right -of -Way Planting Standards for Redevelopment. Each of these divisions of the ordinance can operate independently from the others. The report addresses each of these divisions by providing general issue introductions followed by the highlighted "decision areas," which are lettered for ease of discussion during the upcoming Council meeting. In addition to working with these "decision areas," staff will incorporate general code housekeeping and code readability changes into the eventual ordinance draft. The right-of-way tree removal sections, for example, would benefit a great deal from code readability changes. ITEM E — 2a Division 1 — Private Tree Removal (MMC 12.28.040 - 12.28.070 and 12.28.085-12.28.120) A theme in the discussion of the Tree and Vegetation Code at recent Council meetings has been that the burden of mitigation tree requirements on the typical permit applicant should be reduced. The typical applicant is a property owner replacing an older house with a new one along with some degree of associated tree removal. In starting this project of code changes, staff decided to review recent tree permits and their mitigation plans to distill some trends. Most notable in the findings is that, on average, only 12% of tree removals occurred within the proposed footprints of the new houses. The remainder of the removals are coming from elsewhere on the properties. A total of 51 mitigation plans were involved in this tabulation. Typical reasons for tree removals outside of the new building footprint included re -grading of the yard and re -alignment of a driveway. Another data resource that staff examined is the North Medina tree inventory of 2002. This project utilized GPS to inventory all existing trees 19 inches diameter breast height (DBH) and greater on 111 residential lots north of State Route 520. It was undertaken in conjunction with Ordinance 743 — the re- write of the Tree Code passed in 2003. The key results are as follows: 690 trees inventoried 19 inches and greater 0 19"-23" — 27% 0 24"-29" — 35% 0 30"-35" —17% 0 36"-41 " —13% 0 42" and greater — 8% Make up of 690 trees o 572 (83%) are conifers ■ Cedars — 62% ■ Douglas firs — 30% ■ Other (larch, pine, redwood, sequoia) — 8% o 118 (17%) are deciduous • Maples — 44% ■ Cottonwoods — 25% ■ Poplar — 5% Page 2 ITEM E — 2a ■ Other (madrona, birch, etc) — 26% • Of the trees 24" and greater, 83 (17%) of the trees are deciduous. A third research task undertaken by staff was to do a literature review for the best practices in tree preservation ordinance writing. Articles were reviewed from several sources including different interest groups (for example, home builder associations as well as character preservation advocates.) The general picture that has emerged is that a tree code should encourage the preservation of mature trees but not to the exclusion of planting and preservation of young canopy trees. Decision Area A: What changes should be made to the mitigation requirements for significant tree removals on private property? Staff have developed a potential new mitigation schedule as follows. Removal of 10" - 20" Trees • 1-2 Trees Removed = 1 Replacement Tree for each Tree Removed • 3-4 Trees Removed = 2 Replacement Trees for each Tree Removed • 5+ Tree Removed = 3 Replacement Trees for each Tree Removed Removal of 20" to 36" Trees • Replacement is 125 percent of the inches removed Removal of 36" Trees and Larger • Replacement is 200 percent of the inches removed This would emulate the current mitigation schedule in that mitigation is still prescribed according to three ranges of tree removal size. The 36-inch range boundary is unchanged. The 24-inch range boundary is changed to 20 inches and the 6-inch range boundary is changed to 10 inches. While the overall effect is reduced mitigation, this proposal includes some strategic decisions. The minimum mitigated removal of 10 inches will lessen applicant burden (compared to the current six inches, which is relatively standard in the tree codes of peer cities). On the other hand, revising the range boundary of 24 inches to 20 inches will require more "non development" mitigation and responds to this modal point in the distribution of tree sizes from the 2002 inventory. The current system of requiring mitigation only in the mid and upper ranges for nondeveloping properties is assumed to be preserved. This proposal preserves the caliper inch ratios for the mid and upper ranges (125% and 200%, respectively) but switches to a tree -by -tree Page 3 10-inch Caliper Tree 20-inch Caliper Tree ITEM E — 2a approach in the small range. The new rule is a "sub schedule" of mitigation based on the number of trees removed. This results in reduced mitigation but it also incorporates a disincentive to gratuitous removal in response to the literature review mentioned above. To gain an appreciation of how the new mitigation schedule would affect typical Medina projects, staff have applied it to the actual tree removals involved with seven recent projects shown below. Property Address Maximum Mitigation Trees Required Under Current Mitigation Schedule Maximum Mitigation Trees Required Under Proposed Mitigation Schedule 1257 Evergreen Pt. Rd. 94 68 2456 - 78th Ave. NE 18 2 402 - 87th Ave. NE 74 61 804 - 86th Ave. NE 62 15 712 - 84th Ave. NE 39 21 2795 Evergreen Pt. Rd. 14 14 1004 - 84th Ave. NE 12 1 On average, this reflects a 42% reduction to the amount of required mitigation trees. The column headings refer to "maximum" number mitigation trees because the mitigation inches are assumed to be attained through planting of the smallest qualifying mitigation trees. Though not accounted for in this tabulation, the new mitigation schedule is proposed to incorporate the following additional provisions discussed by the City Council: 1) mitigation exemption for removal of weed trees such as cottonwoods 2) credit for transplanted trees, and 3) broader exemption for removals in the building footprint. 36-inch Caliper Tree Decision Area B: What changes are warranted to the hazardous tree provision? The hazardous tree provision in the current code was intended to provide fairness to the mitigation rules. (Why should the property owner be penalized for a tree that has died for reasons unrelated to the owner's actions?) However, controversy has been created because of two instances where staff believed hazardous designations by the applicant's arborist were not supported. Some degree of bias from applicants' arborists could be expected because 1) most arborists are employed by tree removal companies and 2) in a typical situation where the hazardous exemption is sought, the alternative is Page 4 ITEM E — 2a thousands of dollars of mitigation requirements. This is not intended to disparage these homeowners; it is simply a description of the potential for systematic bias. Staffs suggested solution is to direct all applicants seeking a hazardous designation to a particular arborist who is on a retainer contract with the City. Decision Area C: Are changes warranted to the building footprint exemption? Currently this provision states that mitigation is not required for significant trees up to 24 inches that are removed from within the new building footprint. There has been some discussion at City Council meetings about broadening this exemption to cover trees of all size in the footprint. One theoretical drawback of this change is that a site with a very large tree might lead to the house being sited gain the exemption and avoid the costly mitigation. It is difficult to assess to what degree this would occur, if at all. Also, tree removal within the building footprint only accounts for an average of 12% of all tree removals per the discussion above. Decision Area D: Should certain Medina neighborhoods have special mitigation rules? In past City Council discussions it was identified that different Medina neighborhoods have distinct characters with respect to trees. It was further identified that this creates a obstacle to developing a fair tree code. The most striking example of varied conditions is the area defined by the Zoning Code (MMC 17.21) as the "Neighborhood Character Preservation District," which is a sub area of the Medina Heights neighborhood. Within this district, very few canopy trees exist today. In fact, this neighborhood's history of protecting Lake Washington views first includes the 1997 ordinance to cap building heights at 20 feet, which is very short by typical residential design standards. Exempting the Neighborhood Character Preservation District from whichever tree mitigation rules are developed for the rest of the City is a simple solution. Division 2 — Right -of -Way Tree Removal (MMC 12.28.130 - 12.28.230) These code sections reflect a set of policies on when removal or trimming of right-of-way trees should be allowed. The policies vary based on the size of the tree and whether the action is proposed by the adjoining property owner or not. The policies are summarized by the following outline. Any homeowner should be allowed to apply for a permit to trim or remove a tree that is in the right-of-way not adjoining their property but affecting their view, sunlight, traffic sightlines, or other hazards. a. The decision to grantor deny the permit should be made by the hearing examiner with notice to the adjoining property owner. i. The decision criterion is Comprehensive Plan consistency for trees up to six inches DBH. ii. The decision criteria are Comprehensive Plan consistency as well as safety and access for trees six inches and greater DBH. b. If removal is approved, mitigation is required as according to the private mitigation rules. 2. The adjoining property owner should be allowed to apply for a permit to trim or remove a tree in the right-of-way for any reason. Page 5 ITEM E — 2a a. The decision to grant or deny the permit should be made by the City Manager or designee without any public notice. i. The decision criterion is Comprehensive Plan consistency for trees up to six inches DBH. ii. The decision criteria are Comprehensive Plan consistency as well as safety and access for trees six inches and greater DBH. b. If removal is approved, mitigation is required as according to the private mitigation rules. Decision Area E. Should there be any changes to the policies reflected in the right-of-way removals division? The City Council did not reach any consensus as to whether any departures should be made to the above system at the May meeting. One suggestion that was articulated is to only regulate removal of coniferous trees in the right-of-way. Division 3 — Right -of -Way Planting Standards for Redevelopment (MMC 12.28.080) This section of the code stipulates right-of-way landscaping standards that are imposed on all lots that redevelop on selected streets in Medina (essentially all collector and arterial streets.) This is the only portion of the code concerned with forms of vegetation other than trees. The standards include requirements for trees, shrubs, and groundcover, which are formula -based and very inflexible. While the standards are aimed at maintaining the informal, heavily -vegetated streetscape that is endorsed by the Comprehensive Plan, their rigidity has resulted in some very attractive right-of-way plantings having to be destroyed in an effort to comply with the formulas of this section. Staff felt that the most relevant question in evaluating these regulations is to determine what sort of right- of-way landscaping would be done by homeowners in the absence of regulations, and how does this differ from the results of applying the current standards. In an effort to understand the likely outcome without regulations, staff has compiled a representative set of three photographs of rights -of -way at newly -constructed houses on streets that are currently exempt from the standards (e.g. houses on local streets). It is most likely the case that these would also be representative of the outcomes at new home sites on collector and arterial trees without any regulation. The only possible flaw in this reasoning is that the slightly higher traffic volumes on these streets would lead to a landscaping pattern that served more of a screening function. Below the photos from exempt streets are two photos that are representative of the actual outcomes we are experiencing through application of the code standards. Decision Area F. Are the right-of-way planting standards in need of changes or in need at all? The photo inventory suggests that absence of regulations will lead to attractive but lawn -dominated rights -of -way. Another option that responds to the canopy preservation policy would be to eliminate all of the standards except for the tree planting standard. Page 6 ITEM E — 2a Unregulated Projects Page 7 ITEM E — 2a Regulated Projects Page 8 JUL-19-06 WED 3:01 PM PACCAR INC.C.M.PIGOTT FAX NO, 4254688223 P. 1 F ' CSARL>:9 A�. Piaarr 777 106- AVENUE N.E. CCLL.LVUE. WASHINGTON 9E00,4 U.S.A, July 19, 2006 VIA FAX 425-454--8490 Mr. Douglas J. Schulze City Manager City of Medina 501 Evergreen Point Road Medina, WA 98039 Dear Doug: I am very concerned aboat the proposed change in regulations regarding the removal of large trees and hope that the Council will not take any such action. Sincerely, C.M. Pigott CMP:aIs (Dictated via telephone) TELEPHONE (425) 4e8.7447 FACSIMILE (423) 4158-6223 ITEM E — 2a CITY OF MEDINA Development Services 501 Evergreen Point Road, Medina, WA 98039 425.454.9222 www.medina-wa.gov MEMORANDUM - DATE: July 24, 2006 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Joseph Gellings, AICP, Director of Development Services RE: Tree and Vegetation Code Council members have requested the following additional items after distribution of my July 18 staff report in the agenda packet. My follow-up for each item is attached. 