Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-25-24 Council WorkshopSPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS: The City of Arlington strives to provide accessible meetings for people with disabilities. Please contact the ADA coordinator at (360) 403-3441 or 711 (TDD only) prior to the meeting date if special accommodations are required. CALL TO ORDER Mayor Don Vanney PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL Mayor Don Vanney – Wendy APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Mayor Pro Tem Michele Blythe INTRODUCTION OF SPECIAL GUESTS AND PRESENTATIONS WORKSHOP ITEMS – NO FINAL ACTION WILL BE TAKEN 1. Contract Renewal for Kennel Services with the Humane Society ATTACHMENT A of Skagit Valley Staff Presentation: Jonathan Ventura Council Liaison: Yvonne Gallardo-Van Ornam 2. Final Draft of 2024 Comprehensive Plan ATTACHMENT B Staff Presentation: Amy Rusko / Marc Hayes Council Liaison: Mayor Pro Tem Michele Blythe 3. Community and Economic Development Quarterly Report ATTACHMENT C Staff Presentation: Marc Hayes 4. Utilities and Transportation Quarterly Report ATTACHMENT D Staff Presentation: Jim Kelly ADMINISTRATOR & STAFF REPORTS MAYOR’S REPORT COMMENTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS/COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS PUBLIC COMMENT For members of the public who wish to speak to the Council. Please limit your remarks to three minutes. Arlington City Council Workshop Monday, November 25, 2024 at 6:00 pm City Council Chambers – 110 E 3rd Street SPECIAL ACCOMMODATIONS: The City of Arlington strives to provide accessible meetings for people with disabilities. Please contact the ADA coordinator at (360) 403-3441 or 711 (TDD only) prior to the meeting date if special accommodations are required. REVIEW OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS FOR NEXT MEETING EXECUTIVE SESSION RECONVENE ADJOURNMENT Mayor Pro Tem Michele Blythe / Mayor Don Vanney City of Arlington Council Agenda Bill WS #1 Attachment November 25, 2024 Contract renewal for kennel services with the Humane Society of Skagit Valley (HSSV) 2025 Contract with the Humane Society of Skagit Valley (HSSV) Police; Jonathan Ventura, Chief EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: $10,000.00 BUDGET CATEGORY: Police Animal Control Services BUDGET AMMOUNT: 10,000.00 LEGAL REVIEW: DESCRIPTION: (HSSV). HSSV requests a 5-year agreement. The City of Arlington has maintained a partnership with the Human Society of Skagit Valley (HSSV) since 2012. Prior to this the City had a brief contract with the City of Everett. HSSV is located 30 miles away, whereas the City of Everett Shelter is located 18 miles away. Factoring drive times with traffic, each location takes nearly the same amount of travel time per trip, however HSSV is significantly more cost effective. Arlington had maintained its own animal control services and shelter up to 2002. ALTERNATIVES: “I move to approve the contract with Skagit Humane Society and authorize the Mayor to sign it, pending final review by the City Attorney.” CONTRACT This is a non-exclusive contract entered into between the City of Arlington, hereinafter referred to as "City" and the Humane Society of Skagit Valley, hereinafter referred to as "Contractor". WITNESSETH: The City is a municipal corporation which, in the exercise of its power and to ensure the health and welfare of its citizens, must, to the best of its ability, provide for the care, detention, and/or destruction of stray animals; and the Contractor maintains and operates facilities suitable for said purpose; and both parties are interested in entering into an agreement relative thereto. IS HEREBY AGREED BY AND BETWEEN THE RESPECTIVE PARTIES AS FOLLOWS: 1. SERVICES: Contractor will provide kennels for animals on a seven day per week basis for care and feeding of all animals, brought in by City representatives, or occasionally by City of Arlington residents on a case- by-case basis as approved by City Representatives, other than owner releases, to the Contractor located at 18841 Kelleher Road, Burlington, Washington for impounding. Impounding will occur during regular business hours. After regular business hours animals will be temporarily held by City until a transfer can made after 8:00 a.m. Contractor agrees to maintain clean, sanitary, and adequate kennels for all impounded animals and further, to treat all owners thereof who may appear at said Contractor's place of business in a courteous manner in compliance with the City. City will keep a current list of all licenses of animals registered in the City, which shall be available to Contractor during regular business hours. 2. NON-EXCLUSIVITY: Nothing in the Agreement shall prevent Contractor from providing any service to any other person. Nothing in the Agreement shall prevent City from obtaining all or any part of the services from its employees and facilities or from providers other than Contractor. 3. CONTRACT TERMS: This contract shall be for the period commencing January 1, 2025, through January 1, 2030. 4. INABILITY TO PAY: City reserves the right to temporarily suspend the performance of this contract when real or projected budget shortfalls create an inability to pay for animals transferred by City of Arlington residents. City will provide 45 days' notice in writing of the contract suspension. Suspension of performance of the contract under this section shall not be considered anticipatory repudiation of this agreement nor will it increase the term of the contract. This section shall not affect the agreement as it relates to services provided by Contractor for animals transferred by City representatives. 5. CONSIDERATION: In consideration for the services and facilities provided by Contractor, City will pay charges for each animal transferred to Contractor according to the following schedule: • Live dog transferred to Contractor by City representatives - $95 • Live cat transferred to Contractor by City representatives - $75 • Live cat and her litter of kittens less than 4 weeks of age by City representatives - $80 • Deceased dog or cat transferred to Contractor by City representative - $35 • Live dog transferred to Contractor by City of Arlington resident with City of Arlington pre-approval- $95 • Live small livestock transferred to Contractor by City representative - $55 - Limited space is available for small livestock - must have prior approval from HSSV before impounded here. • Live poultry, rabbits, rodent family, domestic birds, and reptile transferred to Contractor by City representative - $25 - Limited space available - must have prior approval from HSSV before impounded here. • Arlington dog or cat that is adopted in an unaltered condition - No fee. Except that: It is determined that the dog or cat cannot be altered until a later date, based upon staff Veterinary guidelines. In the event of the determination, the animal will be scheduled for an alter appointment with the Contractor's veterinarian at the time of the adoption. If the City discovers that the adopting party has not kept the alter appointment, no fee will be charged to the City. City will not be credited for unaltered dogs or cats released directly to a rescue service that has a policy and practice of altering all animals. 6. VERIFICATION OF ADDRESS: Contractor shall require proof of City residency from any person transferring a dog to their care. Contractor shall verify with City that stated addresses are within the City's jurisdictional limits. 7. DANGEROUS OR POTENTIALLY DANGEROUS DOG: Contractor agrees to provide adequate facilities to safely and securely hold dangerous or potentially dangerous dogs, impounded by City. City representatives shall complete a written request for quarantine provided by the Contractor to specify holding time and requirements. • City will pay an additional charge of $15 per day, after the initial seventy-two (72) hour period for dangerous and potentially dangerous dogs. 8. ANIMAL CRUELTY CASES: City will be responsible for veterinarian care or medicine costs pertaining to cruelty cases. City shall be consulted prior to seeking veterinarian service except for the emergency dispensation of medicine necessary for the comfort of a sick or injured animal. • City will pay an additional charge of $10 per day, after the initial seventy-two (72) hour period for animals impounded in cruelty cases. Limited space is available for large animals and must have prior approval from HSSV before brought here. 9. QUARANTINE: The Contractor agrees to provide facilities for animals impounded by City and in need of quarantine. City representatives shall complete a written request for quarantine provided by Contractor to specify holding time and requirements. • City will pay an additional charge of $15 per day, after the initial seventy-two (72) hour period for animals in quarantine. 10. SPECIAL HOLD: A request by the City to hold an animal for a required time due to individual circumstances. The request to hold the animal and the request to release the animal into our adoption program, return to owner, or euthanasia must be in writing. • City will pay an additional charge of $10 per day, after the initial seventy-two (72) hour period for animals with a special hold. 11. DISPOSAL OF ANIMALS: Contractor agrees to dispose of all animals in compliance with the provisions of City ordinances and state and federal laws. 12. RESERVATION OF RIGHT TO ANIMAL: Contractor may have at its option, the right to any animal not claimed by the owner within the first seventy-two (72) hours after said animal is transferred to Contractor and may make arrangements with regard to the care of the animal as Contractor deems proper. • Except that: prior to a decision to euthanize an animal, Contractor shall first make a reasonable attempt to adopt the animal out or place it with an animal rescue service if the animal fits the adoptable pets criteria. • Except further: the City may authorize euthanizing an animal within the first seventy-two (72) hours if the animal is seriously injured or diseased with a recommendation from a veterinarian. 13. RELEASE OF ANIMALS: Contractor shall post its office hours in a location visible to the public from the outside of the facility and shall be available during those hours to release animals to owners upon presentation of a proper release form issued by the City. 14. RIGHT TO REFUSE ANIMALS: Contractor reserves the right to refuse any animals brought in when it is deemed that Contractor does not have the appropriate facilities to accommodate the need of such animal or Contractor's facilities are at its maximum capacity. 15. ANIMAL RESEARCH: No live animal impounded by City representatives or that City paid a charge for, and was unclaimed, shall be offered or released for research purposes. 16. SUSPENSION, TERMINATION, AND CLOSE-OUT: If Contractor fails to comply with the terms and conditions of this contract, City may pursue such remedies are legally available, including but not limited to, the suspension or termination of this contract. 17. CHANGES, AMENDMENTS, MODIFICATIONS: Either party may request changes to the contract. All modifications shall be in writing and signed by each of the parties. 18. REPORTS AND INFORMATION: Contractor, at such time and in such form as City may require, shall furnish City with monthly reports, and as it may request, pertaining to the work or service undertaken pursuant to this contract, the costs and obligations incurred or to be incurred in connection therewith, and any other matters covered by this contract. 19. AUDITS AND INSPECTIONS: City or its representatives shall have the right to review and monitor financial and other components of the work and services provided and undertaken as part of this contract. 20. HOLD HARMLESS: Contractor agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its appointed officers and employees, from and against all loss and expense, including attorney's fees and costs by reason on any and all claims and demands upon City, its elected and appointed officers and employees from damages sustained by any person or persons, arising out of or in consequence of Contractor and its agents negligent performance of work associated with the contract. 21. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR STATUS: The parties intend that an independent contractor relationship between Contractor and City will be created by the agreement. No agent, employee, or representative of the Contractor shall be deemed to be an employee, agent, servant or representative of the City for any purposes, and the employees of the Contractor are not entitled to any of the benefits the City provides for City employees. Contractor shall be solely and entirely responsible for its acts and for the acts of its agents, employees, servants, subcontractors, or otherwise during the performance of this agreement. Contractor is responsible for all taxes applicable to this agreement. Contractor is not an agent of the City and does not have authority to bind the City to any fiscal or contractual obligation. 22. LIABILITY INSURANCE: Contractor shall procure and keep in force during the term of this Agreement, at Contractor's own cost and expense, Commercial General Liability Insurance with companies authorized to do business in the State of Washington, which are rated at least "A" or better and with a numerical rating of no less than seven (7), by A.M. best Company and which are acceptable to the City. The policy shall be on an occurrence basis in an occurrence basis in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence and at least $2,000,000 in the annual aggregate, including but not limited to: premises/operations (including off- site operations), blanket contractual liability and broad form property damage. The policy shall contain a provision that the policy shall not be canceled or materially changed without 30 days prior written notice to City. No cancellation provision in any insurance policy shall be construed in derogation of the continuous duty of the Contractor to furnish the required insurance during the term of this Agreement. Prior to the Contractor performing any Work, Contractor shall provide the City with a Certificate of Insurance acceptable to the City Attorney evidencing the required insurance. Contractor shall provide the City with either (1) a true copy of an endorsement naming Arlington, its offices, its employees and agents as Additional Insureds or (2) a true copy of the blanket additional insured clause from the policies. Receipt by the City of any certificate showing less coverage than required is not a waiver of the Contractor's obligations to fulfill the requirements. 23. GOVERNING LAW: This contract shall be governed by and constructed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington, including any regulation, ordinance or other requirements of any governmental agency having or asserting jurisdiction over the services provided hereunder. 24. VENUE: In the event that any disputes arise over this contract, the venue of any legal action shall be that of Snohomish County, Washington. 25. SEVERABILITY: If any term of condition of this contract is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other terms, conditions, or application, which can be given effect without the invalid term, condition, or application. To this end, the terms and conditions of the contract are declared severable. 26. WAIVER: Waiver of any breach or condition of this contract shall not be deemed a waiver of any prior or subsequent breach. No terms or conditions of this contract shall be held to be waived, modified, or deleted except by an instrument in writing, signed by the parties hereto. 27. ENTIRE AGREEMENT: This written contract represents the entire contract between the parties and supersedes any prior oral statement, discussions, or understanding between the parties. 28. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS: This contract shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the parties hereto; provided that no party hereto may assign this contract without the prior consent of the other party, which consent shall not be unreasonably delayed or withheld. 29. AUTHORITY: Each individual executing this contract on behalf of City and Contractor represents and warrants that such individual(s) are duly authorized to execute and deliver this contract on behalf of City or Contractor. 