1. Additional project data for each of the past projects featured in the table on page 4. Attached is a revised table with new columns containing details such as number of trees removed, their size, and their location. The new columns are highlighted. 2. Map of the streets which requiring right-of-way plantings for redevelopment properties. These streets are listed in MMC 12.28.080 and are graphically indicated on the attached map. 3. List of "weed trees." My report refers to the question of whether mitigation should be required for removal of trees that are considered weed trees. The term "weed tree" is not defined. As a starting point for discussion, however, I have attached the pages of the City of Medina Preferred Tree and Plant List that identifies all "not recommended" and "prohibited" trees. Revision of Table from Page 4 of Staff Report Property Address Maximum Mitigation Trees Required Under Current Code Maximum Mitigation Trees Required Under Proposed Code Total Trees Removed frown Site Trees Removed. within Building Footprint Trees:Removed (6" <24")„. , Trees Removed (24" <36") Tree Removed (36">),; _. Total Trees Planted on she 1257 Evergreen Pt. Rd 94 68 10 ' 1 8 2 2 ' - 66 2456 - 78th Ave. NE 18 2 3 9 Q 0 -16 402 - 87th Ave. NE 74 61 16 ':4 '14 ',2 0 56 804 - 86m Ave. NE 62 15 19 `0 19 r.0 --0. NA 712 - 84. Ave. NE 39 21 9 0 ' 9 ' 0 0 23 2795 Evergreen Pt. Rd 14 14 1 0 0 - 11 13 1004 - 84th Ave. NE 1 121 11 51 21 31 01 0 NA PROPOSED CODE: Removal of 10" .19" Trees 1-2 Trees Removed =1 Tree for each Tree Removed 3-4 Trees Removed = 2 Trees for each Tree Removed 5+ Tree Removed = 3 Trees for each Tree Removed Removal of 201to 35" Trees - Replacement is 125 percent of the inches removed Removal of 36" Trees and Larger - Replacement is 200 percent of the inches removed El CITY OF VIEDINA PREFERRED TREE & PLANT LIST TREES GENERALLY SUITABLE. FOR THE CITY OF NIEDINA LIST A - The f ollo,.ving list of trecs includes recommendations only. exce t for those trees specifically noted as PROHIBITED. The '*' denotes a native species. CO -VI FEROUS TREES Cedar: *Alaska Yellow Cedar — Chamaecyparis nootkatensis Atlas Cedar — Cedrus atlantica Cedar of Lebanon - Cedrus libani Deodar Cedar — Cedrus dcodara Incense Cedar Calocedrus decurrens *NVestem Red Cedar — Thuja plicata Fir: *Douglas Fir Pseudotsuaa men7.iesii *Grand Fir — Abies grandis Spanish Fir Abies pinsapo White Fir - Abies concolor Pine: Austrian Black Pine — Pinus nigra Japanese Black Pine — Pinus thunbergii Japanese lied Pine — Pinus densiflora *Shore Pine — Pinus contorta var. contorta *Western White Pine — Pinus monticola Larch: *Western Larch— Larix occidentalis European Larch — Larix decidua C'OAlIFF_ROL'S TREES NOT RECOMMENDED Cy rp ! SS *Lawson Cypress - Chamaecyparis lawsoniana Moss Cypress -- Chamaecyparis pisifera Smooth -barked Arizona Cypress — Cupressus glabra Hemlock: Canadian Hemlock — Tsuga canadensis *Mountain Hemlock — Tsuga mertansiana *Western Hemlock— Tsuga heterophylla Yew: *English Yety - Taxus baccata Japanese yew Taxus cuspidata English -Japanese Yew — I'axus .t media Other: Japanese Cryptomcria — Cryptomeria japonica Serbian Spruce — Picea omorika Umbrella Pine — Sciadopitys verticillata *Red Alder — Alnus rubra Coastal Redwood — Sequoia sempervirens; top suffers from freeze damage resulting in multiple tops and poor structural condition Colorado Spruce — Picea pungens: susceptible to spruce aphid Sierra Sequoia Sequoiadendron giganteum: the ultimate size and density of the tree is a limiting factor especially since this tree has the potential to block views and interfere with utility lines Suggested Alternatives to Above Trees Not Recommended ry Japanese Cryptomeria — Cryptomeria japonica (d«•arf forms) Oak: English Oak Quercus robur *Oregon White Oak Quercus g�arryana Scarlet Oak - Quercus coccinca Red Oak - Quercus rubra Pin Oak - Quercus palustris Other: American Sxveetgum - Liquidambar st,,Tacitlua Persian Parrona Parrotia persica Japanese Zclkov a - Zelkova scrrata Black Tupelo Nyssa sylvatica Tulip Tree - D -iodendron tulipifera Harelquin Glorybower - C lerodendrum trichotomum Katsuratrec - C ercidiphyllum japonicum Red Horsechestnut - Aesculus x carnea (non -fruiting varieties) DECIDUOUS TREES NOT RECOM]KENDED Furopean Beech Tagus sylvatica; its ultimate size and tendency to prevent plants from growing beneath it Ilorsechestnut - Aesculus sp. (fruiting varieties); messy fruit London Plane .- Platanus x acerifolia; the shallow roots are destructive to paving: deeper roots invade sewers Quaking Aspen - Populus tremuloides; the roots are destructive to paving and invade sewer lines Red Maple - Acer rubrum `October Glory'; this variety's poor grafting can cause future structural problems Willow - Salix sp.; the roots invade sewer lines: the trees are brittle and short-lived Suggested Alternatives to London Plane Norway Maple - Acer platanoides Sugar Maple - Acer saccharum Sycamore Maple - Acer pseudoplatanus Suggested Alternatives to Quaking Aspen European Hornbeam - Carpinus betulus Katsuratrce - Cercidiphyllum japonicum Paper Birch Betula papyrifera Suggested Alternatives to October Glory Maple Any other Red Maple species Suggested Alternative to Willow Species Weeping Flowering Cherry - Prunus subhirtella 'Pendula' DECIDUOUS TREES PROHIBITED Lombardy Poplar -Populus nigra `Italica' Bolleana Poplar - Populus alba 'Pyramidalis'; the tops are brittle and become dangerous in storms: the roots are destructive to paving and invade sewers; the ultimate size of the tree can potentially block views and interfere with overhead wires Cottonwood - Populus sp.; the tops are brittle and become dangerous in storms: the roots are destructive to paving and invade sewers: the ultimate size of the tree can potentially block views and interfere with overhead wires Bigleaf Maple Acer macrophyllum; this brittle tree becomes dangerous in storms; roots are destructive to paving Preferred 'l rcc & Plant List Page 3 of 3 11 i 17/03 City of Medina AGENDA STATEMENT AGENDA ITEM TITLE: MEETING DATE: DATE THIS ITEM WAS LAST CONSIDERED BY COUNCIL: ITEM E - 3 Permit Process Action Status Report July 24, 2006 May 8, 2006 SUMMARY OF ISSUE/TOPIC: Matrix is provided that shows projected completion date for each of the action items resulting from the focus groups on the permit process. COMMISION RECOMMENDATION: ❑ APPROVE ❑ DISAPPROVE ❑ SEE COMMENTS ® N/A CITY MANAGER: ❑ APPROVE ❑ DISAPPROVE ❑ SEE COMMENTS COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Staff report dated July 18, 2006 BUDGET/FISCAL IMPACT: EXPENDITURE REQUIRED: $n / a ❑ BUDGETED ❑ NON -BUDGETED FUND: ❑ RECOMMENDED MOTION: (ADOPT/APPROVE/AUTHORIZE) move If Council Members have questions, you are urged to call the staff person who prepared this agenda statement prior to the council meeting. R: 2006 Agenda Packets10724200611tem E-2, Tree and Vegetation Code.doc ITEM E — 3a CITY OF MEDINA Development Services 501 Evergreen Point Road, Medina, WA 98039 425.454.9222 www.modina-wa.gov MEMORANDUM DATE: July 19, 2006 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Joseph Gellings, AICP, Director of Development Services RE: Permit Process Action Plan Status Report RECOMMENDATION: Review status of action items resulting from Permit Streamlining Focus Groups. POLICY IMPLICATION: Approximately 50% of the feedback received from the focus groups is related to adopted city policy. That feedback was refined into several legislative projects which are progressing through the Planning Commission / City Council process. The remainder of the feedback was related to administrative procedures. BACKGROUND: The purpose of this report is to simply update the City Council on the implementation status of each of the "action items" that were identified at the conclusion of the Permit Streamlining Focus Groups. The matrix below was developed by extracting each of the action items from the focus group summary report that was presented to the City Council in May. Projected implementation dates or completion status are found in the right column. These dates adhere to the previously -identified goal to have most items implemented by the end of 2006. A large number of the action items will be completed together as they are all encompassed in the project to overhaul all permit application forms, instructions, and checklists. Our guiding principles in this project are to have a greater consistency in formatting and requirements and to eliminate all redundancies in the requested information. Unfortunately, Development Services staff and consultants have been experiencing a peak in permit application volumes ever since the new year. We remain committed to the action items but we also must avoid these procedure projects taking so much attention away from plan review that our permit turnaround time suffers. ITEM E — 3a Action Items Projected Implementation Dates / Completion Status 1. Develop a notification system to alert December the applicant community each time the City Council discusses changes to development regulations. 2. Consolidate the various checklists September now in use for building permit applications. 3. The City should create the mailing For the City to produce the 300-foot radius labels for land use / construction mailing labels in an efficient manner, a mitigation permits instead of special mapping software would have to be applicants. acquired and implemented. Therefore this change is being proposed as long-term. 4. Utilize the intemet for disseminating October application forms. 5. Develop a master application cover September form with a "checkbox approach" to identification of supporting document needs for each kind of permit. 6. Only require a single hold harmless September form for a given project, even if separate permits are still required for separate structures on one property. 7. Mechanical system design: would Completed prefer elimination of this and have inspection only; a smaller change would be to defer the requirement to submit design until closer to permit issuance. 8. Eliminate or simplify the requirement Completed for applicants to prove ownership of the property. 9. Provide for over the counter permits Permit trigger reduction ordinance is adopted for small projects. / completed. Action commitment was to further monitor the need for over the counter permits for small projects. Ongoing. 10. Defer the requirement for submittal of Completed. Action commitment was to treat manufacturer's information ("cut this as a 6-12 month trial due to staff belief in sheets") to time -of -inspection for the advantage of resolving design issues equipment such as fireplaces, hot prior to equipment installation. water heaters, gas stoves, etc. 11. Defer the requirement for landscape December plan preparation to some degree. Page 2 ITEM E — 3a Action Items Projected Implementation Dates / Completion Status 12. Adopt City design standards for Will do in coordination with Public Works engineering matters such as storm Department. February 2007 water / detention design and right-of- way improvements. 13. Reduce the number of installation December certification forms required for Certificate of Occupancy. 14. Reduce fee for appeal of January 2007 (per normal annual review) administrative decision (hearing examiner process) from the current fee of $1500. 15. Focus of plan review should be life Completed safety issues. 16. Develop applicant's "tips for success" September handouts similar to Mercer Island. 17. Medina's permit application January 2007 turnaround should exceed the requirement of the Washington State Regulatory Reform Act. 18. Overhaul the forms and checklists for September all building -related permit applications. 19. Staff will devote more attention Completed (On going) towards legislative intent statements in future ordinances and code revisions. 20. Address issue of different versions of August plan sets between City Hall and job sites. 21. Address issue of written Completed (On going) correspondence from plan reviewers being perceived as obstructionist. Page 3 MEDINA CITY COUNCIL FINDING OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS AND DECISION ST. THOMAS EPISCOPAL CHURCH ) SPECIAL USE PERMIT NO. 252 VARIANCE NO. 1165 On July 10, 2006, the Medina City Council held an open record hearing concerning an application from the St. Thomas Episcopal Church (Church) for a special use permit and variances as to setback and height. Based upon the testimony and exhibits presented at the open record hearing, the Council now makes the following findings, conclusions and decision. FINDINGS 1. The application for special use permit is to expand and renew the educational use of the Church property through a replacement of the classroom building on the site used by the St. Thomas School (School). Variance 1 seeks to reduce the north side setback from 60 feet to 40 feet. Variance 2 is to allow the building to have a maximum height of 38 feet, which is three feet more than the 35-foot maximum established under the zoning code. 2. The Church property is a 5.6 acre parcel located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Northeast 12th Street and 84th Avenue Northeast. The site shares a border with one other parcel, the Overlake Golf and Country Club to the north and west. Zoning of the property is R-20. { WDT636187.DOC;1/00093.900000/} 1 3. The Church is proposing to replace the existing school building with a new 55,000 square foot floor area building with related site improvements. It is anticipated that the larger school building will allow the School an enrollment of 293 students, which represents an approximately 58% increase over the existing student population. 4. Leaders of the Church and School explained their mission and vision and their desire to remain a part of the Medina community. Their plan involves utilizing the latest and best physical configuration of the School along with the best instructional philosophy. 5. With respect to the setback variance, the Church provided testimony that the variance was necessary in order to accommodate the goal and mission of the School. The front of the new building would be setback in excess of the required setback in order to not unduly intrude into the neighborhood and to match the setback of the existing and remaining two buildings (the Church and Great Hall). The gymnasium which is proposed for the southeast corner must be placed in that location in order to be in proximity to the Church which will use it for meetings and other functions. The classrooms must be grouped in sets of two in order to provide for the sharing of certain common areas and other facilities necessary to accomplish the School's teaching philosophy and organization. The Church stated that they considered alternate ways to configure the building in order to comply with the 60-foot north setback but found that any alternative would either significantly affect the teaching function of the school or adversely affect the playground area. The Church testified that the golf course property, located just to the north of theirs, was in the same zone classification but due to the different use, a smaller setback was required under the Medina code. 6. With respect to the height variance request, the Church's architects testified that the existing Church and Great Hall had an extremely steep roof angle and that they desired to { WDT636187.DOC.1/00093.900000/} 2 blend the roof angle of the new school building to the existing Church in the interest of architectural harmony. Because of this, it was necessary to request the variance. The architects further testified that they would be able to have a pitched roof constructed within the height limit but that it would simply be a little less steep. No testimony was provided relating to the necessity of the height variance for any functional reason associated with the Church or the School. 7. The Director of Development Services (Director) provided the City Council with a memorandum dated July 5, 2006 containing an analysis of the criteria for the special use permit and the variances (the July 5th Memorandum). The Council adopts by reference the Director's analysis with respect to the special use permit as set forth in the July 5th Memorandum. 8. With respect to the variance requests, the Council was advised that federal law grants certain rights to the Church as a religious institution which requires careful consideration to assure that the City's development regulations are not unduly burdensome or discriminatory with respect to the Church. CONCLUSIONS 9. The Council concurs with the Director's conclusion that the Church has met all criteria set forth in Section 17.56.020 of the Medina Municipal Code for the special use permit. 10. The City Council concludes that the setback variance request is shown to be important to accomplish the goals and mission of the School and by extension, the Church. The additional setback from Northeast 12th will allow the new building to blend in with the surrounding neighborhood and achieve architectural compatibility with the existing buildings. Reduction of the north setback to 40 feet as requested will not be a detriment to the only neighbor, the golf club, which included a letter of support in the file. { WDT636187.DOC;1/00093.900000/ E 3 11. The City Council concludes that based on the criteria for valiance set forth in Section 2.78.065 of the Medina Municipal Code, and giving due consideration to federal law, the City should grant the setback variance. 12. With respect to the height variance, the City Council concludes that the Church has not met its burden to show that such variance cannot be remedied by other means, namely, having a slightly flatter pitched roof. The variance is not necessary to achieve any of the goals of vision of the Church or School and.thus, federal law has not been breached. The City Council agrees with and adopts the Director's analysis for the height variance as set forth in the July 5th Memorandum. DECISION 13. For the reasons set forth above, the City Council approves the request for special use permit subject to the four conditions set forth in the Director's July 5th Memorandum as follows: 13.1 Total enrollment at the School shall not exceed 293 students unless a revised special use permit is approved by the City of Medina. 13.2 Prior to issuance of a building permit the Church shall submit a final lighting plan for approval by the Director of Development Services. The plan shall be compatible with the character of the surrounding neighborhood while meeting school safety needs. 13.3 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Church shall submit a final landscape plan for approval by the City landscape consultant. The final plan shall meet the requirements of Chapter 12.28 Medina Municipal Code and adhere to the generalized landscape plan of the application for special use permit for the design of the School and site improvement { W DT636187.DOC;1 /00093.900000/ } 4 shall adhere to the two mitigation measures listed in the October 2005 report by Gibson Traffic Consultants, Inc. 13.4 The City Council further grants Variance Request No. 1 reducing the north side setback from 60 feet to 40 feet. 13.5 The City Council denies Variance Request No. 2 to increase the maximum building height. DATED this day of CITY OF MEDINA Miles R. Adam, Mayor ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED LE Rachel Baker, City Clerk { WDT636187.DOC; 1/00093.900000/) 5 ITEM E - 5 104 CITY OF MEDINA City Manager's Office 501 Evergreen Point Road, Medina, WA 98039 425.233.6400 www.medina-wa.gov MEMORANDUM DATE: July 5, 2006 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Doug Schulze, City Manager RE: 2007 Budget Objectives RECOMMENDATION: Discuss 2007 Budget objectives and provide budget targets for City Manager. POLICY IMPLICATION: The budget targets and objectives identified by the City Council should not be considered as policy statements, but should provide direction to the City Manager based on the consensus of the City Council. BACKGROUND: Department Directors will directed to begin preparing 2007 Budget requests within the next 30 days. City Council direction regarding conceptual objectives for the 2007 Budget will assist city management in efforts to deliver a preliminary budget that is consistent with Council expectations. Beginning the budget process with this step is intended to reduce the amount of time spent by the City Council deliberating the budget during business meetings. Topics for conceptual discussion were identified by reviewing major discussion areas during previous budget processes. The City Council should feel free to add or drop topics from the discussion. Discussion should focus on the General Fund, Street Fund and Equipment Replacement Fund since these funds make up the operating costs and have the most impact on property taxes. The attachment to this memorandum is provided to assist the City Council and provide focus for the discussion. 2007 Budget Concept Level Discussion 1. Property Tax (Rate/Actual $ Amount) • Discussion must distinguish between the tax rate and the actual property tax levy (dollar amount to be collected); • What factors should be considered by the City Council as part of the decision making process? • Decrease — How much will be meaningful to taxpayers and what are the short- and long- term impacts to the City? • Increase — Maximum allowable increase established by law is 1 %. Is an increase necessary and what are the short- and long-term impacts to the City? • Status Quo — See comments above (decrease/increase). 2. Revenue Projections • Notable changes • Short- and long-term projections • Sustainability 3. Expenditure Growth • What is the target for 2007? • 2007 — 2008 target? 4. Salaries & Benefits • Determined by collective bargaining agreements for union positions. • Discussion should take place in executive session 5. Fiscal Policies • Draft of Fiscal Policies attached for informational purposes • Council input and direction requested 9 Page 2 City of Medina Fiscal Policies Background and Purpose The stewardship of public funds is one of the most critical responsibilities given to the officials and managers of the City of Medina. As such, establishment and maintenance of prudent fiscal policies enables City officials to protect public interests and ensure public trust. This document incorporates past financial practices in defining the current policies to be used by the City to meet its obligations and operate in a financially prudent manner. These policies have been established to provide general fiscal guidelines and are intended to provide sound direction in the management of the City's financial affairs. General Financial Philosophy The financial policy of the City of Medina is to provid suff '6ht fi an 'al base and the resources necessary to sustain a high level of muni 'pal e . e to a sur public safety, to maintain the physical infrastructure and sjoiuundin s o th ity, an t romote the social well-being of the citizens of Medina. It shall be the goal of the Cit achie a tro inan ' dition with the ability to: • Withstand I gio}5al ec is i pacts; • Adjust icie to e o ity's anging service requirements; • Effective m int 'n a d imp ve e City's infrastructure; • Prudently Ian, co rdi at , eview, and implement responsible community developme t; • Provide a hi el of police, fire, and other protective services to assure public health and safetv. Operating Budget Policies The Municipal Budget is the central financial planning document, which embodies all operating revenue and expenditure decisions. It establishes the level of services to be provided by each department within the confines of anticipated municipal revenues. The City Council will establish municipal service levels and priorities for the ensuing year prior to and during the development of the preliminary budget. The City Manager shall incorporate the Council's priorities in the formulation of the preliminary and final budget proposal. Adequate maintenance and replacement of the City's capital plant and equipment will be provided for in the annual budget. The current fiscal year budget will be balanced with current year revenues Revenue and Expenditure Policies Annual revenues are conservatively estimated as a basis for preparation of the