30.NOTICES: Any and all notices affecting or relative to this contract shall be effective if in writing and delivered or mailed to the respective party being notified at the addresses listed below: Contractor Contact: City Contact: Janine Ceja, Shelter Manager Jonathan Ventura, Chief of Police Humane Society of Skagit Valley Arlington Police Department 18841 Kelleher Rd. 110 East Third Street Burlington, Washington 98273 Arlington, Washington 98223 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Contractor have executed this Agreement as of the date and year written. By: ____________________________ By: ___________________________ Don E. Vanney, Mayor PRESIDENT ATTEST: ATTEST: ________________________________________________________________ Wendy Van Der Meersche, City Clerk TREASURER APPROVED AS TO FORM: Steve Peiffle, City Attorney City of Arlington Council Agenda Bill WS #2 Attachment COUNCIL MEETING DATE: November 25, 2024 SUBJECT: Ordinance Approving 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update ATTACHMENTS: Ordinance, Overview/Staff Report, and Supporting Documents DEPARTMENT OF ORIGIN Community and Economic Development; Amy Rusko, Deputy Director 360-403-3550 EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: None BUDGET CATEGORY: N/A BUDGETED AMOUNT: N/A LEGAL REVIEW: DESCRIPTION: Plan for the City of Arlington was adopted in 2018 (2015 Periodic Update). The State of Washington extended the eight-year deadline for completion (2023) to December 2024. The purpose of the Comprehensive Plan is for the City to supply an overview of comprehensive planning for the city including required and optional elements under the Growth Management Act for the next 20 years. The mandatory elements include Environment, Land Use, Housing, Capital Facilities, Utilities, Transportation, Economic Development, Parks and Recreation, and Climate Change and Resiliency. The optional elements include Public Safety and Subareas. The Comprehensive Plan articulates a series of goals, objectives, policies, actions, and standards that are intended to guide the day-to-day decisions of elected officials and staff. The Comprehensive Plan must meet Washington Administrative Code, Revised Code of Washington, Puget Sound Regional Council Vision 2050, and Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies. The State of Washington changed the periodic update HISTORY: The adopted in 2017. The structure of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan periodic update will be significantly different than our existing plan, which was originally adopted in 1995, and only updated with the most current statistical data during required periodic updates, but never changing the underlying goals. The existing comprehensive plan will be almost 30 years old by the time the 2024 plan is adopted, it was premised on low density residential development, no plan for sustained economic development to occur, and no plan for any expansion of the city’s Urban Growth Area (UGA). The basis upon which that 1995 plan was developed conflicts with how the city must evaluate and manage the inevitable changes that are occurring both currently and in the upcoming twenty-year planning horizon. City of Arlington Council Agenda Bill WS #2 Attachment ALTERNATIVES: Remand to staff for additional information Workshop; discussion only. At the December 2, 2024 Council meeting, after the public hearing, the recommended motion will be, “I move to approve the ordinance adopting the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update and authorize the Mayor to sign the ordinance.” Page 1 of 16 New Comprehensive Plan Layout: • The Comprehensive Plan is organized in 6 sections: o Section I: Introduction and Community Pro�ile o Section II: Foundational Principles o Section III: Subareas o Section IV: Books, with Goals & Policies and a Supporting Analysis o Section V: Implementation Action Matrix o Section VI: Appendix New Sections: • Section I: Introduction and Community Pro�ile o The Introduction includes the framework and outline for the plan, why the comprehensive plan is required, the foundational principles, list of the subarea, list of the books, the purpose of each book, description of the implementation and monitoring, summary of consistency with Growth Management Act (GMA), Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), Multicounty Planning Policies (MPPs), Vision 2050, Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs), and State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), and 2021-2024 Legislative Session policies. o The Community Pro�ile includes a summary of history of Arlington, present day Arlington, and , There is information about Arlington’s demographics, which include population growth trends, age distribution, diversity, languages spoken, income levels, employment by industry, resident’s location of employment, income spent on housing, commute behavior and distribution, population growth projections and capacity, employment growth targets, housing growth, public participation overview, zoning code changes, and other city plans adopted by reference. • Section II: Foundational Principles o The 5 foundational principles:  Equity  Economic Stability and Vibrancy  Climate Adaptation and Resilience  Neighborhoods and Connectivity  Healthy Active Lifestyles o The foundational principles are an extension of the vision and bridge the gap between the city’s core values and actions to achievable change. o Implementing the foundational principles requires setting speci�ic and measurable goals and policies. Each goal and policy of the plan is in alignment 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update Overview Summary – Amy Rusko, Planning Page 2 of 16 with one of these �ive foundational principles. The foundational principles have de�initions, associated symbols, and colors. o The foundational principles are interwoven throughout the books, goals, and policies. The number of goals and policies in each book will vary, however, there will be a minimum of one goal and one policy associated with each foundational principle. • Section III: Subareas o The city has designated 14 subareas:  Arlington Terrace  Cascade Industrial Center  Crown Ridge  East Hill  Edgecomb  Gleneagle  Haller City  Hilltop  Island Crossing  Kent Prairie  Old Town  Smokey Point  West Bluff o Each of the subarea descriptions has a list of neighborhoods, vision, and existing conditions. o The neighborhoods within each subarea are listed in Appendix A where each neighborhood is described, along with existing conditions, attributes, de�iciencies, and identi�ied capital improvement projects. • Section IV: Books o Each book element is evaluated for its current functionality, future needs assessment, sustainability, environmental impacts, and �inancial implications. An implementation strategy, or action plan is then developed for each book to ensure its success. o After analysis is completed, goals are created to meet mandatory requirements, along with the city’s vision for how the community should grow, once the goals are established, policies are created to ensure that the identi�ied goals may be accomplished by staff. • Book 1: Environment Page 3 of 16 o The Environment book addresses the preservation, protection, and restoration of Arlington’s environmental assets and guides the development and implementation of environmental policies and regulations. The primary objective of the Environment book is to integrate the natural and urban environments in a sustainable manner. The goals and policies established in the Environment book are related to preservation, equitable distribution of environmental resources, eco-tourism, greenhouse gas emission reduction, climate change resilience, increased tree canopy, public education, and livability. o Goals and Policies o Supporting Analysis provides information about federal, state, and regional planning, existing conditions, climate and weather, geology and soils, water resources, groundwater, critical areas, critical aquifer areas, FEMA �lood areas, geologically hazardous areas, �ish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, fauna, air quality, and noise. • Book 2: Land Use Page 4 of 16 o The Land Use book is the foundation of the Comprehensive Plan. The Land Use book ensures Arlington can support future population growth, employment growth, and the infrastructure needed to support projected land uses. The primary objective of the Land Use book is to encourage sustainable, equitable growth that will improve the City’s quality of life for generations to come. The goals and policies established in the Land Use book are related to social capital and community resiliency, equitable access to City resources and programs, collaboration with other jurisdictions, land uses, energy conservation, annexation, future growth, and development regulations. o Goals and Policies o Supporting Analysis provides information about Puget Sound Regional Council’s VISION 2050, Snohomish County growth targets, population allocation, land use designations, land use considerations, land capacity analysis, future urban growth area expansion/annexation, and subarea plans, along with Appendix A: Neighborhoods, Appendix C: Land Use Forecasts and Appendix E: Forecast Methodology and Discussion. Page 5 of 16 Page 6 of 16 • Book 3: Housing o The Housing book addresses Arlington’s housing supply and needs. The primary objective of the Housing book is to: understand the local and regional housing market, identify Arlington’s projected housing needs by income level, assess the land capacity to meet identi�ied needs, identify barriers to achieving needed levels of affordable housing, and address and seek to undo policies and regulations resulting in racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion. The goals and policies established in the Housing book are related to a quality and diverse housing stock, affordable, workforce, and special needs housing, housing assistance, mixed-income and mixed-use neighborhoods, sustainable practices, stable neighborhoods, and healthy, active lifestyles. o Goals and Policies o Supporting Analysis provides information in Appendix B: Racially Disparate Impact Analysis, Appendix D: House Bill 1220 Analysis, Appendix E: Emergency Housing Template, and Appendix F: Forecast Methodology and Discussion. Page 7 of 16 Housing + Population All forecasts show sufficient land for accommodating the 2044 housing and population targets. Scenario 5 assumes the UGA will redevelop by 2044, at densities based on recent development in Page 8 of 16 Figure 2 below shows Arlington’s housing allocations by income band for the 2020-2044 planning horizon. The new methodology, called “Method C” as shown below, allocates future housing needs by income band to all Snohomish County jurisdictions. In total, Arlington must plan to accommodate 7,794 new permanent units by 2044, and an additional 482 emergency housing units. • Book 4: Economic Development o The Economic Development book addresses the City’s commitment to a sustainable local and regional economy. The primary objective of the Economic Development book is to create conditions for economic growth and improve the quality of life in Arlington by providing living-wage jobs. The goals and policies established in the Economic Development book are related to a strong economy, diverse employment options, cooperation with other agencies and local businesses, the Arlington Municipal Airport as an economic engine, enhancing the Cascade Industrial Center, supporting the natural environment, unique economic hubs, and quality of life. o Goals and Policies o Supporting Analysis provides information in Appendix F: Forecast Methodology and Discussion. Page 9 of 16 Only under Scenario 5 does the City have enough land to accommodate future jobs targes, but this is an aggressive outlook on development, which assumes a continuation of the current estimated work from home levels and that all developable land within the UGA will redevelop by 2044, regardless of market constraints observable in recent development. Future land needs for employment depends on many factors, including what job types the market brings – either lower-density industrial jobs as seen in the past and recent developments, higher-density industrial employment in emerging industries, and/or increased employment in higher-density occupations such as healthcare. Page 10 of 16 • Book 5: Parks, Recreation and Open Space o The Parks, Recreation, and Open Space book addresses the present and future park, recreation and open space needs of those living and working in Arlington. The primary objective of the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space book is to ensure there are suf�icient, diverse, high-quality, equitably distributed open space, trail, and park facilities, and recreation programs and services throughout Arlington. This book also aims to support the 2024 Parks and Recreation Plan. The goals and policies established in the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space book are related to an equitable recreation system, impact mitigation, and effective �inancing strategy, protection of unique environmental amenities, a highly connected trail system, consistent and high-quality facilities, and collaboration with other recreation providers. o Goals and Policies o Supporting Analysis provides information in Appendix G: Parks and Recreation Master Plan Page 11 of 16 • Book 6: Transportation o The Transportation book addresses the multi-modal transportation system serving Arlington residents, workers, and visitors including roads, public transit, rail transportation, non-motorized facilities (bike lanes, multiuse trails, sidewalks, and crosswalks), and the Arlington Municipal Airport. This book also aims to support the 2024 Transportation Master Plan. The primary objective of the Transportation book is to ensure Arlington has a well-connected multi-modal system that offers safe and easy travel options that are accessible, build climate resiliency, and promote livability. The goals and policies established in the Transportation book are related to ef�icient and equitable services, environmental impacts, energy conservation, fewer vehicle miles traveled, walkability, concurrency, safety, connectivity, annexation, and coordination with other agencies. o Goals and Policies o Supporting Analysis provides information in Appendix H: Draft Transportation Master Plan Page 12 of 16 • Book 7: Public Safety o The Public Safety book addresses �ire and emergency medical services, police protection, and hazards and emergency management with respect to natural, humanmade, and technological disasters. The primary objective of the Public Safety book is to identify the wide-ranging public services and resources that address public safety and ensure the basic needs of the City’s residents are met. The goals and policies established in the Public Safety book are related to social services, community resiliency, natural hazards, climate change, hazardous materials, safe neighborhoods, and strong social network. o Goals and Policies o Supporting Analysis provides information about federal, state, regional, countywide, city planning, existing conditions, �ire and emergency medical services, police, hazards and emergency management, natural hazards including �loods, earthquakes, landslides, severe weather, volcanoes, and wild�ire, humanmade hazards including accidents, dam failure, and epidemics, technological hazards including cybersecurity incidents and hazardous materials, emergency management approach including mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. Page 13 of 16 Page 14 of 16 • Book 8: Capital Facilities and Utilities o The Capital Facilities and Utilities book addresses both publicly owned and privately owned utility, collection, transmission, distribution, and processing facilities that serve Arlington. This includes transportation, water, sewer, stormwater, parks systems, the Arlington Municipal Airport, community buildings such as police stations and libraries, as well as solid waste, natural gas, electricity, cable, and telecommunication services. The book aims to support long-range plans maintained by service providers, including the City’s Water System Comprehensive Plan, Wastewater Comprehensive Plan, Stormwater Comprehensive Plan, and Airport Master Plan. The primary objective of the Capital Facilities and Utilities book is to demonstrate that all capital facilities and utilities serving Arlington support the current and forecasted population and economy. The goals and policies established in this book are related to meeting or exceeding standards, concurrency, demand management and conservation, affordability and equitable access and distribution of public services, increasing resiliency by preparing for disasters and other impacts, promoting renewable energy, mitigating environmental and public safety impacts, and coordinating with other organizations. o Goals and Policies o Supporting Analysis provides information about existing conditions, municipal services, city-owned facilities, police, water, wastewater, stormwater, airport, information services, transportation, contracted services, other utilities including natural gas, electricity, public schools, hospitals, and capital improvement projects, along with Appendix G: Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Appendix I: Arlington School District Capital Facilities Plan, Appendix J: Lakewood School District Capital Facilities Plan, Appendix M: Capital Improvements Prioritization Framework, Appendix N: Parks 6-year CIP, and Section V: Implementation Action Matrix o Final update to the book includes adding a Parks section. The city consultant is working on this update, and it will be completed for the next packet. Page 15 of 16 Page 16 of 16 • Section V: Implementation Action Matrix o This section has the Comprehensive Plan Implementation Action Matrix that shows the Short-Term: 0-5 years, Medium-Term: 5-10 years, and Long-Term: 10 or more years for each of the Book Elements. • Section VI: Appendix o Appendix A: Subarea Neighborhoods o Appendix B: Racially Disparate Impacts and Displacement Analysis o Appendix C: Land Use Forecasts o Appendix D: HB1220 Analysis o Appendix E: Emergency Housing Analysis o Appendix F: Land Use Forecast Methodology o Appendix G: Parks and Recreation Master Plan o Appendix H: Transportation Master Plan o Appendix I: Arlington School District Capital Facilities Plan o Appendix J: Lakewood School District Capital Facilities Plan o Appendix K: Public Engagement and Outreach o Appendix L: Department of Commerce Checklist o Appendix M: Capital Improvement Prioritization o Appendix N: Parks 6-year Capital Improvement Plan Still to be Completed and Added: o Appendix O: Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS Issued on 11-25-2024) o Appendix P: Consistency with Snohomish County Planning Policies (12-6-2024) o Appendix Q: Response to Puget Sound Regional Council (12-6-2024) o Appendix R: Response to Department of Commerce (12-6-2024) o Appendix S: Adopting Ordinance (12-3-2024) Appendix P, Appendix Q, and Appendix R are not required items that need to be adopted by City Council. Staff is choosing to add this information for transparency. These items will be completed prior to sending the �inal approved document to Department of Commerce and Puget Sound Regional Council. • The Growth Management Act • The Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update is regulated by 36.70A RCW • Washington State Department of Commerce. • Puget Sound Regional Council – Vision 2050 • Multicounty Planning Policies (MPPs) • Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs) • State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) • Miscellaneous Legislative Session Policies Passed from 2021-2024 Washington State Legislation or Other Requirements ORDINANCE NO. 2024-XXX 1 ORDINANCE NO. 2024-XXX AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND ADOPTING BY REFERENCE AMENDMENTS TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY OF ARLINGTON AS REQUIRED BY THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT (GMA) WHEREAS, The City of Arlington is required to plan under RCW 36.70A.040; and WHEREAS, every eight years, RCW 36.70A.130(1) requires the City of Arlington to take legislative action to review and, if needed, revise its comprehensive plan, including its policies and regulations designating and conserving natural resource lands and designating and protecting critical areas to comply with the requirements in Chapter 36.70A RCW; and WHEREAS, under the schedule established in RCW 36.70A.130 (4), the deadline for the City of Arlington to comply with the update required by RCW 36.70A.130 (1) is December 31, 2024; and WHEREAS, the City of Arlington contracted with OTAK, Inc to conduct a thorough review of the City’s comprehensive plan and prepare with assistance of city staff analyses of the comprehensive plan currently in effect and develop an updated plan for the City of Arlington consistent with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW; and WHEREAS, the City’s Planning Commission and City staff discussed and recommended proposed revisions they concluded were needed to comply with Chapter 36.70A RCW; and WHEREAS, the City of Arlington Planning Commission reviewed the analyses and proposed revisions and held open public meetings on January 19, 2023, joint meeting with Arlington City Council on January 23, 2023, February 7, 2023, open house on April 27, 2023, May 2, 2023, September 19, 2023, November 7, 2023, November 21, 2023, December 5, 2023, January 18, 2024, February 6, 2024, February 22, 2024, March 5, 2024, March 19, 2024, July 2, 2024, September 3, 2024, September 17, 2024, October 15, 2024, open house on October 22, 2024, November 5, 2024, and November 19, 2024. WHEREAS, based on its review of the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW, the analysis and proposed revisions prepared, and the public comments received, the Planning Commission modified the plan and forwarded a recommended draft plan to the City Council on November 19, 2024 after the Planning Commission public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a public workshop on the proposed plan on November 25, 2024 and conducted a public hearing on December 2, 2024 to receive public comments on the recommended findings on review and proposed revisions; and ORDINANCE NO. 2024-XXX 2 WHEREAS, based on its review of the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW, the analysis and proposed revisions prepared by their Boards and Commissions and staff, and the public comments received, the City Council finds and declares that the review and needed revisions have been prepared in conformance with applicable law, including Chapter 36.70A RCW, Chapter 43.21C RCW, and the approved public participation and adoption process; and WHEREAS, based on its review of the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW, the analysis and proposed revisions prepared by their Boards and Commissions and staff, the recommended findings on review and proposed revisions forwarded by the Planning Commission, and the public comments received, the City Council hereby finds and declares that Arlington’s comprehensive plan as revised by this ordinance complies with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW; and WHEREAS, the City Council acknowledges that portions of the comprehensive plan, most particularly the water and sewer comprehensive plan and transportation plan portions of the plan, are still in process but the City has made substantial progress towards completing the same with the assistance of the City’s consultants, RH2 Engineering and Transpo Group, and the City anticipates those plans being final not later March 31, 2025; and WHEREAS, the City completed water, sewer, and transportation comprehensive planning following the adoption of the 2015 Comprehensive plan, including, but not limited to, the City of Arlington Sewer Comprehensive Plan completed in 2017, the Transportation 2035 Plan completed in 2017, and the City of Arlington Water Comprehensive Plan completed in 2019 and annual transportation CIP planning; and those plans have already laid the groundwork for the updates to those plans which are in progress and provide support for the amendments to the comprehensive plan contemplated by this ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to document its substantial compliance with the December 31, 2024 deadline of RCW 36.70A.130 (4); NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ARLINGTON, WASHINGTON, DOES MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS: 1. Findings. The Arlington City Council finds that: a. The City has established and followed a public participation program in accordance with RCW 36.70A.130 (2)(a). b. The City Council believes that the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) issued by the City’s Responsible Official adequately identified all known significant environmental issues associated with the adoption of the updates to the comprehensive plan. c. Notice of all amendments to the comprehensive plan adopted to fulfill the requirements of RCW 36.70A.130 was sent to the Washington State Department of Commerce a least sixty days before the amendments were adopted, in accordance with RCW 36.70A.106. ORDINANCE NO. 2024-XXX 3 d. The City of Arlington’s existing development regulations comply with the requirements of Chapter 36.70A RCW. e. The City Council finds that the review and needed revisions to the Comprehensive Plan have been prepared in conformance with applicable law, including Chapter 36.70A RCW, Chapter 43.21C RCW, and the approved public participation and adoption process and, taken collectively, are in the best interests of all its citizens. f. The City Council finds that although Book 6 – Transportation and Book 8 – Capital Facilities and Utilities of the Comprehensive Plan require updating when the water and sewer comprehensive plans and updates to the transportation plan are completed by the City’s consultants, the draft chapters provide an adequate basis for planning and growth. g. The city Council will proceed with completion and adoption of the water and sewer comprehensive plans and the transportation plan when finished by the City’s consultant and following all appropriate reviews by staff, agencies, stakeholders, and the public. WHEREAS, the City Council considered the same at a workshop held on July 8, 2024 and December 9, 2024 and their regular meeting on July 15, 2024 and December 16, 2024, and considered them along with the Planning Commission recommendations; and the City Council having determined approving said amendment was in the best interest of the city; and WHEREAS, the amendments were presented to the Department of Commerce for comment and said Department had no comments on the ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered the proposed amendment to the municipal code and finds it to be consistent with city and state law and in the best interests of the citizens; and NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Arlington does hereby ordain as follows: Section 1. Comprehensive Plan Cover Page/Table of Contents/Acknowledgements. The cover page, table of contents, and acknowledgements section of the Comprehensive Plan, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, is hereby adopted, and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 2. Section I: Introduction and Community Profile. The Introduction and Background section of the Comprehensive Plan, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “B”, is hereby adopted, and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 3. Section II: Foundational Principles. The Foundational Principles section of the Comprehensive Plan, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “C”, is hereby adopted, and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. ORDINANCE NO. 2024-XXX 4 Section 4. Section III: Subareas. The Subareas section of the Comprehensive Plan, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “D”, is hereby adopted, and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 5. Section IV: Book 1 – Environment. The Environment Element and Supporting Analysis section of the Comprehensive Plan, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “E”, is hereby adopted, and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 6. Section IV: Book 2 – Land Use. The Land Use Element and Supporting Analysis section of the Comprehensive Plan, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “F”, is hereby adopted, and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 7. Section IV: Book 3 – Housing. The Housing Element and Supporting Analysis section of the Comprehensive Plan, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “G”, is hereby adopted, and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 8. Section IV: Book 4 – Economic Development. The Economic Development Element and Supporting Analysis section of the Comprehensive Plan, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “H”, is hereby adopted, and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 9. Section IV: Book 5 – Parks, Recreation, and Open Space. The Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Element and Supporting Analysis section of the Comprehensive Plan, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “I”, is hereby adopted, and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 10. Section IV: Book 6 – Transportation. The Transportation Element and Supporting Analysis section of the Comprehensive Plan, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “J”, is hereby adopted and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 11. Section IV: Book 7 – Public Safety. The Public Safety Element and Supporting Analysis section of the Comprehensive Plan, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “K”, is hereby adopted, and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 12. Section IV: Book 8 – Capital Facilities and Utilities. The Capital Facilities and Utilities Element and Supporting Analysis section of the Comprehensive Plan, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “L”, is hereby adopted, and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 13. Section V: Implementation Action Matrix. The Implementation section of the Comprehensive Plan, a true copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “M”, is hereby adopted, and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. Section 14. Section VI: Appendices. The following appendices, a true copy of which are attached hereto as Exhibit “N”, are hereby adopted, and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full; Appendix A: Subarea Neighborhoods Appendix B: Racially Disparate Impacts and Displacement Analysis Appendix C: Land Use Forecasts ORDINANCE NO. 2024-XXX 5 Appendix D: HB1220 Analysis Appendix E: Emergency Housing Analysis Appendix F: Land Use Forecast Methodology Appendix G: Parks and Recreation Master Plan Appendix H: Transportation Master Plan Appendix I: Arlington School District Capital Facilities Plan Appendix J: Lakewood School District Capital Facilities Plan Appendix K: Public Engagement and Outreach Appendix L: Department of Commerce Checklist Appendix M: Capital Improvement Prioritization Appendix N: Parks 6-year Capital Improvement Plan Appendix O: Environmental Impact Statement Appendix P: Consistency with Snohomish County Planning Policies Appendix Q: Response to Puget Sound Regional Council Appendix R: Response to Department of Commerce Appendix S: Adopting Ordinance Section 14. Ordinance to Be Transmitted to Department. Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.106 a copy of this Ordinance shall be transmitted to Washington Department of Commerce as required by law. Section 15. Severability. If any provisions, section, or part of this ordinance shall be adjudged to be invalid or unconstitutional, such adjudication shall not affect the validity of the ordinance as a whole or any section, provision or part thereof not adjudged invalid or unconstitutional. Section 16. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof consisting of the title shall be published in the official newspaper of the City and shall take effect and be in full force five (5) days after publication. PASSED BY the City Council of the City of Arlington and APPROVED by the Mayor this 2nd day of December, 2024. CITY OF ARLINGTON ____________________________________ Don E. Vanney, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________________ Wendy Van Der Meersche, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ___________________________________ Steven J. Peiffle, City Attorney Arlington in Motion, 2044 and Beyond ARLINGTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN De c e m b e r 2 0 2 4 II 2024 Comprehensive Plan City of Arlington, WA Adopted by the Arlington City Council December 2, 2024 Ordinance No. 2024-XXX Prepared in accordance with the Washington Growth Management Act – RCW 36.70A – and the State Environmental Policy Act – RCW 43.21C. The Plan was also prepared with Washington Department of Commerce Guidelines for updating comprehensive plans. See Appendix L. III Acknowledgements Section I: Introduction and Community Profile Section II: Foundational Principles Section III: Subareas Section IV: Books »Book 1: Environment Overview with Goals and Policies »Book 1: Environment Supporting Analysis »Book 2: Land Use Overview with Goals and Policies »Book 2: Land Use Supporting Analysis »Book 3: Housing Overview with Goals and Policies »Book 3: Housing Supporting Analysis »Book 4: Economic Development Overview with Goals and Policies »Book 4: Economic Development Supporting Analysis »Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Overview with Goals and Policies »Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Supporting Analysis »Book 6: Transportation Overview with Goals and Policies. »Book 6: Transportation Supporting Analysis »Book 7: Public Safety Overview with Goals and Policies »Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis »Book 8: Capital Facilities and Utilities Overview with Goals and Policies »Book 8: Capital Facilities Supporting Analysis Section V: Implementation Action Matrix Section VI: Appendix »A p p endix A: Neighborhoods »Appendix B: Racially Dis par at e I mpacts and D isplacement Analysis »A p p endix C: Land Use Forecast s »Ap p endix D: HB 1220 Analysis »Appendix E: Emergency Housing An alysis »Ap p endix F: Land Use Forecast Meth odolo gy »App endix G: Parks and Recreation Ma ster Plan »Appendix H: Transportation Mas ter Plan »Appendix I: Arlington Schoo l Dis trict Capital Facilities Plan »Appendix J: Lakewood School D ist r ict Capital F ac ilities Plan »Appendix K: Public Engagemen t an d Outreach »Appendix L: Department of C omm e r ce Checklist »App endix M: Capital Improvem e nt P r io ritization »A p p endix N: Parks 6-year Cap it al Imp rovement Pla n »Appendix O: Environmental I mpact S ta tement »A p p endix P: Consistency with Sno hom ish County Pla n ning Policies »Appendix Q: Response to Puget Soun d Regional Council »Appendix R: Response to Depa r t ment of Commerce »Appendix S: Adopting Ordi na nce Table of Contents IV Acknowledgements Elected Officials MAYOR Don Vanney CITY COUNCIL Rob Toyer Heather Logan Debora Nelson Michele Blythe Yvonne Gallardo-Van Ornam Jan Schuette Leisha Nobach PLANNING COMMISSION Melissa Johnson Gayle Roeber Tim Abrahamson Nathan Senff Jennifer Benton PARKS, ART, AND RECREATION COMMISSION Steve Maisch Jennifer Harrington Rick Sloan Crista Dietz Heather Watland Randy Nobach Jan Bauer City Staff ADMINISTRATION Paul Ellis, City Administrator COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Marc Hayes, Director Amy Rusko, Deputy Director Raelynn Jones, Administrative Specialist III Ameresia Lawlis, Assistant Planner I Baile Linklater, Arlington High School Student Intern PUBLIC WORKS James Kelly, Director Ryan Morrison, Deputy Director Katie Heim, Enterprise Data and Technology Manager PARKS AND RECREATION Sarah Lopez, Community Engagement Director POLICE Jonathan Ventura, Police Chief City Staff Continued FINANCE Kristin Garcia, Director AIRPORT Marty Wray, Director INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY Bryan Terry, Director Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 1 SECTION I: INTRODUCTION AND COMMUNITY PROFILE What is a Comprehensive Plan? A comprehensive plan is a long-range plan that jurisdictions use to capture the community’s 20-year vision for the future. Comprehensive plans provide a unique opportunity to build a framework for the future of the community by covering various topics and establishing goals, policies, and action. This framework provides guidance for day-to-day decisions made by elected City officials, City staff, and community members. Comprehensive plans also allow jurisdictions to be proactive in planning for the future. The plan seeks to understand trends and other factors that could impact and shape the community and to establish means of addressing and mitigating these impacts as needed. Additionally, comprehensive plans offer rare occasions to holistically analyze and evaluate how competing interests can be balanced for everyone within the planning area. Jurisdictions are allowed to make minor amendments to their comprehensive plans once per year if necessary; however, more substantial periodic updates to comprehensive plans are required every ten years by the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA).1 This periodic update to the City of Arlington’s Comprehensive Plan, referred to as Arlington in Motion – 2024 and Beyond, presents a completely restructured document to ensure the City is not only compliant with current standards, but is also planning for the next 20 years, and laying a solid framework for the years beyond 2044. The central Puget Sound region has changed dramatically since Arlington’s first comprehensive plan was adopted in 1995. For the most part, Arlington’s previous comprehensive plans from 2005 and 2015, retained many of the same planning ideologies prevalent in 1995. The 2024 Comprehensive Plan updates the previous plans with current planning principles that supports Arlington’s growth in a way that the community supports. This comprehensive plan is designed to serve the entire community, with sustained economic development, and the capacity to accommodate allocated growth targets (population, housing units, and jobs) for the next twenty years, through 2044. 