annual budget and City service programs. They will be as realistic as possible based on the best available information. Expenditures approved by the City Council in the annual budget define the City's spending limits for the upcoming fiscal year. Beyond the requirements of law, the City will maintain an operating philosophy of cost control and responsible financial management. High priority is given to expenditures that will reduce future operating costs, such as increased utilization of technology and equipment and proven business methods. The City of Medina provides quality service programs. If expenditure reductions are necessary, complete elimination of a specific service is preferable to II g the quality of programs provided. An appropriate balance will be maintained between bud public services and dollars provided to assure good rrr The City will maintain revenue and expendit ca gori administrative regulation. Current revenues will be suffi ' nt�7pp rt Irnt I All revenue foreca ill be a ormedutili User fees will be segments of the ,pNvidh,d for direct and ga compliance. ng to sW6 statute and analytical techniques. of services provided for unique or narrow All user fees shall be rimed and adjusted (where necessary) at least every five years to ensure that rates are equitable and cover the total cost of service or that percentage of total service cost deemed appropriate by the City. Revenues of a limited or indefinite term will be used for capital projects or one-time operating expenditures to ensure that no ongoing service program is lost when such revenues are reduced or discontinued. Grant applications to fund new service programs with state or federal fund will be reviewed by the City, as they become available, with due consideration being given to whether locally generated revenues will be required to support these programs when outside funding is no longer available. The City of Medina will establish and maintain Special Revenue Funds, which will be used to account for proceeds from specific revenue sources to finance designated activities, which are required by statute, ordinance, resolution or executive order. Annual expenditures will be maintained within the limitations of annual revenues. The City will not use short-term borrowing to finance current operating needs without full financial analysis and prior approval of the City Council. In order to ensure the continuity of services, the City will budget no more sales tax revenue than was received in the prior year as a hedge against possible future economic events. Interest income revenue will be used to finance one-time capital or time -limited goods or services. All authorized positions will be budgeted for a full year and with the maximum allowable benefit rate unless specifically designated by the City Council as a partial -year position. Enterprise Fund Policies The City of Medina does not currently operate utility services. In the future, the City will establish enterprise funds for City services when 1) the intent of the City is that all costs of providing the service should be financed primarily through user charges; and/or 2) the City Council determines that it is appropriate to conduct a periodic review of net income for capital maintenance, accountability, or other public policy purposes Enterprise funds will be established for City -operated utili Enterprise fund expenditures will be established at the fund's infrastructure and provide for necpsqary Each enterprise fund will maintain adec operations, including ma' nte ce, d re( reserves (as established b fiscoli o necessary. maintain N to cover the costs of all "ebt service requirements, , and any other cost deemed Rates may be se%roaJpi bleXun�sh after requirements are met for cash flow and scheduled r se e c ntri u ' Enterprise fund se ices I establish and maintain reserves for general contingency and capital purpose onsistent with those maintained for general governmental services. Revenue bonds shall be issued only when projected operating revenues are insufficient for the enterprise's capital financing needs. The City will insure that net operating revenues of the enterprise constitute a minimum of 1.5 times the annual debt service requirements. The City will limit the maturities of all utility revenue bond issues to 25 years or less. Cash Management and Investment Policies Careful financial control of the City's daily operations is an important part of Medina's overall fiscal management program. Achieving adequate cash management and investment control requires sound financial planning to ensure that sufficient revenues are available to meet the current expenditures of any one operating period. Once steps are taken to ensure that the City maintains a protected cash position in its daily operations, it is to the municipality's advantage to prudently invest idle funds until such time as they are required to make expenditures. The City's idle cash will be invested on a continuous basis in accordance with the City's adopted investment policies. The City will maintain a formal investment policy, which is reviewed and endorsed by state and national professional organizations. The City will invest all funds (in excess of current requirements) based upon the following order of priority: 1) legality; 2) safety; 3) liquidity and yield. Investment with City funds shall not be made for purposes of speculation. The City is prohibited from investing in derivative financial instruments for the City's managed investment portfolio. Proper security measures will be taken to safeguard investments. The City's designated banking institution will provide adequate collateral to insure City fund The City's investment portfolio will be reviewed every two valuation service to assess the portfolio's degree of ris adopted investment policies. An analysis of the City's cash position will the fiscal year. The City Council will be and performance. _,- Sufficient cash shall expenditures. Where permitted, they Cash") for investment D reo qOylified portfolio ice ith the ar intervaWthroughout City's investment strategy adequate funds for current operating pool its cash resources from various funds ("Treasurer's Investment income from Treasurer's Cash will be allocated in accordance with RCW 5.24.060 considering 1) minimum cash balance needs as determined by the Finance Officer; 2) average cash balance of the participating,fund; and 3) administrative costs with first priority given to the Current Expense Fund revenue requirements. The City of Medina will select its official banking institution through formal bidding process in order to provide the City with the most comprehensive, flexible, and cost- effective banking services available. Accounting, Financial Reporting, and Auditing Policies The City of Medina will establish and maintain a high standard of accounting practices. Accounting and budgetary systems will, at all times, conform to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, the State of Washington Budgeting Accounting Reporting System (B.A.R.S.) and local regulations. A comprehensive accounting system will be maintained to provide all financial information necessary to effectively operate the City. The City will meet the financial reporting standards set by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. Full disclosure will be provided to all City financial reports and bond representations. An annual audit will be performed by the State Auditor's Office and include the issuance of a financial opinion. Reserve Fund Policies Adequate reserve levels are a necessary component of the City's overall financial management strategy and a key factor in external agencies' measurement of the City's financial strength. City and State regulations have been established to allow the City o dina to create and maintain specific reserve funds. Prudent use of reserve fun ena the City to defray future costs, take advantage of matching funds, and neficial but limited) opportunities. Reserve funds provide the City with the alit x cis flexible financial planning in developing future capital projects. Res e f ds re ne es ry to enable the City to deal with unforeseen emergenci�r cha ge n c ditio A Contingency Reserve Fund sl to meet any municipal expen , reasonably foreseen at th imp the Contingency F�;� bL All expenditure fro t Council. ma to ed a or nce with RCW 35A.33.145 Etisnithe tyoexte ch could not have been udget. Annual contributions to oC rrent Exoense Fund resources. shall have the prior approval of the City The City will maint n a Pcdheral Operating Reserve to serve as a "Rainy Day Fund" to address temporary r enue shortfalls in an amount equivalent to twelve percent of the operating budget, less proprietary funds and interfund operating transfers. Annual contributions will be budgeted from Current Expense Fund resources as available to attain and maintain an established reserve level. The City will maintain a General Capital Reserve to address unforeseen project expenditures or external revenue shortfalls in an amount equivalent to ten percent of the funded six -year CIP, less proprietary fund projects. Contributions will be made from Current Expense Fund resources as they are available. Special reserve accounts may be created within the Park and Cumulative Reserve Fund to account for monies for future known expenditures, special projects, or other specific purposes. The City will maintain a Capital Improvement Project Grant Match Reserve as a means of assuring the availability of cash resources to leverage external funding when the opportunity arises. Contributions will be made from Current Expense Fund resources as they are available. All expenditures drawn from reserve accounts shall require prior Council approval unless previously authorized by the City Council for expenditure in the annual budget. Capital Improvement Policies Medina's city government is accountable for a considerable investment in buildings, parks, roads, storm sewer, equipment and other capital investments. The preservation, maintenance, and future improvement of these facilities are a primary responsibility of the City. Planning and implementing sound capital improvement policies and programs today will help the City avoid emergencies and major costs in the future therefore: The City will establish and implement a comprehensive multi -year Capital Improvement Program. The Capital Improvement Program will be prepared and updated annually. The City Council will designate annual ongoing funding levels for project categories within the Capital Improvement Program. Financial analysis of funding sources will be cond improvement projects. An annual Capital Improvement Budget Council as part of the annual budget. The Capital Improvement ogil of the Comprehensiv�an\ r w Debt ado f the major capital the City Capital Facilities Element The amount of d t isu d b thrCity is an important factor in measuring its financial performance and nditio roper use and management of borrowing can yield significant advantag . rom a policy perspective, the City of Medina uses debt in two ways: 1) As a mechanism to equalize the costs of needed improvements to both present and future citizens; and 2) As a mechanism to reduce the costs of substantial public improvements. City Council approval is required prior to the issuance of debt. An analytical review shall be conducted prior to the issuance of debt. The City will use the services of a legally certified and credible bond counsel in the preparation of all bond representations. The City of Medina will not use long-term debt to support current operations. Long-term borrowing will only be used for capital improvements that cannot be financed from current revenues. Short-term borrowing will only be used to meet the immediate financing needs of a project for which long-term financing has been secured but not yet received. The issuance of bonds shall be financed for a period not to exceed a conservative estimate of the asset's useful life. Noncapital furnishings, supplies, and personnel will not be financed from bond proceeds. The City will use refunding bonds where appropriate, when restructuring its current outstanding debt. Reserves, interest costs, operating costs, and/or maintenance expenses will be capitalized only for enterprise activities; capitalized operating expenses will be strictly limited to those expenses incurred prior to actual operation of the facilities. The City will maintain a good credit rating at all times. Assessment bonds will be issued in place of general obligation bonds, where possible, to assure the greatest degree of public equity. ynder most circumstances, the maturity of all assessment bonds ^all rxceed 12 ears. General Obligation bonds will be issued with maturiti The voter approved general obligation del total of 7.5% of the assessed valuate of The following individual category: l Gene I bt 2!F,� Utility ebt 2. Open S ce d Me 'na AQII neftxceed art aggregated Ok pfterty wi in the City. be qX4ake0& in any specific debt fd valuation valuation Facilities — 2.5% of assessed valuation Limited -tax general obrgation bonds will not exceed one and one-half percent of the City's current assessed property valuation. Limited -tax general obligation bonds will be issued only if: A project in progress requires funding not available from alternative sources; Matching fund monies are available which may be lost if not applied for in a timely manner; or Emergency conditions exist. ITEM E - 6 04 M��� CITY OF MEDINA City Manager's Office 501 Evergreen Point Road, Medina, WA 98039 425.233.6400 www.medina-wa.gov MEMORANDUM DATE: July 17, 2006 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Doug Schulze, City Manager RE: Business License Program RECOMMENDATION: Authorize City Manager to enter into an Agreement with the State of Washington Department of Licensing. Direct staff to present ordinance establishing a business licensing program for Council consideration at the August 14, 2006 meeting. POLICY IMPLICATION: Ordinance No. 303, adopted in 1974, requires an occupation license for any person, firm or corporation engaged in or carrying on any business, occupation, act or privilege for which a tax is imposed by MMC 5.04.030. This section of MMC imposes taxes on utilities (telephone, electricity, natural gas, water, sewer, solid waste and cable television). The City levies a tax of zero percent on these services. Licenses are granted to these services in the form of franchise agreements. In addition to utility licenses, RCW also authorizes the City to require business licenses for other types of business activities conducted within the city. Business licenses can be imposed on persons, firms or corporations engaged or carrying on any business, occupation, act or privilege within the city even if the business is not located in the city. The policy issue before the City Council is: Should the City require business licenses for any person, firm or corporation engaged in or carrying on any business, occupation, act or privilege? BACKGROUND: During 2005, more than 3,000 different individuals, firms or corporations reported sales taxes for sales or uses within the corporate limits of Medina. A nominal business license fee could generate a significant amount of revenue as well as add more diversity to the City's revenue sources, which creates financial stability. The Department of Licensing Master License Service (MLS) provides an opportunity for the City to implement a business licensing program without creating a significant workload, which could potential drive a need for additional staff. The MLS has been offered to cities as a cost-effective option for licensing, but also improves service for businesses and individuals seeking licenses because it eliminates the burden of obtaining individual licenses from the State as well as each individual jurisdiction. Cities impose business license requirements primarily as a means of regulating businesses but sometimes also as a means of raising revenue. A regulatory business license program requires businesses to register with and obtain a license from the city, subject to a flat fee designed to cover the costs of implementing the program. A revenue -raising business license scheme generally involves different fees for different classes of businesses. Such fees may be based, for example, on the type of business, on the number of employees, or on the square footage of the business facility. City staff proposes a business license program as both a means of regulating businesses and as a means of raising revenue. Regulation of businesses provides a public benefit by establishing a process that will reduce the likelihood of illegitimate businesses engaging in the sale of goods and services to residents. In addition, a growing number of individuals have developed home businesses, which are regulated by Medina Municipal Code however there is no requirement for home occupations to obtain a license from the City. It is extremely difficult for City staff to enforce the home occupation regulations without a licensing program to identify the locations of the home occupations. Finally, a business licensing program will provide information to improve tracking and monitoring of sales and use taxes. AWC conducts an annual survey of City fees and charges, which includes information about business license fees. Approximately eighty percent (80%) of cities and towns in King County require business licenses. Cities charge fees based on several factors including flat rates and ranges based on number of employees, square feet of business space, and type of business. The average minimum fee charged is just under $50 annually. An average maximum fee cannot be calculated with the available information from the AWC survey. A recommendation on a fee structure has not been developed, but staff would propose a fee structure based on type of business, which would establish different fees for home occupations, businesses located in Medina and businesses not located in Medina, but engaged in business activities in Medina. An ordinance establishing business license regulations must be adopted by the City Council prior to implementation of the business license program. An enabling ordinance has been drafted by the City Attorney and can be presented to the City Council at the August 14th meeting, if desired. • Page 2 DOL Contract No. 8442-K City of Medina Contract No. INTERAGENCY AGREEMENT BETWEEN STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF LICENSING AND THE CITY OF MEDINA, WASHINGTON This Agreement is made and entered into by and between the Department of Licensing, hereinafter referred to as DOL, and the City of Medina (WA) 501 Evergreen Point Road PO Box 144 Medina, Washington 98039 hereinafter referred to as the City PURPOSE r It is the purpose of this Agreement to (1) authorize DOL's Master License Service, hereinafter referred to as "MLS," to act as the City's agent for business licensing activities, and (2) ensure that the City will retain full, lawful, regulatory and approval authority over all business licensing activities within its jurisdiction. This agreement is entered into pursuant to authority granted by Chapters 39.34 and 19.02 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW). THEREFORE, IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED THAT: STATEMENT OF WORK The Parties to this Agreement shall furnish the necessary personnel, equipment, material and/or services and otherwise do all things necessary for or incidental to the performance of work set forth in the Attachment "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein. PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE Subject to its other provisions, the period of performance of this Agreement shall commence on the date of final signature by both parties, and be completed two years thereafter, unless terminated sooner as provided herein. COMPENSATION Services identified in this Agreement are provided by MLS at no charge to the City unless otherwise noted. Communications and travel related costs for project coordination, or for respective staff needing to visit either the City or MLS locations, will be absorbed by the respective parties for their own staff. The City will reimburse MLS the cost of developing and producing any special or ad hoc informational reports requested by the City that are in addition to the standard MLS informational reports identified in the section "Reports." If the City and MLS agree to offer Internet filing processes for the City's licensees, the City agrees to reimburse DOL the fees charged by financial institutions and/or credit card processors to handle the city's license fees collected by credit card and/or other electronic means. MLS will absorb the cost of collecting its own handling fees via electronic means. The City will reimburse MLS expenses for changes as specified in section "Changes, Modifications, and Amendments" of this Agreement. The City will remit payment to the Department of Information Services (DIS) for costs billed them by DIS for access to the MLS computer system as provided in the Statement of Work. rile Name: 8442-K.doc Page 1 of 1 Printed: June 6, 2006 Original Copy 1 — DOL Contracts Office One Copy — Contract Manager Original Copy 2 — Contractor DOL Contract No. 8442-K BILLING PROCEDURES City of Medina Contract No, DOL will submit invoices monthly. Payment to DOL for approved and completed work will be made by warrant or account transfer by the City within 30 days of receipt of the invoice. Upon expiration of the contract, any claim for payment not already made shall be submitted within 30 days after the expiration date or the end of the fiscal year, whichever is earlier. MLS will forward the invoice to the attention of: Doug Schulze, City Manager at: City of Medina (WA); 501 Evergreen Point Road; PO Box 144; Medina, WA 98039. RECORDS MAINTENANCE Each party shall maintain books, records, documents and other evidence, which sufficiently and properly reflect all direct costs expended by either party in the performance of the services described herein. These records shall be subject to inspection, review, or audit by personnel of both parties, other personnel duly authorized by either party, the Office of the State Auditor, and federal officials so authorized by law. All books, records, documents, and other material relevant to this Agreement will be retained for six years after expiration and the Office of the State Auditor, federal auditors, and any persons duly authorized by the parties shall have full access to and the right to examinVny of these materials during this period. Records and other documents, in any medium furnished by one party to this agreement to the other party, will remain the property of the furnishing party, unless otherwise agreed. The receiving party will not disclose or make available this material to any third parties without first giving notice to the furnishing party and giving it a reasonable opportunity to respond. Each party will utilize reasonable security procedures and protections to assure that records and documents provided by the other party are not erroneously disclosed to third parties. INDEPENDENT CAPACITY The employees or agents of each party who are engaged in the performance of this agreement shall continue to be employees or agents of that party and shall not be considered for any purpose to be employees or agents of the other party. CHANGES, MODIFICATIONS, AND AMENDMENTS This agreement may be changed, modified, amended, or extended only by written agreement executed by both of the parties hereto. If, after the execution of this Agreement, the City requests changes to MLS processes, the City may be asked to reimburse MLS the cost of implementing the changes. MLS will notify the City of anticipated costs before starting to make the requested changes. If such changes are initiated by MLS, implementation costs will be absorbed by MLS unless otherwise mutually agreed upon by both parties. TERMINATION AND SAVINGS Either party may terminate this Agreement by written notice delivered to the other party at least sixty (60) days before the effective date of termination. In the event of termination of this Agreement, both parties will be liable only for performance rendered before the effective date of termination. In the event applicable funding provided to the city or MLS to implement the provisions of this agreement is withdrawn, reduced or limited in any way after the effective date of this Agreement and prior to its normal completion, either party may unilaterally terminate the Agreement. Such action is effective immediately upon delivery of written notice of termination. In the absence of actual delivery to and receipt by mail or other means at an earlier date and/or time, written notice of termination under this section shall be conclusively deemed to have been delivered as of midnight of the third day following the date of its posting in the United States mail. DISPUTES In the event that a dispute arises under this Agreement, it shall be determined by a dispute board in the following manner: Each party to this agreement shall appoint a member to the File Name: 8442-K.doc Page 2 of 2 Printed: June 6, 2006 Original Copy 1 — DOL Contracts Office One Copy — Contract Manager Original Copy 2 — Contractor DOL Contract No. 8442-K City of Medina Contract No. dispute board. The