1 RCW 36.70A.130, https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx - ?cite=36.70A.130 Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 2 Comprehensive Plan Framework and Organization Arlington in Motion’s framework and organization consists of the City’s mission, vision, foundational principles, newly-defined subareas,, goals and policies for each Book (or planning element), and actions for implementation and monitoring. Each of these components of this plan are described in more detail below and on the following pages. Mission The overall mission of the City of Arlington is to represent itself as a regional example of innovation, pro- gression, and resourcefulness; and to be able to quickly respond to ever changing conditions, while main- taining its commitment to provide exceptional public services, compet- itive opportunities, and an enviable sense of place and quality of life for the community. Vision The vision for Arlington is represented within the following statements. These express the desired future for the community and align with Puget Sound Regional Council’s VISION 2050 plan. By 2050… Arlington is a diverse, inclusive community whose residents have equal opportunity to access available resources, programs, services, and places regardless of income level, race, ethnicity, gender, ability, or age. By 2050… Arlington’s subareas are safe, each one an expression of our City’s history and commitment to quality urban planning. Our subareas are connected through a network of complete streets, trails, and transit lines, so residents have multiple transportation options for work, play, or just exercise. By 2050… Arlington’s economy has a global reach with well diversified and robust manufacturing and business interests that provide a sustainable employment base allowing residents the opportunity to live, learn, work, and play in the same community. By 2050… Arlington remains a city framed within a beautiful natural setting from the river to the Cascade mountains that continues to enhance the quality of life for our community. The City has enhanced access to this environment with an expanded system of trails that provide easy connections from our urban environment as well as pathways to neighboring cities. By 2050… Arlington’s multi-faceted approach to a healthy community has included social, economic, environmental, and physical efforts which have had a positive effect on the overall strength of our community. In elements from transportation to food policy the City has taken an active role in planning for the health of our residents. This vision is supported by the five foundational principles below and is premised upon a ‘look back from the year 2050’, and what a desirably progressive city Arlington has or will become by the year 2050. As Arlington evolves and adapts to ongoing changes related to economics, population, environmental impacts, technological changes, and even changes in governance, it is essential that strong enduring principles are adhered to, to ensure the growth and success of the City. Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 3 Foundational Principles Arlington in Motion includes a set of five foundational principles that are intended to provide guidance for the next 20 years and support the community’s achievement of the mission and vision statements. The City of Arlington’s foundational principles are: »Equity »Neighborhoods and Connectivity »Economic Stability and Vibrancy »Climate Adaptation and Community Resiliency »Healthy Active Lifestyles The foundational principles are interwoven throughout this plan to guide the goals and policies for the Subareas (Section III), Books (Section IV), and the actions for implementation and monitoring (Section V). Full descriptions for each foundational principle are provided in Section II – Foundational Principals. Subareas Arlington is divided into 14 subareas which contain 200 defined neighborhoods (described in detail in Appendix A). Arlington’s subareas: »Arlington Terrace »Crown Ridge »Gleneagle »Kent Prairie »Old Town »Cascade Industrial Center »Edgecomb »Haller City »Hilltop »West Bluff »Smokey Point »Gateway »Island Crossing »East Hill Section III (Subareas) provides an analysis of each subarea. This section presents information about the existing conditions and characteristics of each individual subarea, including the existing public facilities and amenities, and identified needs that are addressed by this comprehensive plan. Each subarea has a unique vision statement which has informed the goals and policies. The goals and policies provide detailed guidance for how to achieve the vision for the subarea and address identified needs. The information in Section III is in line with Arlington’s overall vision and the goals and policies through this comprehensive plan. The Kindness Mural at the Arlington Boys and Girls Club Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 4 Comprehensive Plan Books This Arlington in Motion comprehensive plan presents eight “Books” (referred to as plan elements in previous plans) in Section IV of the plan. These Books contain goals and policies tied to the foundational principles. Each Book also contains existing conditions and background information addressing the context of the City when the plan was written, through the lens of that particular Book’s topic. The Books are as follows: »Book 1 Environment »Book 2 Land Use »Book 3 Housing »Book 4 Economic Development »Book 5 Parks, Recreation, and Open Space »Book 6 Transportation »Book 7 Public Safety »Book 8 Capital Facilities and Utilities Figure 1 – Comprehensive Plan Framework and Organization Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 5 The goals and policies of each Book align with the Washington State Growth Management Act and the community’s vision (Figure 2). As part of the framework for this plan, the goals and policies for each Book in Section IV are designed to have strong ties to the foundational principles. This approach is used to ensure that these key themes are carried through the comprehensive plan as a means of achieving the community’s vision. In Section II (Foundational Principles) goal statements are presented for each foundational principle. These same goals are included in one, or more, of the Books. The actions of the plan, presented in Section V (Implementation and Monitoring), are also tied to the goals and polices in Section IV, and the foundational principles in Section II. Actions are clearly stated directives that the City intends to implement to achieve the plan’s vision, goals, and policies in line with its foundational principles. Actions help to guide the City (staff, as well as leadership and policymakers) toward successful implementation of the plan. Goals are overarching statements representing what the community intends to focus on and attain over the next 20 years. Policies are supportive statements to the goals that provide more detail about how the goals will be achieved. Historical parade in downtown Arlington Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 6 THE PURPOSE OF EACH BOOK The purpose of each of the Books is described below. The Books address the required elements of the GMA that must be incorporated into comprehensive plans: Land Use, Housing, Capital Facilities, Transportation, and Utilities. Jurisdictions are allowed to include additional elements of focus to the plan, if they chose to do so. Arlington has elected to include several optional elements: Environment, Economic Development, Public Safety, and Parks, Recreation, and Open Space. Book 1 – Environment Provides a deeper context around how the environment has changed since pre-settlement and the current environmental conditions. Aspects of the newly required Climate Change and Resiliency element are also addressed in the Environment Book; however, the full Climate Change and Resiliency element is not required to be implemented for this periodic update of the Comprehensive Plan, and is required to be adopted by 2029. Book 2 – Land Use Designates the proposed general distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land within the City, where appropriate, for housing, commerce, industry, recreation, open spaces, the airport, public utilities, public facilities, and other land uses. This Book also describes the City’s capacity to accommodate the growth targets for population, housing units, and employment, including population densities and building intensities. Book 3 – Housing Ensures the vitality and unique identity of established residential subareas and neighborhoods. This Book also includes an inventory and analysis of existing and projected housing needs, and makes provisions for moderate capacity housing options to accommodate the existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community. This Book also identifies local policies and regulations that result in racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing, and identifies policies to undo those impacts, as well as establishes anti- displacement policies. Book 4 – Economic Development Establishes provisions for local economic growth, vitality, and a high quality of life. Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 7 Book 8 – Capital Facilities & Utilities Provides an inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, including but not limited to public buildings, streets, stormwater, water, sewer, park and recreation facilities, and identifies the locations and capacities of the capital facilities within the City. This Book also covers the general location and capacity of all existing and proposed utilities; including, but not limited to, electrical, telecommunication, and natural gas lines. The Capital Facilities & Utilities Book also provides a forecast of the future needs for such facilities, including the proposed locations, and a minimum six-year plan that will finance them. Also included in this Book, is a requirement to reassess the Land Use Book if it is failing to meet existing needs. This is to ensure that the Land Use Book, Capital Facilities Plan, and Financing Plan are all coordinated and consistent. Book 5 – Parks, Recreation and Open Space Includes a summary of projected park and recreation demand, evaluation of facilities and service needs, and of intergovernmental coordination opportunities to provide regional approaches for meeting park and recreational demand. Book 6 – Transportation Provides a framework that guides transportation investments over the next 20 years in alignment with the Land Use Book. This Book supports a multi-modal transportation network that is welcoming, safe, and functional for all users, including people walking, biking, using shared-use mobility devices, using transit, and driving. Book 7 – Public Safety Addresses community resilience, fire and emergency medical services, police protection, and hazards and emergency management with respect to natural, humanmade, and technological disasters. The Public Safety Book supports the provision of adequate public safety services and social services. Welcome to Arlington sign on Highway 530 Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 8 Implementation and Monitoring This Comprehensive Plan is designed to be a dynamic document that will be utilized on a regular basis for all land use-related decisions being made throughout the City. The plan will be monitored and updated regularly through a transparent public process. Arlington’s City Council members will help in monitoring the implementation of the Books in Section IV of this plan and promote the Foundational Principles in Section II during their terms in office. Councilmembers will ensure Books are successfully implemented by utilizing the interconnectivity matrix in Section V to identify the interrelationships between Books, City departments and staff, individuals, groups, and agencies that can aid in achieving the City’s vision and goals, and all community stakeholders affected by policies and actions. Farmers Market in Legion Park Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 9 Regional Plan Coordination and Consistency As part of the Growth Management Act (GMA), the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) adopts Multicounty Planning Policies (MPPs), adopted as part of VISION 2050, that provide a regional framework for achieving these goals. Snohomish County also adopts a set of policies, the Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs), which provide a more focused framework, tailored to the needs of the County. Arlington’s Comprehensive Plan takes into account the GMA, VISION 2050 and PSRC’s MPPs, and Snohomish County’s CPPs when developing the goals, policies, and guidance within the Plan. City Comprehensive Plans provide the most specified guidance to meet the needs and vision of the community, while still ensuring a coordinated effort to address the needs of the growing Central Puget Sound Region. Washington State Growth Management Act This periodic update to Arlington’s Comprehensive Plan is required by the Growth Management Act (GMA), codified in the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) Section 36.70 A.040, and enacted in 1990 to require jurisdictions to address growth by developing comprehensive plans. GMA is fundamentally the Legislature’s expression of a statewide interest in local planning decisions through the establishment of 15 overarching goals as of 2024. The 15 goals established by GMA and the basis for compliance for each goal are as follows:2 1. Urban Growth- Encourage development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner. 2. Reduce Sprawl-Reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development. 3. Transportation- Encourage efficient multimodal transportation systems that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and per capita vehicle miles traveled and are based on regional priorities and coordinated with county and city comprehensive plans. 4. Housing- Plan for and accommodate housing affordable to all economic segments of the population of this state, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock. 2 Washington State Legislature, Growth Management Act, 1990 Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 10 5. Economic Development- Encourage economic development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all residents of this state, especially for unemployed and for disadvantaged persons, promote the retention and expansion of existing businesses and recruitment of new businesses, recognize regional differences impacting economic development opportunities, and encourage growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic growth, all within the capacities of the state’s natural resources, public services, and public facilities. 6. Property Rights-Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation having been made. The property rights of landowners shall be protected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions. 7. Permits – Applications for both state and local government permits should be processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure predictability. 8. Natural Resources Industries- Maintain and enhance natural resource-based industries, including productive timber, agricultural, and fisheries industries. Encourage the conservation of productive forestlands and productive agricultural lands and discourage incompatible uses. 9. Open Space and Recreation- Retain open space and green space, enhance recreational opportunities, enhance fish and wildlife habitat, increase access to natural resource lands and water, and develop parks and recreation facilities. 