members so appointed shall jointly appoint an additional member to the dispute board. The dispute board shall evaluate the facts, contract terms and applicable statutes and rules and make a determination of the dispute. The determination of the dispute board shall be final and binding on the parties hereto. As an alternative to this process, either of the parties may request intervention by the Governor, as provided by RCW 43,17.330, in which event the Governor's process will control. GOVERNANCE This contract is entered into pursuant to and under the authority granted by the laws of the state of Washington and any applicable federal laws. The provisions of this agreement shall be construed to conform to those laws. In the event of an inconsistency in the terms of this Agreement, or between its terms and any applicable statute or rule, the inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence in the following order: Applicable state and federal statutes and rules; Applicable City or Local Ordinances ,r,,,�r Regulations, The Terms and Conditions of this Agreement; Statement of Work; Any other provisions of the agreement, including materials incorporated by reference. If any provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed in conflict with any statute or rule of law, such provision shall be deemed modified to be in conformance with said statute or rule of law. If any covenant or provision of this Agreement shall be adjudged void, such adjudication shall not affect the validity, obligation or performance of any other covenant or provision, or part thereof, which in itself is valid if such remainder conforms to the terms and requirements of applicable law and intent of this Agreement. The venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in the Superior Court of Thurston County. ASSIGNMENT The work to be provided under this Agreement, and any claim arising thereunder, is not assignable or delegable by either party in whole or in part, without the express prior written consent of the other party, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. WAIVER A failure by either party to exercise its rights under this agreement shall not preclude that party from subsequent exercise of such rights and shall not constitute a waiver of any other rights under this Agreement unless stated to be such in a writing signed by an authorized representative of the party and attached to the original Agreement. SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Agreement or any provision of any document incorporated by reference shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Agreement which can be given effect without the invalid provision, if such remainder conforms to the requirements of applicable law and the fundamental purpose of this agreement, and to this end the provisions of this Agreement are declared to be severable. File Name: 8442-K.doc Page 3 of 3 Printed: June 6, 2006 Original Copy 1 — DOL Contracts Office One Copy — Contract Manager Original Copy 2 — Contractor DOL Contract No. 8442-K City of Medina Contract No. CONTRACT MANAGEMENT The contract manager for each of the parties shall be responsible for and shall be the contact person for all communications regarding the performance of this Agreement. They may issue written or oral instructions that do not change the contract conditions, which may be needed to accomplish the contracted work. The Contract Manager for the City is: The Contract Manager for DOL is: Doug Schulze, City Manager Nancy Skewis City of Medina (WA) MLS Administrator 501 Evergreen Point Rd Department of Licensing PO Box 144 PO Box 9034 Medina, WA 98039 Olympia, Washington 98507-9034 dschulze@medina-wa.gov Phone: 360-664-1446 425-233-6400 Fax: 360-570-7875 425-454-8490 (fax) E mail: nskewisC&-dol.wa.gov ALL WRITINGS CONTAINED HEREIN This Agreement contains all the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties. No other understanding, oral or otherwise, regarding the subject matter of this Agreement shall be deemed to exist or to bind any of the parties hereto. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement. For City of Medina State of Washington Department of Licensing (date) Alan Haight, as Contracts Officer (date) Federal Tax ID #: Approved as to Form By AAG Anderson, 313106; See Me 8283 Jerald Anderson, AA (date) File Name: 8442-K.doc Page 4 of 4 Printed: June 6, 2006 Original Copy 1 — DOL Contracts Office One Copy — Contract Manager Original Copy 2 — Contractor DOL Contract No. 8442-K City of Medina Contract No. Attachment A STATEMENT OF WORK The City Shall: Agree to the exclusive use of the Master Application and any required addenda for the process of applying for a City business license, and the exclusive use of the Master License Service's Licenses and Registrations document for proof of City business licensure. If additional forms are identified as necessary for processing of City licensee accounts, their design, creation, or collection will be a cooperative effort between MLS and the City Agree to the exclusive use of the Unified Business Identifier (UBI) number in conjunction with the physical location identification numbering used by MLS in the identification of licensees and license accounts in all communications with MLS. Maintain remote on-line inquiry and update access to the automated MLS and UBI databases. Accept responsibility for payment of -ell equipment, connection, or access charges related to the city's access into and use of the MLS databases, as well as for the ongoing maintenance of the city's access to the MLS databases. Maintain in its city licensing office a limited -service, Washington State Unified Business Identifier (UBI) program field office. Accommodate requirements for Master Application forms as well as issuance of UBI numbers, regardless of whether the transaction involves a City business license. Ensure the timely availability to DOL of its licensing and Information Technology staff. The staff contacts provided will be knowledgeable of the City operations and/or technology and be able to assist MLS staff with process improvements and/or troubleshooting. DOL Shall: Create, produce, issue, accept, and process new and renewal applications for the City business licenses. In doing so, it will collect, process and disburse the respective City business license fees and licensing information received from applicants and licensees. Issue licensing documents (Master Licenses) for City business licensees. Provide informational reporting to the City of the City's business licensees. Provide its services through either paper -based licensing processes or Internet based processes, depending on the needs of the City and the capability of MLS. Be responsible for all aspects of designing and implementing modifications to the MLS computer system and establishing related MLS procedures and forms to handle new and renewal applications for City business licenses, issuance of license documents, collection of necessary licensing information and license fees, and their proper distribution. Provide technical assistance in establishing and configuring proper system access, and ensure security of access for City staff into the MLS and UBI databases. Training will be provided to City staff in the use of the MLS and UBI databases; and ongoing training will be provided to accommodate system changes or staff changes. Filing of Documentation Forms and Records Paper files are not maintained by MLS. Paper documents submitted to MLS will be microfilmed or electronically imaged, and then destroyed after MLS processing. An electronic representation of all filings completed via the Internet will be maintained. The City will have access to information filed with MLS on either a paper document or via the Internet through electronic access to the MLS computer system. If a paper document is needed by the City, File Name: 8442-K.doc Page 5 of 6 Printed: June 6, 2006 Original Copy 1 — DOL Contracts Office One Co Original Copy 2 — Contractor Copy —Contract Manager DOL Contract No. 8"2-K City of Medina Contract No. MLS will produce a copy from the microfilm or electronic record. The copy will be certified if needed by the City. REPORTS MLS provides a standard set of reports to each of its partners at no charge. These include but are not limited to, daily lists of new business applications and renewals, the fees processed each day; weekly lists of pending accounts; and lists of businesses for which fees have been transferred. City staff will determine which forms best suit their needs. MLS may be able to provide non-standard reports, statistics or lists to the City upon request. The City agrees to reimburse MLS costs for the production of non-standard reports requested. CHANGES TO PROCESSES MLS will notify the City of any changes anticipated to its processes or services as soon as they are known, and thereafter will coordinate mitigation of impacts that such changes may have upon service it provides. The City will notify MLS of potentialthanges to its business licensing requirements, fees or processes sufficiently in advance of the change to allow MLS to implement timely changes to any electronic, or automated systems, or changes to procedures or methods related to administering City business licensing. The MLS staff will be mindful of broader impacts that could occur to MLS or any of its partners by the City's proposal for change. MLS will assist the City in considering possible alternatives and in determining the most feasible means of achieving the objective of the proposal. MLS will coordinate review of the changes proposed by the City with any other MLS partners potentially impacted by the proposal and attempt to reach consensus among all affected partners. MLS will prepare any needed computer system change request in coordination with the City, and place the request in a prioritized work queue for timely completion. Changes that substantially alter the terms of this Agreement require a written amendment. CONFIDENTIALITY. The MLS automated system maintains data that is shared by multiple regulating agencies and other jurisdictions. The data is subject to various public disclosure laws regulating both its protection as well as dissemination to third parties. Therefore, the City understands and agrees: That data under the administration of MLS, regardless of whether it is uniquely related to the issuance of the City business licenses, is subject to applicable lawful requirements for protection and/or public disclosure. To abide by all applicable current or future public disclosure laws and to protect data confidentiality by limiting the disclosure of information received from MLS to third parties, unless authorized or required by law, or having received written consent from DOL to disclose it. That much of the information collection on the Master Application document may not be disclosed under RCW 82.32.330, RCW 51.16.070, RCW 50.13.020, and other state or federal laws. To utilize reasonable security procedures and protections designed to assure that confidential information is not disclosed to persons other than City staff who also agree to such confidentiality requirements. The City shall include such requirements of confidentiality for all staff that have access to the confidential data pursuant to this Agreement. File Name: 8442-K.doc Page 6 of 6 Printed: June 6, 2006 Original Copy 1 — DOL Contracts Office One Copy — Contract Manager Original Copy 2 — Contractor A L -C3 fn coCL N ca '� L CL ~ U � Q U � o �� N C C E c: � U U U pU U a) ) a) a) a) � C) ., 0 - c a) -ac � � c co E c E c c U U U U (oJ 70 m -0 _0 aa) � a) o o � a) > a) > CD "o E 70 70 o o U) U Q U Q Q CL Q U CL Q o o (D Co cn cn c v) v> c M co p O U Un p O U 70 m a) 7 a) _0 70 a) 70 (1) M a) D U Q a) N L Q =3 c =3 c U 0 CL O � C M U U co �j Q Q U U o M > p a) - a) Q m - N CL CL O U 0 E 0 U 0 E 0 Q U U U U U w N N a) a) c a) a) c a) CIO CL O a O O U U o U U N p a) a) a) a) _ a) ._• U a) - a) - M c a) - Q a.- U Z U U U U O co cn a) E - 0 0 o cn ��a)o� �. c C �� U L C OO (a N N CL a)a) c 0) a) 2 Q_' o .O C a Q �' O a)`acnaa)0) m c a-0 v .N 4. L = p `r a) LL CL L O .. p �_ cLa U c N a LO a a) w "o .2 c L U U) U C 0 E Q •` U O } O m .0 a n a) *, a (B C CL Q ��/ IL U c p n (a ai O Q U � a_ J (�„) Y_ Q Q .0 cn o L O-0 U� p_ 2) co U � W Z p L C? tl1�Q� vJ U U UF`� Li a) N-0 oQ.Uli a_ a o co LL 0 4-IL COc-0 c «. �� O a) ?� a)�_0 U p E � �a `' U� a) U O �-0 ' 4J G23 0 0 a) M 0� a)�m 5 �F •- cn c a) O c o cow te oza a) OD co oa L E o E o cn O — 'c � c ca cn � a)� c U) -i LL >— Q 02 >•-_� c ca U L:= o o :.NO O U L a) c con4- U o ao '= U U L a. c o E2"N a• > Q >, 00000� O O O O O M C C U � N � >,= "- .� E O a) U Ua H N 1- O0 •� (a a) 00 W ca i F N .- �E a) O a) a) NNNNNooQQmmUUU W W W W I-YJ2�Z0a-a_a_a_U I WU. ctCO. coZ) N 0 a) cu a. Co O O N O U O cu c a) cu U cu cm a) Q "U c 0 U ti w co c a) Q O O O 11 I L ca Q� Co U •U C O U 4-0 6A Co 0 o T CO N � T Q to 0 O •� N T U (1) T Q C O O O T U) U) U) T 0 Q Q to .O O O O c 0 CDvi Cl) cn U)Cl) U) O =3 :3 Co �_ �_ U) 0 0 0 W .O 0 O O 0 0 o U) U) to ui i/i ui N U U U U U U M U) U) U) U) _w 0 0 0 to C O C 0 O C O O O C 0 T to =3 = uvi = cvn cvn Uri a) C, C 0 0 .0 CY) 0 0 0 0 U) Cl) L U) (n U) U) T U V 4) U U U U Co (n W _ 0 w w W.o G O 0 C o C O C o C 000 C O o U) to in U) in Cl) FD m in U) U) U) '@ U) 'U) m N:3 :3 :3 = =3 =3 =3 0 0 0 C) 0 0 > '0 N > O CD> L 0 tmn O T O CL CL Q O (a 3 Q ._. U Q U U = 2 c 0 Q »r ia CM Cu ca p O C L 0 a. w (� 0 L c) C W y o -0 > •L LLam p Cn 0N) >, U m d Cm Q - � E E 0 � � � N v U O U_ ccaa —OO �-00 fA .c m (n U m O Q � Z d� O J O a) U Ll' a U) () y. _= .. 0� m «: O 2-0 �- O H m U a' m O L to Co N -0 m �N a N O O O O mmU) Z 0 caa O a) _0 O O E m �' c >> m I -0 mad c a ca U — .� — I U U L Co c 60 U C m V m O ca i ca U C N 0 Q 0 0 .� U� E c c U O c ui 0 L� p U c H _ NNQQmUUUU0mYY_f° ZzOdddz(nC U)U)HZCCo N 0 N m 0) Co a O O O N rn ti O Cu m Q 0 O ril z H DI CD 0 Hi N a CD C CD m O 0 CD U) CL ■ O. U) CD CD n ■ I CD r� C CD U) 1• O 0 O� U) 1 , 1 O D 3 CD e--1- Cn CD 3 CD ■ KO O U) CD CD C O 3 CD D rf NEW CD --h C CD O n ^^-. o3 — . �. cD 3 — . CC N =r CD cr O O � O O =r CD CD -O O. CD n r~ ■ ET 0 mn CCD w w CD 3 O �C O CD O CD w CQ O O ■ — 3 0 11 O C CD CD rF �C CD iv cr �C �E k 0 Alb i 1 ` I i I m 3= 0 M Va CEO k, rr Can � � � f, m R =' 2 a 1 @ S .. 0=1 !T �[ Q PIL C Cj IL f[ N -4 CCA Q. N. :3 cD ca.u' m C3 cl E i i L...._........_._..__.._ ._.__ ,._..._ .._.:..__...___.__, --.-._--- _--- __ --------------- .:__..:_,._._._..:..�� Is CD CCD C U) l< r--i- CD In' ow, e- q- CD CD n r—f- O C) G T Cal N O Q CQ CD 0 n O ti CD C) O co Q) J shoulder t shoulder m shoulder 0 uuutomu�i shoulder i bikes/pedestrians shou;lder r z shoulder • •- 14 shoulder p 0 w G) 0 v, CD C � m 0 �- CD U) �z Cn O 1 0- CD m � CD O O O D( �' CD CD o m COn CD �- C CD. C� < "I' _ CD . 0 CD O to M. � Sv O � �, m O Q CD CD — o :3 0 O 3 O 0. '+ Cn � � � Z � m D y - 0 E (n CD _0 CD 3 cr CD _0 3 -!4 "0 3 C: 7- CD vi C: I 0 CD CD no m 0 0 3 CD CD cr (n -0 CD CD Q 0 C: =3 0 0 CDT 3 c cn- 0 CC) 0 0 0 0 0 0 cr 0 CD o I 0 rQ 3 CL 3 CD G) =; r-f- 0 0 :3 CL 0 0 0 c) C,,:-), An, CD CD 0 0 w 0. --4 CD CD M W < < m CD CA) 0 Zo C) (D (D QL . ..... -a 0 0 I --'� 0 C/) 0 _0 (D -0 w 0 O 0 9 CD CD CD cD2) 0 a 0 =M -1 0 X 0 0 0 0 CD 0 —3 CD =r :3 CD CD CD cn _0_0 _0 CD -n c 0 O. CD O. 3 0 n M n 3 (n CD a) CD l< -0 h ::g 0 -o -- 0 3 CD CD M 0 CD cn =r CD M CD CL CD 0 C: C. CD CL 0 0 3 3 D ■ 0 CD ^^ Q (n CD ,�CD � CCD � N ,Q O Cn n CD I Q _+ -Q cn O w (a << go � CD c `< M n cn l< 0 3 Q V (n cn go CD O Q -n U \V (" rmf ' '♦ ^V v , CCD cn O n CD ■ ■ ■ m CD c) 0 p- 0 O CD 3 cn M w O. (n- O n- 3 CD C� CD � r v O D i C: O Un CD O O 3 n- w Q CD O ■ ■ ■ Z F CD m 0) U) Q. CD Q) I QL 0 0 O� U) 0 Cn CD a) CD QL CD ■ r CD rn C CD CD CD 0 r-q- 0 0 ■ r CD 0) CD C CD =O 0 i 0 0 00 in c 0 Q) 0 0 l< c CD ■ r CD a) m C CD . . on 0 CD CD o rn U) cn 0 0 m CD 0 0. ■ z 0 0- c QL Av CD C� CD n 0 0 3 3 0 0 CD CD 0- c- CD cam' N ■ ■ m CD 0 0' 0 0 0 rn �- o' ■ W CL c0 0 3 w =' rn w 0 CD 0 0 ■ 0 cn CD 0 0 m v cn 0- CD cam' o' 0 zr 0 ■ VJ 0 1 CD CD 3 rn ■ ■ W 0' l< 0 0 w CD 0- CD s�' E • • CD c . cD 3 CD �o 0. O 0 � CD � n � o CD o �- �. � ( c 0 o� rn r+ 3c cn o D— CD QO '-+ �cr� svcn r 0 CD O � 00 -0 —. o CD T w n 3 90 �' I CL CD W m cD r o M CD o 0� CD ca 0 0 3 3 ■ w ,W 4- Z 1 r- I. fil LA M- ) § � III E 0 00 .p D c 0 z 0 3 CD 0) N r c: a CD 0) m CD cc C. ) Q CD 0 :71:5 CD CD Q a) O 3 444 �j cy- • CQ a) Q_ • rn= c -��uon O Q. ,{ IT n O �- CDZT cD - O �- -o c O CD 0n r+ D O O O N z Cr 2 CD rh M% \ 0 0 ,..� 0 . 0 p.I. W v 0 m C. 0 m iw M rMOL CD N N 4**40 ■ if 0) -0 < 0 > a 3-0 55 �- D CD O CD 0 IV O cr C) O 0 ::r CD u) S r-F- rn � CD ■ co CD n 3 w CD :3 :3 r-.I- CD CD CD C.)O 0 CD CD =3 < 0. CD Cn CD -1 CD CD < CD CD �-t- :3 O n CD CD 0- r-+L CD (C) v 2) O CD O. CD n ■ gin' 00 cn CD cn O N e--f 0 O_ 3 CD 3 O G- (O O CD 0- cn CD CD 0- ■ 0 m_ cn w 3 CD O ch w cn CD O w CD I CD CD o� L77J ■ ■ ■ ■ cCD�Ccn CD �CD0 �CD0 CD cn CD CD CD Q CD 0 CD 0 'O CD CD 0 tD p C) S1 - n. �- m 0 CD CD :• CD CD ui CD M� CD O N O r(7-F Q < o� _.iv --I, --I" �� oCnw '�o� 0 CD U) �� �cn5. CD� N r-l- -0 M Q �, CCDD p CAD CDCD CD CD O CD � CD O Q � � O C . 3 2� N G n CD �. O D CD 0 CD CD - v M X CD C�� C CDN C CD N O CD � C 3 0 cn M CD O CD CD a) c% CZ 3 v =" � CD CD � BCD zO 0 O-U CD a Cn CD m v N CD M M r* -1 " p o 0 CCDD O Q Q CD •J c0 CD �. O r-f =r CD r� O CD v � M m 3 3 m CD CD o 0 CD V r-4- 0 E r--f 0 0 QL (DD Cl) CD Q CD CD � CD 0 N 0 0 Q 3-01 0 CD 3 CD CD w Q 0 M, CD am CD cn Q CD F 0 S o CD 0 �✓--1- CD e--f O n S3 CD "i O rF CD CD Q N Yj� N J C7 r- FE mn Q tQ z CD CD C CO) TI CD m c O 0' O :" N O Ol CD CD N O Cal U) CD 0 O P, CD _' n c� CD N O W C,n 0) CD z 0 CD (C) CD O O IV O 3 O 3 — 3 (D co 1 O D. 3 0 X go CCD 0n 0 .� CD 0 O N N c. N D W n Q 0. E '{ D D o CD CD 3CD o O CD O 3o �'o CD c cr CD CD CD N CO Q Q CD 5 sv3 MCD CD m (n CD CD w CD -Is aD < ca %< CD %< r-+- O O O O� off. 3 c — CD C �w CD CD 0'- _CD7- 0. u �-• o c� CD m 0- — o C �- 0. W 0 ■ w0 Qo � �n C .5. CD M- CL CD o =' 1 CD CD CD CDO X CD 00 O- CD cr0 CD O c� � �3 CD Q CD 70m 0 CD O CD CD �UD 0 ■ 00 C: ;1�- 3 c: cn O CD 0 o �< 0' CD O << O r-f- C: CD 0 � my C/)� CD QL CD (n �. +1 O p CD r,., 0� ■ D;u cc < w CD CO �O 0 m cn �� CD CD CD O 0 0 E-Eloo '' S CD �M� wll rmtk CD O 0 w YN,r,:1 e ItA r k-p (t Tree Ordinance Guidelines <Previous I Next > .. Part 1. Planning for an ordinance More and more communities are beginning to recognize the very tangible benefits that trees provide in the urban environment. Healthy trees reduce air and noise pollution, provide energy -saving shade and cooling, furnish habitat for wildlife, enhance aesthetics and property values, and are an important contributor to community image, pride, and quality of life. Furthermore, many communities have realized that in order to protect and enhance their valuable tree resources, it is useful to view and manage their trees as a cohesive unit, the community or urban forest. Tree ordinances are among the tools used by communities striving to attain a healthy, vigorous, and well -managed community forest. By themselves, however, tree ordinances cannot assure that the trees in and around our communities will be improved or even maintained. Tree ordinances simply provide the authorization and standards for management activities. If these activities are not integrated into an overall management strategy, problems are likely to arise. Without an overall strategy, management will be haphazard, inefficient, and ineffective, and the community forest will suffer. f This larger management view is commonly lacking when ordinances are developed. Local ordinances j are often developed in response to public outcry over specific perceived problems. This "band -aid" i; approach frequently leads to ordinances that are not consistent with sound community forest management, and may in fact thwart good management efforts. For example, public outcry has led to the development of many ordinances designed to protect old "heritage" trees. Unfortunately, most of these same ordinances allow the routine destruction of younger trees. The end result may be an unsustainable community forest, short on young trees and long on old, declining trees. By focusing too narrowly on individual trees, such ordinances may contribute to the degradation of the community forest over the long term. A tree ordinance is not a panacea for poor or inadequate municipal tree management. Nor is it a replacement for a comprehensive community forestry program that is fully supported by the local government and community residents. Properly applied, tree ordinances can facilitate good management of community tree resources. Improperly applied, ordinances can legitimize counterproductive practices and undermine the long term success of the community forest. Types of ordinances In 1990, we conducted a study of city and county tree ordinances in California (Bernhardt and Swiecki 1991). We reviewed 159 enacted city tree ordinances and 9 enacted county ordinances in addition to a small number of proposed ordinances. This sample represented about 50% of the city tree ordinances and 80% of the county tree ordinances in effect in California at that time. For the purposes of our review, we grouped tree ordinances into three basic categories: Street tree ordinances primarily cover the planting and removal of trees within public rights -of -way. They often contain provisions governing maintenance or removal of private trees which pose a hazard to the traveling public. Also included in this category are ordinances with tree planting requirements, such as those requiring tree planting in parking lots. Tree protection ordinances are primarily directed at providing protection for native trees or trees with historical significance. They usually require that a permit be obtained before protected trees can be removed, encroached upon, or in some cases, pruned. View ordinances are designed to help resolve conflicts between property owners that result when trees block views or sunlight. Among California cities, street tree ordinances were more common than tree protection ordinances, although many city ordinances include elements of both. County tree ordinances were most commonly tree protection ordinances, and most of these regulated tree removal on private property. View ordinances were relatively uncommon. We received view ordinances from only four cities and one county. Most of these were "self -enforcing", that is, they set forth a procedure through which private parties could resolve conflicts without direct intervention by the city or county. Although other types of ordinances, such as grading ordinances, may be related to trees and other vegetation, our discussion will be limited to these three categories, which encompass the overwhelming majority of all tree -related local ordinances. Effectiveness of existing ordinances The effectiveness of a tree ordinance can be influenced by many factors. Do the residents support or oppose various ordinance provisions, or are they even aware of them? Is the ordinance enforced adequately? Does the ordinance account for environmental limitations that affect tree health, growth, and survival? Does the local government have the financial resources to fulfill ordinance requirements? Since the answers to these questions will vary from place to place, even very similar ordinances can have quite different outcomes in different communities. In our 1992 survey of city and county tree programs in California (Bernhardt and Swiecki 1993), we asked tree program managers about the effectiveness of their existing ordinances. The majority of respondents from cities and counties with existing ordinances believed that their current tree ordinance was in need of revision. In some cases, respondents from different programs within the same city had widely divergent opinions on the effectiveness of their existing ordinance. Enforcement was not the only issue affecting effectiveness ratings - 52% of the city respondents felt that tree ordinance enforcement was adequate. (A note of caution here: many of these respondents were probably responsible for ordinance enforcement in their cities.) As we discuss in Part 3, Evaluating the urban forest and ordinance performance it is possible to objectively assess the performance of a tree ordinance. This assessment requires both an evaluation of the ordinance and related regulations and evaluation of the urban forest itself. In our analysis of California tree ordinances, we looked to see whether each ordinance had the structural elements necessary for effectiveness. Although ordinances may vary widely in form, content, and complexity, an effective tree ordinance should meet the following criteria: 1. Goals should be clearly stated and ordinance provisions should address the stated goals. • 2. Responsibility should be designated, and authority granted commensurate with responsibility. • 3. Basic performance standards should be set. • 4. Flexibili should be designed into the ordinance. • 5. Enforcement methods should be specified. • 6. The ordinance should be developed as part of a comprehensive management strategy. • 7. The ordinance should be developed with community support. The first five criteria are key features of the ordinance itself. The last two criteria reflect the background in which the ordinance is developed. Although an ordinance meeting these criteria is not guaranteed