10. Environment-Protect and enhance the environment and enhance the state’s high quality of life, including air and water quality, and the availability of water. 11. Public Participation and Coordination-Encourage the involvement of citizens in the planning process, including the participation of vulnerable populations and overburdened communities, and ensure coordination between communities and jurisdictions to reconcile conflicts. 12. Public Facilities and Services-Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards. 13. Historic Preservation- Identify and encourage the preservation of lands, sites, and structures, that have historical or archaeological significance. 14. Climate change and resiliency - Ensure that comprehensive plans, development regulations, and regional policies, plans, and strategies under RCW 36.70A.210 and chapter 47.80 RCW adapt to and mitigate the effects of a changing climate; support reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and per capita vehicle miles traveled; prepare for climate impact scenarios; foster resiliency to climate impacts and natural hazards; protect and enhance environmental, economic, and human health and safety; and advance environmental justice. Shorelines of the State - For shorelines of the state, the goals and policies of the shoreline management act as set forth in RCW 90.58.020 shall be considered an element of the county’s or city’s comprehensive plan. Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 11 GMA AMENDMENTS Although the basic structure of GMA has remained intact over the years, the state legislature has amended it frequently since the last 2015 periodic update cycle. The 2021-23 Legislative Sessions contributed historic amendments with specific regard for housing policies. The goals and policies in the Section IV Books in this plan were designed to cover all GMA amendments for this 2024 periodic update cycle. The following list catalogs the GMA amendments most notably affecting this periodic update to Arlington’s Comprehensive Plan, though this is not a comprehensive list of updates. More detail on the requirements of the GMA amendments is provided in the individual Books in Section IV. »House Bill 1241 – Periodic Review Due Dates •Changed the time cycle requirement for periodic updates to comprehensive plans, extending it from eight to ten years after this 2024-27 cycle. However, it also added that jurisdictions will be required to submit an implementation progress report five years after transmittal of their comprehensive plans to the State Department of Commerce for review. »HB 1717 - Indian Tribe Collaboration •Amended GMA adding new regulations for cities and counties to include local and regional tribes in planning processes and decisions. »House Bill 1220 - Planning for Housing •Significantly changed the housing-related provisions of GMA. The updates strengthened the GMA housing goal from “Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population” to “Plan for and accommodate housing affordable to all economic segments of the population of this state.” »HB 2001 - Tiny House Communities •Expanded the ability to build tiny houses by encouraging jurisdictions to include them in their affordable housing incentive programs. »SB 5042 - Encouraging Condominium Construction •Intended to reduce barriers to condominium construction. The “leaky condo crisis,” resulting from problems with design and construction in a wetter climate, had led builders (and their insurers) to shy away from this product. »SB 5235 - Occupants in a Dwelling Unit •Intended to increase housing unit inventory by removing arbitrary limits on housing occupancy. »SB 5593 - Urban Growth Area Revisions •Allows a county to revise a UGA boundary to accommodate patterns of development. »SB 5818 - Appeal protections •Promoting housing construction in cities through amendments to limiting appeals under the State Environmental Protection Act and GMA. »HB 1110 – Middle Housing •Creating more homes for Washington by increasing middle housing in areas traditionally dedicated to single-family detached housing. »HB 1337 – Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) •Expanding housing options by easing barriers to the construction and use of ADUs. Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 12 Washington State Environmental Policy Act Most projects and decisions made by agencies in the State of Washington concerning development and/or disturbance of land, is subject to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Most projects and decisions will have at least some level of environmental or other significant impact. SEPA was enacted in 1971 to help state and local agencies identify environmental impacts likely to result from a project or decision and identify how to mitigate the impacts where necessary to protect our natural environment. Example projects and decisions can include, but are not limited to, permits for constructing commercial or residential buildings, public facilities such as schools, roads, or utilities, and the adoption of regulations, policies, or plans. SEPA evaluates impacts associated with these projects and can either change a proposal or apply conditions when adverse impacts are identified. The State’s Department of Ecology, which mainly administers SEPA, provides the following framework for which SEPA was intended when it was adopted by state lawmakers:3 »“To declare a state policy which will encourage productive and enjoyable harmony between people and their environment. »To promote efforts which will prevent or eliminate damage to the environment and biosphere. »Stimulate public health and welfare. »Enrich the understanding of the ecological systems and natural resources important to Washington and the nation.” Due to the scope of this comprehensive plan that affects growth by facilitating and directing development, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was determined necessary to address the associated environmental impacts. An EIS describes the existing environment that will be affected by the proposal, in this case the Comprehensive Plan, analyzes the potential environmental impacts of each alternative, and discusses reasonable mitigation measures that will reduce or eliminate a proposal’s adverse environmental impacts. The EIS process is a tool for identifying and analyzing: »Probable adverse environmental impacts »Reasonable alternatives »Possible mitigation. An EIS may also discuss the beneficial impacts of the proposal. It identifies the mitigation measures as mandatory or potential so reviewers can better assess the impact of the proposal. After Arlington policymakers and its communities chose the preferred land use alternative to guide growth over the next 20 years, and after tribal governments, federal, state, and other local agencies commented on the draft EIS, Arlington issued a final EIS for this periodic update to the Arlington Comprehensive Plan. You can read the full final EIS and learn about the land use alternatives in Appendix B. 3 Overview of Washington State Environmental Policy Act. Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 13 Puget Sound Regional Council VISION 2050 By 2050, the Central Puget Sound Region is forecasted to grow by another 1.5 million people to reach a total population of 5.8 million (Figure 3). The region has a plan for this growth called VISION 2050 – led by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), which is designated under federal law as the Metropolitan Planning Organization (required for receiving federal transportation funds) and under state law as the Regional Transportation Planning Organization. PSRC is primarily responsible for carrying out a regionally coordinated transportation planning process. VISION 2050 was adopted in 2020 and establishes the following regional vision: The central Puget Sound region provides an exceptional quality of life and opportunity for all, connected communities, a spectacular natural environment, and an innovative, thriving economy.4 In 2050: »Climate. The region’s contribution to climate change has been substantially reduced. »Community. Distinct, unique communities are supported throughout the region. »Diversity. The region’s diversity continues to be a strength. People from all backgrounds are welcome, and displacement due to development pressure is lessened. »Economy. Economic opportunities are open to everyone, the region competes globally, and has sustained a high quality of life. Industrial, maritime, and manufacturing opportunities are maintained. »Environment. The natural environment is restored, protected, and sustained, preserving and enhancing natural functions and wildlife habitats. »Equity. All people can attain the resources and opportunities to improve their quality of life and enable them to reach their full potential. »Health. Communities promote physical, social, and mental well-being so that all people can live healthier and more active lives. »Housing. A range of housing types ensures that healthy, safe, and affordable housing choices are available and accessible for all people throughout the region. »Innovation. The region has a culture of innovation that embraces and responds to change. »Mobility and Connectivity. A safe, affordable, and efficient transportation system connects people and goods to where they need to go, promotes economic and environmental vitality, and supports the Regional Growth Strategy. »Natural Resources. Natural resources are sustainably managed, supporting the continued viability of resource-based industries, such as forestry, agriculture, and aquaculture. »Public Facilities and Services. Public facilities and services support the region’s communities and plans for growth in a coordinated, fair, efficient, and cost-effective manner. »Resilience. The region’s communities plan for and are prepared to respond to potential impacts from natural and human hazards. »Rural Areas. Rural communities and character are strengthened, enhanced, and sustained. 4 Puget Sound Regional Council, Vision 2050, 2020 Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 14 Realizing the complexity and impact of regional transportation planning, VISION 2050 covers growth related topics through its Regional Growth Strategy and Multi-County Planning Policies (MPPs). GMA requires the adoption of MPPs for the entire Central Puget Sound region. The Growth Management Hearings Board, which is responsible for reviewing and determining compliance under the GMA, has stated that “the MPPs provide for coordination and consistency among the metropolitan counties sharing common borders and related regional issues as required by RCW’ [the Revised Code of Washington], and, in order to ensure consistency, the directive policies of the MPPs need to have a binding effect.”5 The Regional Growth Strategy is a way to distribute growth coming to the region by focusing it near high-capacity transit and inside designated Urban Growth Areas. MPPs serve as the adopted regional guidelines and principles to guide both regional and local planning. The policies provide a framework and action steps for counties and cities to use as a guide when updating their Countywide Planning Policies (see Snohomish County section below) and local comprehensive plans. Lastly, VISION 2050 supports PSRC’s Regional Transportation Plan, Regional Economic Strategy, Regional Equity Strategy, and Housing Strategy. While this comprehensive plan prioritizes Arlington’s local policy goals and values, it also endeavors to help its regional partners work toward the overarching VISION 2050 goals. To that end, the goals, policies, and actions in Arlington’s Comprehensive Plan work to address the PSRC criteria for comprehensive plans (see Appendix C). 5 Puget Sound Regional Council, Vision 2050 p. 12, 2020. Figure 3 – Historic and Forecasted Growth Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 15 Snohomish County Comprehensive Plan The Snohomish County Comprehensive Plan guides decisions on a wide range of topics and services over a 20-year time period on a county-wide basis. The plan acts as the blueprint for development within the County, considering impacts on neighborhoods, businesses, traffic, and the environment among others. Like the Arlington Comprehensive Plan, it’s also meant to reflect the vision and priorities of all communities and residents in the County, while meeting requirements of federal laws, the GMA, and VISION 2050. Arlington and all other jurisdictions within the County that are required to adopt their own comprehensive plans, must be consistent with Snohomish County’s Comprehensive Plan, and the County’s Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs). CPPs establish a countywide framework for developing and adopting county and city comprehensive plans. The role of the CPPs is to the coordinate comprehensive plans of jurisdictions in the same county, regarding regional issues and issues affecting common borders. The CPPs encourage flexibility in local interpretations to support diverse interests throughout the County.6 The CPPs include strategies for development patterns, housing, public services and facilities, natural environment and climate change, transportation, and economic development and employment. The 2022 update to the previous 2012 CPPs introduced new topic areas which follow VISION 2050. The new integral topics included equity and inclusion, natural environment and climate change, transit supportive and oriented development, the risk and mitigating the effects of residential and business displacement, countywide centers (a new type of center designation within the Regional Growth Strategy), and reasonable measures for development regulations for jurisdictions which aren’t creating adequate capacity for their share of regional growth. To guide the development of the 2022 CPPs, Snohomish County created the following “Central Principles”:7 »Be consistent with GMA, other state laws, MPPs, and the overall regional vision; »Establish a framework for continuing coordination and collaboration between all jurisdictions of Snohomish County; »Incorporate equity and inclusion into all aspects of countywide and local planning; »Allow for flexibility in local implementation; »Support attaining an environmentally, socially, and economically/fiscally sustainable county within Snohomish and within the regional context; »Establish a framework for mitigating and adapting to climate change;»Address and maintain quality of life; and enhance the built environment and human health. 6 Countywide Planning Policies for Snohomish County, p. 4 March 6, 2022. 7 Countywide Planning Policies for Snohomish County, p. 16, March 6, 2022. Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 16 CONTEXT This comprehensive plan applies specifically to the land within Arlington’s City limits. However, the City recognizes that planning decisions in the areas surrounding Arlington will also affect the City, just as decisions made within the City will affect the surrounding area. This section describes the general make-up of the City and surrounding areas. The City of Arlington is located in northern Snohomish County (Figure 4) where the North Fork and South Fork of the Stillaguamish River meet. As of 2023, the incorporated boundary of Arlington encompasses a total of 9.97 square miles (6,380 acres)8. The largest land use within the City is residential properties, covering approximately 33% of the City’s lands, 23% of which is low-density residential lands. Industrial and Commercial zoned land each individually account for approximately 19% of total land, with industrial lands covering slightly more than commercial. The Arlington Airport is the fourth largest land use within the City, covering approximately 12% of the City’s land. As seen in Figure 5 the City’s current Urban Growth Area consists of several different enclaves, totaling 0.37 square miles (239 acres). These areas largely consist of established low- to medium-capacity residential neighborhoods, and rural residential land suitable for future redevelopment. The southern boundary of the City’s limits abuts the northern boundary of the City of Marysville, and the majority of the land around this area is industrial and manufacturing land uses. This area was designated as an official Manufacturing and Industrial Center by the Puget Sound Regional Council in 2019 and is referred to as the Cascade Industrial Center (CIC). The CIC master plan is a joint effort between the Cities of Marysville and Arlington and includes an area of over 4,000 acres of manufacturing and industrial zoned land, spanning between both cities. The City is bounded by unincorporated Snohomish County on the west, north, and east city limits. The majority of uses surrounding the City consists of agricultural and rural residential lands. The Stillaguamish Tribe’s reservation lands dots various areas north of the City, all within three miles of the City limits. Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 17 Stillaguamish River ArlingtonArlington S e a S a l i s h 20 5 2 5 5 30 5 5 S A N J U A N S N O H O M I S H C O U N T YS N O H O M I S H C O U N T Y Mukilteo Lake StevensLake Stevens Sequim MarysvilleMarysville 5 D e c e p t i o n P a s sDeception P a s s S t a t e P a r kState P a r k EverettEverett LynnwoodLynnwood MonroeMonroe Granite FallsGranite Falls SeattleSeattle Bellevue Bellevue Oak HarborOak Harbor Camano Camano S K A G I T C O U N T YS K A G I T C O U N T Y K I N G C O U N T YK I N G C O U N T Y ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN Figure 04. Arlington Regional Context Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 18 Figure 05. Arlington City Limits and Urban Growth Area Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 19 Community Profile (Past, Present, Future) History The timeline below and in Figure 6 shows events and key milestones Arlington reached throughout the decades up until the time of this plan.9,10,11,12,13 »Pre 1850s: The Arlington area is inhabited by Coast Salish people (primarily Stillaguamish tribal territory, including travelers from the Sauk and Duwamish tribal communities) who camped along the Stillaguamish River forks and utilized the abundant fish runs up and down the river. The Stillaguamish people called the land area at the forks of the Stillaguamish river Skabalko. »1850s to 1890s: Exploration and settlement by settlers and pioneers (predominantly Euro-American) arriving via wagons and canoes occurs in the Arlington and Marysville areas. In 1887 Scandinavian immigrants Nels K. Tvete and Nils C. Johnson open the first store at the forks of the Stillaguamish river. In the same year, a logging family opens the White House Hotel which offers meals, steam heat, and a continental breakfast. »1890s: In the spring of 1890, the Haller family and interested parties file the first plat of the town, naming it Haller City. However, another group of entrepreneurs has already begun to plat an area to the east of the Hallers and sold lots to interested buyers calling the place Arlington. Railroad service arrives at Arlington in 1891, gaining a distinct advantage over Haller City. »1900s: In 1903 both towns incorporate into one, forming Arlington. In 1905 Arlington Water, Light, and Power begins servicing the town. »1910: The first public park opens in Arlington in 1916. »1920: Arlington improves the Haller and Lincoln bridges over the Stillaguamish River which previously supported wagons and horses but could now support automobiles. »1930s: Federal relief programs during the Great Depression help to create the municipal Arlington Airport, with the first plane landing there in 1934. »1940s: The Navy converts the municipal airport to a Naval Auxiliary Air Station During World War II and builds new hangers and runways. Formal ownership of the airport is transferred back to Arlington in the 1950s. »1950s: A community in Arlington first becomes known as “Smokey Point” due to a constant plume of smoke being generated by a local café. 9 https://historylink.org/ 10Countywide Planning Policies for Snohomish County, p. 16, March 6, 2022. 11 https://web.archive.org/web/20170417073114/http:// old.seattletimes.com/html/eastsidenews/2002223758_ centennial30n.html 12 https://www.psrc.org/media/2440 13 https://www.arlingtonwa.gov/463/History-of- Arlington Historical picture of City Hall on Olympic Avenue Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 20 »1960s: In 1969 the final segment of Interstate-5 is completed between Marysville and Everett and includes 11 new bridges. »1970s: Burlington Northern Railroad is the last company to own and abandon the north-south portion of the railroad network that contributed to Arlington’s birth, which later was converted to the Centennial Trail in the 1990s. »1980s: People in Everett and Seattle begin to look for affordable housing leading to an Arlington population boom. »1990s: Arlington annexes Smokey Point. »2000s: Arlington is formally accepted as a “Tree City” by the National Arbor Day Foundation Program. In 2002 Snohomish County chooses the Jensen- Grimm Farm in Arlington as one of its designated Centennial Farms. »2010s: The Puget Sound Regional Council designates the Cascade Industrial Center as a Regional Manufacturing/Industrial Center, enabling Arlington to better compete for Federal funding for transportation projects. »2020s: Arlington company builds the first prototype all-electric commuter airplane. »2024: Arlington completes this periodic update to its comprehensive plan. Figure 6– Arlington Historical Timeline Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 21 Present Day Arlington In many respects, the City of Arlington (the City) is demographically representative of the County where it is situated (Snohomish County). The City is similar to the County in key metrics such as age and employment. However, Arlington residents stand out as slightly less racially diverse, earning slightly lower incomes, more likely to own their housing, and less likely to experience housing cost burden, and more likely to drive alone. Arlington City Hall Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 22 As of 2023, the Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM) estimated the City of Arlington’s population at 21,740 – about 2.5% of Snohomish County’s total population. As seen in Figure 1, this represents a growth of 22% since 2010 and nine percent since 2020 (20% and four percent for the same periods, countywide). Figure 1- Arlington’s Population Growth from 2010 to 2023 Population Source: Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM), April 1 official population estimates, April 2023. Over the last ten years, the population of Arlington has grown by nearly 20,000 Veterans in parade Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 23 The City’s age distribution (Figure 2) is similar to that of the County. According to the American Community Survey (ACS), Arlington’s median age is 37, compared to age 39 countywide. The City’s median age increased approximately 4 years since 2010 (Figure 3), while the County’s median age increased by 1.5 years. Arlington has a population consisting of roughly 25% children (population under age 18), while the County has 22% children. 13% of Arlington’s population is age 65 and over while 15% of the County’s population is over the age of 65. The County has slightly more residents ranging from age 18 to 34, with 22% of the total population, compared to the City’s 21% age 18 to 34. Age Figure 2- Arlington’s Age Distribution U.S. Census, Decennial Census 2010 and 2020 – Table P2: Hispanic or Latino, and Not Hispanic or Latino by Race, April 2010 and 2020. Figure 3- Arlington’s Age Distribution in 2010 & 2020 Source: United States Census Bureau (U.S. Census), American Community Survey (ACS) Five-Year Estimates: 2022, April 2022. Arlington’s median age is slighlty younger than the county average Residents’ incomes in Arlington are increasing while median annual income is remaining lower than the County average Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 24 The City’s residential population is slightly less racially diverse than that of the County. While 72% of Arlington is white and non-Hispanic, that number is 63% in Snohomish County. The next most significant difference is the proportion of residents identifying as “Asian alone,” with 13% of County residents being Asian, compared to six percent in the City. About 15% of Arlington residents are Hispanic or Latino and about 10% are of two or more races. From 2010-2020, the proportion of white non-Hispanic residents decreased by 7 percentage points in Arlington (Figure 4) and 11 percentage points in the County. Diversity Source: U.S. Census, ACS Figure 4 – Arlington Race Distribution from 2010 to 2022 Arlington’s residential population is less racially diverse and predominately white, non-Hispanic, by 9% of the County averages Colorful dancers at the Hispanic Heritage Event Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 25 Languages Spoken Figure 5- Arlington Languages Spoken at Home Source: U.S. Census, ACS In Snohomish County seven percent of households reportedly speak Spanish at home. As of 2022 the majority of Arlington residents speak English (83%) and Spanish (10%) at home (Figure 5). More than half of Spanish-speaking households in Arlington indicated that they speak English less than “very well.” Households who reported speaking English less than “very well” nearly doubled between 2010 and 2022 in Arlington (Figure 6). Source: U.S. Census, ACS Figure 6- Percent of Arlington Households that Speak English less than “Very Well” from 2012 to 2022 The percent of households who speak English less than “very well” has nearly doubled since 2010 Following English, Spanish is the most commonly spoken language in Arlington Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 26 Income Arlington households tend to have slightly lower annual incomes than those throughout the County (Figure 7). The City’s median annual household income is about $89,500, which is $12,000 lower than the countywide median. This difference appears to primarily stem from the relatively smaller proportion of households earning $200,000 or more (10.5% in the City, compared to 18% in the County). However, the number of residents earning $100,000 or more in Arlington has increased significantly since 2010 (Figure 8). As of 2022, about 7% of Arlington residents are below the poverty level, which is similar to the County’s 9%. About 26% of the City’s Hispanic or Latino population are below the poverty level, over double that of the County’s Hispanic residents (12% of Hispanic or Latino population below the poverty level). Figure 7 - Income Distribution in Arlington and Snohomish County (2022) Figure 8 - Arlington Income Distribution in 2010 & 2020 Source: ACS Five-Year Estimates: April 2022. Household Income in the Past 12 Months (B19001) its ACS Five-Year Estimates: April 2010 and April 2022. Household Income in the Past 12 Months (B19001) In the three previous years, Arlington incomes remained consistent with the County. In the last twelve months, incomes in Snohomish County have surpassed Arlington There are more households making over 100k a year in 2020 than in 2010 Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 27 Employment by Industry City residents work in a similar set of industries as the County, with a slightly higher proportion working in manufacturing, construction, and “arts, entertainment, recreation, accommodation, and food services,” and a slightly lower proportion in “professional, scientific, and management, and administrative, and waste management services” and “finance and insurance, and real estate and rental and leasing (FIRES).” Arlington’s employment by industry as of 2022 can be seen in Figure 9. Figure 9 – Arlington Employment by Industry (2022) ACS Five-Year Estimates: April 2022. Selected Economic Characteristics (DP03) Health and education fields are employers in Arlington in contrast to a lower amount of workers in the County working in these areas Industrial building located in the Cascade Industrial Center Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 28 Where Residents Work Figure 10 – Arlington Residents’ Location of Employment (2022) As of 2021, about 41% of the City’s residents held jobs located in Snohomish County, including 17% in Everett and 13% in Arlington (Figure 10). About 12% hold jobs located in Seattle. Source: U.S. Census, Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD), OnTheMap The majority of Arlington residents work within Snohomish county, with the third highest percentage of 13% working within Arlington. Industrial building located in the Cascade Industrial Center Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 29 In Arlington, two-thirds of households are in owner-occupied housing units, compared to only half of households in the County being owner-occupied. About one-third of Arlington households experience housing cost burden (Figures 11 and 12), which is defined as spending more than 30% of their gross income on housing-related costs. 41% of households in the County experience this same burden. Additionally, while 11% of Arlington households experience severe housing cost burden by spending more than 50% of their income on housing, this condition is more common countywide, at a rate of 17%. Low-income earners are less likely to be severely cost burdened in Arlington than Countywide. Looking closer at different income levels, ACS data shows significantly lower severe housing cost burden for Arlington households earning between $10,000 and $35,000 annually (21% of households experiencing severe housing burden), when compared to households within the same income bracket in the County (62% of households experiencing severe housing burden). Income Spent on Housing Figure 11 – Arlington Percent of household income spent on housing (2022) Figure 12 – Arlington Housing Cost Burden by Income Group (2022) U.S. Census, ACS Five-Year Estimates 2022 – Tables B25070 and B25091: Housing Tenure, Gross Rent as a Percentage of Household Income, and Selected Monthly Owner Costs as a Percentage of Household Income, April 2022 U.S. Census, ACS Five-Year Estimates 2022 – Tables B25070 and B25091: Housing Tenure, Gross Rent as a Percentage of Household Income, and Selected Monthly Owner Costs as a Percentage of Household Income, April 2022 32% of households are housing cost burdened and pay more than 30% of their annual household income on housing Households who make less than the median household income of $89,587 are more likely to be housing cost burdened nearly 45 % of households make more than 100k in a year Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 30 About 95% of both Arlington and Snohomish County households have access to at least one vehicle. While 73% of Arlington workers commute to work by driving alone, only 63% of workers in the County commute to work by driving alone (Figure 13). Median commute times in Arlington are in the 25-29 minute range, which is only a few minutes shorter than the countywide median in the 30-34 minute range. As of 2022, about 11.5% of working residents said they worked from home – 4.5 percentage points fewer than the countywide rate. From 2019-2022, the proportion of residents working from home roughly doubled in Arlington and increased nearly three times in the County. Commute Behavior Figure 13 – Arlington Commute Type Distribution in 2010 & 2020 Source: U.S. Census, ACS Five-Year Estimates 2022 The percentage of residents who drove alone to work went up between 2010 and 2020 Traffic headed west on Highway 530 to Island Crossing Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 31 Growth Projections and Capacity SNOHOMISH COUNTY BUILDABLE LANDS REPORT (THROUGH 2035) The Growth Management Act required certain counties, including Snohomish County, to submit a Buildable Lands Report by June 30, 2021. The report was assembled through the Snohomish County Tomorrow Planning Advisory Committee process which consists of members from each participating local jurisdiction, County staff, and the Tulalip Tribes. The report captured all development activity between 2012 and 2019 and analyzed existing land capacity in each jurisdiction. Parcels with development potential were classified and aggregated by four categories: »Vacant – parcels without structures; »Partially-used – parcels where existing structures use a portion of the site and where additional development is possible without demolition; »Redevelopable – parcels with existing structures that are expected to be demolished and replaced with new and more intensive uses; »Pending – parcels with pending applications for new construction. Unbuildable land area was not counted toward future capacity. This includes parcels affected by: critical areas and buffers (steep slopes, wetlands, streams and lakes, frequently flooded areas); major utility easements; and future arterial rights-of-way and land needed for other capital facilities (schools, parks, etc.). The main purpose of the report is to provide valuable information on how well jurisdictions are accommodating their share of regional growth from the previous 20-year (2015-2035) comprehensive planning period. In 2020, Arlington was ahead of schedule in achieving its 2035 population, housing, and employment “growth targets” (see description of growth targets below). Table 1, 2, and 3 below show the Buildable Lands Report 2035 growth allocations progress for the City of Arlington and the unincorporated area which together are called the Arlington urban growth area (UGA). AREA 2020 CENSUS POPULATION 2035 POPULATION GROWTH TARGET PROGRESS % ACHIEVED Arlington UGA 20,418 26,002 79% City of Arlington 19,868 24,937 80% Unincorporated 550 1,065 52% Table 01. Comparison of 2035 UGA Population Growth Targets with Total Capacity Estimates AREA 2020 HOUSING UNITS 2035 HOUSING GROWTH TARGET PROGRESS % ACHIEVED Arlington UGA 7,868 10,018 79% City of Arlington 7,689 9,654 80% Unincorporated 179 364 49% Table 02. Comparison of 2035 UGA Housing Growth Targets with Total Capacity Estimates Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 32 AREA 2019 ESTIMATED EMPLOYMENT 2035 EMPLOYMENT GROWTH TARGET PROGRESS % ACHIEVED Arlington UGA 10,289 20,884 49% City of Arlington 10,267 20,829 49% Unincorporated 22 55 40% Table 03. Comparison of 2035 UGA Employment Growth Targets with Total Capacity Estimates 2044 GROWTH ALLOCATIONS In addition to the Buildable Lands Report, Snohomish County was also required to provide guidance on issues such as land use, transportation, housing, environment and climate, social equity, infrastructure, and other policy areas for local comprehensive plans by updating their Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs). The CPPs were also developed through the Snohomish County Tomorrow Planning Advisory Committee process (subsequent to the Buildable Lands Report), and later adopted by the Snohomish County Council with an effective date in 2022. These policies are also required to be consistent with the GMA and the PSRC’s regional VISION 2050 Plan, which contains guidance about similar topics and multicounty planning policies (MPPs) (see full VISION 2050 description above). The Washington Administrative Code (WAC) specifies topic areas that, at a minimum, must be addressed by the MPPs and the CPPs. Under VISION 2050, the City of Arlington, and the unincorporated area around, it is classified as a “High Capacity Transit (HCT) Community”, which is assigned to cities and unincorporated areas that are connected to the regional high-capacity transit system. Arlington and 33 other HCT Communities in the region are expected to accommodate 24% of regional population growth, and 13% of regional job growth through 2050. VISION 2050 calls for focusing greater amounts of growth within regional growth centers like Arlington and Marysville’s joint-effort Cascade Industrial Center (CIC). The intent of industrial centers like the CIC is to continue growth of industrial employment and preserve the region’s industrial land base for long-term growth and retention. Overall, these large industrial areas serve the region with international employers, industrial infrastructure, concentrations of industrial jobs, and evidence of long-term potential.14 To determine a jurisdiction’s regional growth allocation, growth targets are established for each regional geography based on population forecasts from the State Office of Financial Management 14 PSRC, Regional Centers Framework Update, March 22, 2018. Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 33 (OFM) and employment forecasts from PSRC. The forecasts are provided to counties, which then work with cities to allocate growth according to the percentages for regional geographies in VISION 2050, and according to each city’s ability and willingness to accommodate additional growth. The counties then adopt allocations within the CPPs and establish official population, housing, and employment growth targets for local jurisdictions for the succeeding 20-year period. The prior CPPs, last updated in 2012, supported the last 2015 periodic update to comprehensive plans and established growth targets for 2035. In like manner, the growth targets adopted in the updated 2022 CPPs, formed the basis for this 2024 Arlington Comprehensive Plan periodic update, and covers Arlington’s growth through 2044. Tables 4 and 5 below compare Arlington’s 2044 growth targets to the Buildable Lands Report 2035 total capacity estimates. Arlington is required to create additional capacity within its city limits in order to accommodate the City’s 658 population and 1,249 job unit shortfalls from 2035-2044. To create additional capacity, Arlington has updated this plan and development regulations to provide capacity for growth in targeted areas of the city, consistent with the GMA framework, MPPs, and CPPs. AREA 2044 POPULATION GROWTH TARGET 2035 CAPACITY ESTIMATE ADDITIONAL CAPACITY NEEDED TO 2044 Arlington UGA 35,506 35,784 -278 City of Arlington 34,649 33,991 658 Unincorporated 857 1,793 -936 Table 04. Comparison of 2044 UGA Population Growth Targets with Total Capacity Estimates AREA 2044 EMPLOYMENT GROWTH TARGET 2035 CAPACITY ESTIMATE ADDITIONAL CAPACITY NEEDED TO 2044* Arlington UGA 24,751 23,518 1,233 City of Arlington 24,690 23,441 1,249 Unincorporated 61 77 -16 *( -) indicates surplus capacity Table 05. Comparison of 2044 UGA Employment Growth Targets with Total Capacity Estimates Additionally, in 2023, the State Department of Commerce developed 20-year housing need projections by income band, and similar projections for special housing needs, such as emergency housing. The projections were developed at a countywide level so counties could allocate housing needs on a fair share basis through regional coordination between the counties and the VISION 2050 regional geographies. The housing targets shown below are discussed in further detail in the Housing Book. Countywide housing need projections were based on each county’s 2044 population targets, which was 1,136,309 people for Snohomish County. After removing an assumed 2044 group quarters population, projecting the future household size in 2044, and accounting for projected 2044 vacancy, Snohomish County had a responsibility of achieving 474,070 housing units. Deducting the number of existing housing units built across the County by 2020 (317,348 units), revealed that Snohomish County jurisdictions would Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 34 collectively need to create capacity for an additional 156,722 housing units across their “regional geography”. Arlington was ultimately assigned an allocation of 4.72% of that countywide need, equaling about 7,399 housing units. Table 6 below shows Arlington’s 2044 housing target compared to the number of existing units in the City in 2020. Seasonal units/vacation homes were removed and not counted in the 2020 housing base, since those units do not accommodate year-round residents. AREA 2044 HOUSING GROWTH TARGET 2020 HOUSING UNITS ADDITIONAL UNITS REQUIRED Arlington UGA 15,374 7,868 7,507 City of Arlington 15,088 7,689 7,399 Unincorporated 286 179 108 Table 06. Comparison of 2044 UGA Housing Growth Targets with Existing 2020 Housing Units Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 35 ARLINGTON URBAN GROWTH AREA AND THE NEED FOR EXPANSION In Washington State, counties are required to designate Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) in their comprehensive plans outside of which urban development will not occur. UGAs typically contain both incorporated and unincorporated areas, and therefore by definition include all cities like Arlington. Most importantly, UGAs must include adequate land area and allow densities sufficient to permit the urban growth projected to occur over the next 20 years. Areas outside the UGAs are reserved for non-urban, rural, and resource lands such as agricultural, forest, and mineral lands. The Arlington UGA is comprised of the City of Arlington, and areas unincorporated land around it (see map on page 18). Cities like Arlington may choose to annex unincorporated territory in the future. Arlington recognizes the importance of coordinating with Snohomish County to ensure an orderly transition of services between unincorporated and incorporated land, should annexation ever be proposed. During this periodic update it was determined that The City of Arlington will be able to accommodate the employment growth target. However, land capacity will just barely accommodate the employment growth target. Within the next 20 years, the City will coordinate with Snohomish County on efforts to increase the City’s Urban Growth Areas. More detail on this subject is in the Land Use Book in Section IV. Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 36 Public Participation Overview As part of the Comprehensive Plan updates, Cities are required to establish a public participation program to ensure public input is considered and integrated into the City’s plans for the future. The City of Arlington employed several different methods of outreach, including public meetings, questionnaires and surveys, and other activities to elicit feedback from the community. To read about the full extent of community engagement please see Appendix D. City Zoning Code Changes (Title 20) This section includes code amendments, comprehensive plan amendments, and annexations since the last comprehensive plan update that relate to State senate and house bills, State laws and regulations, or changes needed to account for population allocation numbers. The city also processed 14 rezones, approving 11 and denying 3 from 2016 to 2024 that are not included in this list (available if needed). 2024 Completed Amendments: »AMC Chapter 20.08 – Definitions – Ordinance No. 2024-010 The amendments included updates to the definitions chapter of the code. The city updated definitions to ensure clarification and to meet the definitions of the State of Washington. Amendments were made to include new or revised definitions per Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1110, Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1220, Second Substitute Senate Bill 5290, Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1293, Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1998, and Engrossed Substitute House Bill 2321. »AMC Chapter 20.16 – Permits and Land Division Approval – Ordinance No. 2024-017 The amendment included updates to the permits and land division approval chapter of the code. The city updated multiple sections, such as administrative conditional use permits required, consolidated permit process and review procedures, permit exemptions from timelines, submittal requirements, complete applications, time limit for resubmitting additional information, time limits for permit processing, notice of final decisions, expiration of permits, and amendments to and modifications of permits. The proposed amendments are required updates from Second Substitute Senate Bill 5290, Substitute House Bill 1105, WAC 365-196-845, and RCW 36.70B to ensure city compliance with State Regulations and the upcoming Comprehensive Plan update. »AMC Chapter 20.40 – Permissible Uses – Ordinance No. 2024-019 The amendments to AMC Chapter 20.40 Zoning Code Amendment include updates to the permissible uses chapter of the code. The city updated multiple sections, such as permanent supportive housing, transitional housing, emergency shelters, emergency housing facilities, accessory uses, change in use, footnotes of the permissible use tables, co-living housing, residential homes emphasizing special services, treatment, or supervision, alternative energy systems, commercial corridor uses, temporary mobile or modular structures used for public services, health care facility, and other minor permit type changes throughout the permissible use tables to better align the permit type to the proposed use. Many of the proposed changes were required updates from Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1998, Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1110, and Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1220 to ensure city compliance with the upcoming Comprehensive Plan update. Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 37 »AMC Chapter 20.46 – Design Review – Ordinance No. 2024-015 The amendments included updates to the design chapter of the code. The city updated this chapter to streamline the design review process by abiding by RCW 36.70A.630 and WAC 365-196- 845 through Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1293, Engrossed Substitute House Bill 1042, and Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1110. The updated sections are revised to meet these regulations. »AMC Chapter 20.114 – Alternative Energy Systems – Ordinance No. 2024-021 The amendment included updates to electric vehicle infrastructure (updated and moved from previous section of 20.44.098) to comply with WAC 51-50-0429 regulations. 2024 Docket Items to be adopted between the 4th Quarter 2024 and 2nd Quarter of 2025 AMC Chapter 20.93 – Critical Area Ordinance - Processing The City has proposed revisions to Chapter 20.93 Critical Area Ordinance to follow new updated Washington State Department Commerce, Department of Fish and Wildlife, and Department of Ecology regulations through Washington State Register (WSR) 23-08-037 that was certified on May 22, 2023. Multiple sections will be updated with the guidance from State agencies. The same information is proposed to be updated in the Comprehensive Plan. »AMC Chapter 20.110 – Mixed-Use Development Regulations – Processing The City has proposed revisions to Chapter 20.110 Mixed Use Development Regulations to clean up the entire document. The main areas include the permissible use tables, dimensional standards, open space, along with other areas that staff has noticed where there are parts of this code that do not work and sections that do not match others. Another reason for the amendment is to provide additional density to one transect area in Smokey Point for future Transit Oriented Development (TOD) with Community Transits Bus Rapid Transit Gold Line, as proposed to be updated in the Comprehensive Plan. »AMC Chapter 20.112 – Affordable Housing Program – Processing The City has proposed a new chapter to create an Affordable Housing Program. The proposed information will pull requirements from Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1220 and Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1110. 2023 Completed Amendments: »AMC Chapter 20.44 – Supplemental Uses – Ordinance No. 2023-016 Section 20.44.032: Subarea Plan (replacing Master Plan Neighborhoods) amends the procedure and requirements for parcels within the Master Plan Neighborhood Overlay of the city. The update amends the title of the section to Subarea Plans and establishes criteria and procedures for both private and public initiated subarea plans. The subarea plans correlate to the fourteen subareas of the City’s Comprehensive Plan that distinguish specific geographical areas and existing neighborhoods within the community. The intent of creating subareas is to develop a subarea plan for each area of the city that contains specific policies and criteria to guide land development, incorporate missing middle housing options, transportation facilities, community facilities, infrastructure and capital improvement decisions that provide for a more coordinated, efficient, and effective structure for predicable neighborhood planning. Section 20.44.042: Accessory Dwelling Units amends the requirements and criteria set forth for Accessory Dwelling Units per Engrossed House Bill 1337 as filed to the Secretary of State of the State of Washington on May 10, 2023. The amendments followed the criteria adopted by the State of Washington and all updates to RCW 36.70A, RCW 43.21C, and RCW 64.32, 64.34, 64.38, 64.90 Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 38 »AMC Title 13 – Water and Sewers – Ordinance No. 2023-015 The proposed amendment included updates to revise the sections AMC Chapters 13.04, 13.08, and 13.12. The amendment provides updated regulations regarding utilities provided for Accessory Dwelling Units. The revisions include definitions, housing type classifications, residential classifications, water and sewer connections, connection charges, and water/sewer/ stormwater rates. »AMC Chapter 20.98 – SEPA – Ordinance No. 2023-018 The amendments included updates to sections that directly relate to changes that were made to WAC 197-11 and RCW 43.21C by the Department of Ecology as mandated by Senate Bill 5818 under Administrative Order 22-08. Changes were also made to the Flexible Thresholds for Categorical Exemptions to add attached residential housing, increase the threshold for multi- family residential, and update the fill and excavation description. The changes to the Categorical Exemptions align with the city’s permit types. •WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(c) and (d) – Minor new construction flexible thresholds •WAC 197-11-444(2)(c) – Elements of the Environment •WAC 197-11-960 – Environmental Checklist •WAC 197-11-172(1)(b) – Planned actions project review •WAC 197-11-164(1)(b) – Planned actions definition and criteria •Chapter 43.21C RCW – Sections relating to the above changes. 2022 Completed Amendments: »AMC Chapter 20.16 – Permits and Land Division Approval – Ordinance No. 2022-012 The amendment included an update to Final Plat approval from Legislative (City Council to Administrative (Community and Economic Development Director) per Senate Bill 5674, which became effective July 23, 2017. The Bill allows the local legislature bodies to adopt an ordinance delegating final plat approval to administrative personnel. This bill amended RCW 58.17.100, 58.17.170, and 58.17.190, which govern these procedures. 2021 Completed Amendments: »AMC Chapter 20.08 – Definitions – Ordinance No. 2021-012 The amendment included and update to zoning regulations requiring Permanent Supportive Housing, Transitional Housing, Emergency Housing, and Emergency Shelters, through local planning and development regulations, in response to Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1220. »AMC Chapter 20.40 – Permissible Uses – Ordinance No. 2021-012 The amendment included an update to the permissible use table to allow Permanent Supportive Housing, Transitional Housing, Emergency Housing, and Emergency Shelters, in response to Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1220. 