success, ordinances lacking one or more of these elements will definitely be handicapped. In our review of city and county tree ordinances, we looked for evidence that the first six of these basic criteria were met. Goals A clear statement of goals is essential, since goals provide the basis for interpreting the ordinance and evaluating its effectiveness. However, only 52% (88) of the ordinances we reviewed began with a stated purpose which can be interpreted as the goal of the ordinance. Goals were most commonly lacking in street tree ordinances. Among street tree ordinances that did list a goal, it was often of the form, "to establish rules and regulations governing tree planting, maintenance and removal on the public right of way". This type of goal suggests that the ordinance is seen as an end in itself, rather than as a tool to help achieve certain community forestry goals. Some street tree ordinances do show a clear link with a wider management strategy, as indicated by a goal such as "to create a master plan governing tree planting, maintenance, and removal". Tree protection ordinances nearly always begin with a stated goal, such as "to prevent wanton destruction of trees", or "to preserve as many trees as possible during the development process". However, goals such as these may be too general to allow for meaningful evaluation. How many are "as many as possible"? The lack of clear, specific goals is a common shortcoming of many tree ordinances. Responsibility and authority Of the ordinances reviewed, 54% (91) designated a single position responsible for enforcing the ordinance and carrying out the urban forest program. In the remainder of the ordinances, responsibility was split between two or more positions, or worse yet, was not designated. In most cases, the most efficient way to manage the urban forest is to have a single person responsible for overseeing all tree -related activities. This allows for better coordination of management activities and reduces conflicts between departments. However, in small communities, it may not be possible to have a single central tree authority. Responsibility may be split between a tree commission, which sets policy and has administrative duties, and city staff, which is responsible for operations and enforcement. The tree program manager should be vested with the authority necessary to carry out his or her responsibilities. A reasonably clear link between responsibility and authority is found in many tree ordinances. However, in some ordinances, responsibility appears to exceed authority, whereas in others, authority is granted, but specific responsibilities are not stated. The management of the urban forest is likely to suffer when responsibilities are ill-defined or the authority to act is not granted. Basic performance standards Many tree ordinances focus on setting specific standards that pertain to trees. A tree ordinance should indicate which practices and conditions are acceptable and which are not. For example, damaging public trees is unacceptable in most communities and is addressed in many tree ordinances. Some communities find that damage to or removal of oaks and other native trees without cause is unacceptable, and address this in their ordinances. Besides stating what is regulated, an ordinance should set basic standards for performance. Many older ordinances are deficient in this regard. For instance, many ordinances require tree planting in conjunction with new construction. However, relatively few ordinances set standards for the eventual amount of canopy cover or shading that is to be provided, or the level of species diversity to be achieved. Similarly, many ordinances require an extensive permit process before native trees can be removed, but few set a standard for the maximum amount of canopy that can be removed overall. If basic standards for performance are not set, it is possible that all individual actions taken will conform with the ordinance, but that the overall goals of the ordinance are never achieved. Effective performance standards address the urban forest as a whole rather than focusing exclusively on individual trees. Excessively vague standards (e.g., "as much as possible") may not only be unenforceable, but may not survive a legal challenge. In 1999, a Fulton County Superior Court Judge ruled in favor of developer against the City of Atlanta because a section of the city's tree ordinance lacked sufficient objective standards. The section in question included the following language (underlined sections are our emphasis): ... the city arborist shall require that improvements be located so as to result in minimal disturbance to the natural topoQraphy of the site and the protection of the maximum number of mature trees on the site. It is the specific intent of this section to require that damage to mature trees located within setback and required yard areas and to trees located on abutting properties owned by others be minimized to the greatest degree possible under the particular circumstances as determined by the city arborist in the city arborist's discretion. [Atlanta, GA: 1999 Code of Ordinances Part H, Ch. 158, Art. H, Div. 2, Sec. 158-104] Although the concept advanced in this provision may be reasonable, additional language is needed to more clearly define what constitutes "minimum disturbance" or the "maximum number". For example, tree retention standards based on a percentage of the existing tree density or canopy cover (see Provision 32. Conservation of forest and woodland resources duringdevelopment) evelopment) could provide a sufficiently objective standard for assessing whether a project complies with the ordinance. While avoiding the pitfall of vagueness, an ordinance should also avoid slipping into the abyss of excessive technical detail. Many ordinances have focused on very detailed implementation standards instead of setting basic performance standards. For example, many ordinances include lists of species that are allowed or prohibited for use as street trees. Others specify the size of planting stock to be used in plantings. Implementation standards such as these change as new methods and materials are developed and old ones fall out of favor, and as a result, ordinances with these details can quickly become outdated. If detailed specifications are needed, they are more appropriately placed in the urban forest management plan, which can and should be updated frequently. Flexibility While ordinances should set basic performance standards, it is important that they allow for flexibility. If the tree ordinance sets objective performance standards, it can also direct the community arborist or forester to implement the standards by making decisions on a case -by -case basis. This can reduce the need for overly detailed implementation standards and allows for the flexibility to make decisions based on site -specific physical and biological factors. Even if a community does not have personnel with the necessary expertise on staff, the ordinance can allow for the input of qualified professionals on specific issues. For example, many tree protection ordinances require a report by a qualified consultant as a part of the permit process. Outside technical consultants should work for and be responsible for representing the interests of the community, not clients that may have a financial interest tied to tree removal or damage (e.g., a property owner or developer). About three-quarters of the ordinances have a process for appealing decisions. The appeal process provides a degree of flexibility, in that it serves as a check against the authority of the tree program manager. Ideally, this helps to ensure that decisions are based on all pertinent information, and that they stand on technical merit. Unfortunately, appeals may also serve to undermine good urban forest management if they routinely allow political pressure to override the decisions of competent tree specialists. Enforcement Enforcement is an important aspect of every ordinance. Only slightly more than half of the ordinances we received contain an enforcement element. Although 48% (81) of the ordinances specified penalties for violations, only 24% (41) designated a position or positions responsible for enforcement. Thus, many tree ordinance provisions may not be enforced because nobody is specifically charged with this duty. In ordinances with enforcement provisions, many kinds of penalties are employed. Fines, jail terms, and forfeiture of performance bonds are among the penalties invoked in both street tree and tree protection ordinances. Many jurisdictions also require specific replacement plantings as penalties. In some street tree ordinances, occupancy permits are withheld until required trees and landscaping are satisfactorily installed. Many of the penalties available appear to be sufficient to help deter offenders, but only if consistent enforcement makes it likely that violators will be cited and penalized. Comprehensive management strategy Few existing ordinances have been developed as part of an integrated tree management strategy. Only 6% (10) of the Californian ordinances we reviewed showed clear evidence that they were an element of a comprehensive management strategy. Without this underlying strategy to guide the process, inappropriate provisions may be included, or necessary provisions may be omitted. Furthermore, local governments may unsuccessfully use a tree ordinance to pursue goals that are more readily achieved through other means. The tree ordinance is often seen as an end in itself, rather than as one of a number of tools which must be used to attain a healthy, vigorous, and well -managed community forest. The lack of integration between urban forest management and tree ordinances is probably the most prevalent and serious problem with tree ordinances overall. ! An ordinance is not a panacea for poor or inadequate management of community tree resources. Properly applied, an ordinance can help facilitate good management. Improperly applied, ordinances can legitimize counterproductive practices, provide disincentives for tree conservation, and undermine the long-term sustainability of the urban forest. By focusing on community forest management, rather than simply regulation, communities can determine whether an ordinance is necessary, and what its role should be. By following the process we present, Developing a Community Forest Management Strategy, communities can develop effective ordinances that are uniquely suited to meet their specific needs. It seems that relatively few communities have followed this approach in developing their tree ordinances. Far more commonly, tree ordinances are drafted after reviewing a few existing ordinances or "model' ordinances. As a result, we found that many California tree ordinances were very similar to one another. In several instances, two or more communities had identical ordinances. Certain frequently -copied provisions are found unchanged in many ordinances, often complete with dated terms or concepts. Although it is possible to construct an ordinance using a "cookie cutter" approach, such an ordinance is unlikely to be well integrated with a comprehensive urban forest management strategy. Community support and ordinance success Community support is critical to ordinance effectiveness, but community support cannot be legislated into an ordinance. Rather, the ordinance must be developed within the context of community values and priorities if it is to enjoy public support. Even a technically correct tree ordinance is apt to be ineffective without public support. Passing a highly restrictive ordinance in a nonsupportive community is not only politically difficult, but may be counterproductive. Rossi (1990) described such a situation that occurred after the passage of a tree protection ordinance. Local citizens attempted to circumvent the ordinance by cutting down trees before they attained the diameter specified for protection in the ordinance. As a practical matter, most tree ordinances rely heavily on voluntary compliance. Few communities would support the concept of a patrolling "tree cop" that seeks out violations. However, citizens in many communities are willing to voluntarily comply with restrictions they perceive as reasonable, and report obvious violations to protect their local tree resources. To be successful, tree ordinances should not impose regulations that most local citizens are unwilling to support. <Previous I Tree ordinance web site map I Next , ISA home page I Submit comments or suggestions © International Society of Arboriculture 2005 P.O. Box 3129, Champaign, IL 61826 Email comments & questions to isa(aisa-arbor.com