2020 Completed Amendments: »AMC Chapter 20.36 – Zoning Districts and Zoning Map – Ordinance No. 2020-019 The amendment included updates to create new zones to allow for middle housing options throughout the city, to help the city comply with the population allocation numbers given to the city during the last comprehensive plan update. The current residential zoning districts only provide for three zones, Suburban Residential (4 dwelling units per acre), Residential Moderate Density (6 dwelling units per acre) and Residential High Density (unlimited density controlled only by open space and parking requirements), there exists no mechanism to allow for a gradual change of capacity from one neighborhood to another. The proposed changes are necessary to correctly identify the housing capacities of current residential zones within the City. Other proposed changes include updated language of existing districts and the creation of a new Commercial Corridor District, with a clearly defined purpose. These proposed changes support and are in alignment with the following goals and policies of the City’s Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 39 Comprehensive Plan. »Lindsay Annexation – Ordinance No. 2022-003 The annexation included approximately 97.5 acres in the urban growth area in the southeast portion of the city. 2019 Completed Amendments: »Shoreline Master Program – Ordinance No. 2019-018 The amendment included updates to ensure compliance and consistency with requirements of the Shoreline Management Act and state regulations that have been added or changed since the last Shoreline Master Program update, and incorporate amendments deemed necessary to reflect changed circumstances, new information, or improved data. »AMC Chapter 20.44 – Supplemental Uses – Ordinance No. 2019-010 Section 20.44.020: Unit Lot Subdivision the amendment provided updates to provide new specific and detailed regulations for unit lot subdivisions for developing fee simple property related to common wall and zero lot line types of housing. This amendment was proposed to help enable the development of middle housing that could be sold as fee simple properties, and not just rented. This was necessary to help provide housing options with the population allocations given to the city during the last comprehensive plan update. »Arlington-Marysville Manufacturing Industrial Center Subarea Plan – Ordinance No. 2019-008 This was for the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment related to the previously adopted Subarea Plan. »Butler Wetland Annexation – Ordinance No. 2019-012 The City purchased the 51.53-acre property in 2000 with assistance from a Snohomish County Conservation futures grant. The intention was for passive recreation, open space, and wetland restoration. Since that time the Old Town Stormwater Wetland has been constructed on the property. The City applied to the Snohomish County Docketing process in October 2010 to include the property in the Arlington UGA. The docket was approved by Snohomish County Council in August 2013, and the property is within the Arlington UGA. 2018 Completed Amendments: »Arlington-Marysville Manufacturing Industrial Center Subarea Plan – Ordinance No. 2018-010 This was for the adoption of the Subarea Plan only. The Arlington-Marysville Manufacturing Industrial Center consists of 4,019 acres located between the two jurisdictions. The amendment to the Comprehensive Plan was required to show and guide future growth within the manufacturing industrial center in direct compliance with Puget Sound Regional Council’s Vision 2040. 2017 Completed Amendments: »AMC Chapter 20.36 – Zoning Districts and Zoning Map – Ordinance No. 2017-022 The amendment provided updates to the zoning map and zoning districts in correlation to the Mixed-Use Development Regulations and directly related to the 2017 Updates to the 2015 Comprehensive Plan. »AMC Chapter 20.110 – Mixed-Use Development Regulations – Ordinance No. 2017-021 The update to AMC Title 20 – Land Use Code and the implementation of this Chapter replaces the Horizontal Mixed-Use Overlay District, which was a placeholder until the regulations could be written. The implementation of the Mixed- Use Development Regulations was necessary to accommodate the City’s need to comply with Vision 2040 and the Buildable Lands Analysis per Snohomish County Ordinance 16-077. The Mixed-Use Development Regulations will allow for the City of Arlington to accommodate the 2035 population estimates through more efficient land use regulations. The Mixed-Use Development Regulations directly relate to the 2017 Updates Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 40 of the 2015 Comprehensive Plan. The Mixed-Use Development regulations amended the Horizontal Mixed-Use Overlay District language and provided regulations for the implementation of a hybrid form-based code. »AMC Chapter 20.36 – Zoning Districts and Zoning Map – Ordinance No. 2017-022 The amendment provided updates to the zoning map and zoning districts in correlation to the Mixed-Use Development Regulations and directly related to the 2017 Updates to the 2015 Comprehensive Plan. 2016 Completed Amendments: »AMC Chapter 20.36 – Zoning Districts and Zoning Map – Ordinance No. 2016-022 The amendment created a horizontal mixed-use overlay description and zoning map change to show the overlay over the commercial zones of the city. The amendment directly relates to Department of Commerce comments from the 2015 Comprehensive Plan. Section I: Introduction and Community Profile 41 Other City Plans Adopted by Reference One limitation of comprehensive plans is that they cannot include an in-depth discussion, analysis, and plan for each and every aspect of municipal government, due to the vast scope of municipal interest. Comprehensive plans, by nature, are policy-oriented, and reliant in large part upon other documents that precede and succeed the planning process. The policies and preferences contained in this comprehensive plan rely on knowledge gained from past work, including technical studies, adopted plans, adopted regulations, and public participation. Those plans, studies, and reports are incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan by reference or practice. These types of documents are either specifically referenced in the Section IV Books or are explicitly adopted by reference. Finally, the City has taken great care to make sure this comprehensive plan is consistent with and supports both the policy- driven and functional plans, studies, and reports adopted by the City of Arlington. Section II: Foundational Principles 2 SECTION II: FOUNDATIONAL PRINCIPLES Introduction The City of Arlington’s 20-year Comprehensive Plan incorporates the City’s core values and priorities, as outlined in five foundational principles: »Equity »Neighborhoods and Connectivity »Economic Stability and Vibrancy »Climate Adaptation and Community Resiliency »Healthy Active Lifestyles Section II: Foundational Principles 3 Purpose These foundational principles help guide the City of Arlington to be a place where all residents can thrive economically, physically, and socially. This is becoming increasingly significant as the Central Puget Sound region continues to grow. With growth, we face challenges posed by a changing climate, a difficult housing and economic environment, technological changes, and other ever- changing conditions. The foundational principles are an extension of the vision and bridge the gap between the City’s core values and actions to achievable change. The foundational principles are aspirational, looking ahead to implementation by the year 2050 and are representative of the community’s vision of what Arlington should become as it plans for its future. Implementing the foundational principles requires setting specific and measurable goals and policies. Each goal and policy of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan is in alignment with one of these five foundational principles. The definitions, associated symbols, and colors are shown below. Implementation of the foundational principles also requires regular monitoring; these strategies are explained in Section V of this Plan. Having a plan to monitor the goals, policies, and associated actions helps to ensure City officials are incorporating the foundational principles into daily work, such as updating development regulations. Figure FP-01 shows the relationship between the foundational principles, Books, goals, and policies. The number of goals and policies in each Book will vary, however, there will be a minimum of one goal and one policy associated with each foundational principle.Figure FP-01- Foundational Principle, Goals, and Policy Framework Section II: Foundational Principles 4 EQUITY Arlington is a diverse, inclusive community whose residents have equal opportunity to access available resources, programs, services, housing, transportation options, and public amenities regardless of income level, race, ethnicity, gender, ability, or age. By establishing standards in 2024 to assess and manage these issues we are well positioned to address our current, as well as future needs, thus eliminating any preventable inequities. ECONOMIC STABILITY AND VIBRANCY Arlington’s economy has a global reach. With diverse and robust manufacturing and industrial clusters, as well as economic interests Arlington’s economy provides a sustainable employment base, allowing residents the opportunity to live, learn, work, and play in the same community. Maintaining diverse employment sectors has allowed Arlington to weather economic downturns. By promoting the growth of existing businesses, recruiting new innovative “green industries”, and focusing on producing here, with the point of delivery in Arlington, is critical in sustaining regional economic stability and vibrancy. CLIMATE ADAPTATION AND RESILIENCE Arlington remains a community framed within a beautiful natural setting, from the Stillaguamish River to the Cascade Mountains. These natural elements continue to enhance the quality of life for residences and the experience of being in Arlington as employees and visitors. Arlington has committed to sustaining this iconic lifestyle by addressing our contribution to global climate change, with requirements for greenhouse gas reduction, responsible use of essential resources, utilizing alternative energy sources, and proactive environmental stewardship. We are also committed to the resiliency of our community, through the innovative and imaginative implementation of the built environment and pre- emptive emergency planning that is essential in recovering from natural and human-caused disasters. Section II: Foundational Principles 5 HEALTHY ACTIVE LIFESTYLES Arlington’s multi-faceted approach to a healthy community has included social, economic, environmental, and physical factors, which have had a positive effect on the overall strength of our community. The City has taken an active role in planning for the health of our citizens by implementing an array of elements available to all residents and employees. This includes multi-modal transportation options and access to nutritious food, social and health services, and quality recreational opportunities. Parks and open spaces are recognized as a fundamental part of the City’s infrastructure and critical to the health and well-being of our community. NEIGHBORHOODS AND CONNECTIVITY Arlington’s neighborhoods are safe. Each neighborhood is an expression of our community’s history and commitment to quality city planning. Our neighborhoods are connected through a network of complete streets, trails, and transit routes, so that residents have multiple transportation options to commute to work, access services and amenities, and/ or enjoy recreation opportunities. Identifying and evaluating each neighborhood in 2024 for its character, attributes, needs, and opportunities, was important in determining where key points of connectivity should occur and what investments should be made. Connectivity includes the physical elements such as streets, sidewalks, and trails, but more importantly the social connections created by community events, parks, schools, and other public places. Creating these social connections is essential in supporting all elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Section III: Subareas 1 Section III: Subareas 1 SECTION III: SUBAREAS Introduction As seen in the Neighborhood and Connectivity Foundational Principle the City is prioritizing placemaking and connectivity throughout Arlington. This Comprehensive Plan supports enriched physical and social connectivity with quality urban planning. Arlington has been broken up into fourteen subareas which have been analyzed to determine the existing and missing features. Vision statements for each subarea have been developed to help clearly identify improvements needed to meet goals for each subarea. Finally, neighborhoods within each subarea have been identified and are further described in Appendix A. Section III: Subareas 2 Arlington Terrace Vision In 2044 Arlington Terrace remains a quiet, residential neighborhood with significant tree canopy. The subarea’s utility improvements such as connection to the City’s sewer and water systems make it a subarea ready for moderate increased housing density. This subarea’s higher housing density allows for a multitude of family sizes. Existing Conditions Arlington Terrace is located on the eastern side of the City. The subarea is triangle-shaped with each side measuring approximately three quarters of a mile. This small subarea is only 0.28 square miles. Highway 9 creates the eastern border with Crown Ridge just beyond the highway to the east. Arlington Terrace is connected to the rest of the City via 188th St NE. As 188th St NE enters Arlington Terrace, the road becomes a private road, 71st Dr NE then 190th Pl NE. 190th Pl NE splits into two private dead-end roads, 192nd Pl NE which runs north and east and 190th Pl NE which runs southeast. Arlington Terrace is entirely residential. The majority of the area is classified as Residential Ultra-Low Capacity, with one parcel of Residential Low Capacity and one parcel of Residential High Capacity in the northern part of the subarea. Parcels in Arlington Terrace are large, densely covered with trees, and dotted with single family homes. The subarea is not connected to the City’s sewer or water system. Residences are served by a septic system and community water system. There are moderate to severe slopes throughout the subarea. The significant slopes are more heavily concentrated on the western and eastern sides of the subarea. There is one notable stream, Prairie Creek, running through Arlington Terrace that flows towards the north. The west fork runs along the western boundary of the subarea. The east fork runs along Highway 9 and meets the west fork at the north border of the subarea. There is also one small wetland in the north portion of the subarea. This subarea has no public transportation, street trees, sidewalks, bike paths, or defined trails. There are also no parks, public art, or heritage trees in Arlington Terrace. Neighborhoods »There is one neighborhood in Arlington Terrace: •BRJR Association. »More information about the neighborhoods can be found in Appendix A. improvements needed/ expected for each. Arling t o n V l y R d 192nd Pl NE 190th Pl N E Arling t o n V l y R d 190th Pl N E 192nd Pl NE 9 Arlington TerraceArlington Terrace ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN 0 500 1,000250Feet Parks/Open Space Arlington City Limits LEGEND Subarea Manufacturing Industrial Center Figure SU-01: Map of Arlington Terrace Section III: Subareas 3 Cascade Industrial Center Vision In 2044 the Cascade Industrial Center subarea is a large hub of industrial development. This subarea is a major employer with upwards of 20,000 jobs including a job training center and the Airport. The Cascade Industrial Center is home to a satellite campus for an accredited college which attracts students to the area. The Cascade Industrial Center is a subarea with rich employment opportunities, opportunity for professional and academic growth, and a hub for further industrial development. Employees and visitors alike enjoy the trail network, food truck court, festivals, and other activities hosted throughout the year. Existing Conditions Cascade Industrial Center is in the center of Arlington and is the City’s largest subarea, covering 3.5 square miles. The Arlington Municipal Airport is in the center of Cascade Industrial Center. The main roads in Cascade Industrial Center include 59th Ave NE which runs north to south and Highway 531 (172nd St NE) which runs east to west south of the airport. 188th St NE connects Cascade Industrial Center to the eastern side of Arlington. The local bus runs on 188th St NE, north on 47th Ave NE, and on Cemetery Road (which turns into 198th St NE) along the northern borders of the subarea. There are bike lanes and sidewalks located along Airport Blvd. There are also sidewalks along 67th Ave NE and 59th Ave NE but few other sidewalks throughout the subarea. Cascade Industrial Center has a mix of zoning including a large section of Aviation Flightline in the center of the subarea. The eastern half of Cascade Industrial Center is zoned General Industrial with a few small areas of Public/Semi-Public throughout and a small section of General Commercial in the northeast corner. There are also sizable sections of Light Industrial and Business Park on the eastern side of the subarea. Small sections of Highway Commercial and General Commercial can also be found on the southern border of the subarea. There are several trails throughout Cascade Industrial Center. Airport Trail is a loop trail located in the center of the subarea and the Centennial Trail follows the eastern boundary of Cascade Industrial Center. Additional trails include the Secondary Airport Trail, multiple Airport Connector Trails, 168th Trail in the southwestern part of the subarea, and the 180th Path in the east. There is also a paved path on Arlington Valley Road in the northeast. There are two parks located next to each other in the subarea, Bill Quake Memorial Park, and W.E. Evans Park. A skatepark and athletic fields are located within the parks. An array of public art is located around the perimeter of the subarea. Edgecomb Creek, Edgecomb Tributary, and Quilceda Tributary all have a section located in the subarea. A few small wetlands are present in the southern part of the subarea. There are street trees but no heritage trees in Cascade Industrial Center. There are also small amounts of moderate and severe slopes in the northern section of the subarea. Section III: Subareas 4 211TH PL NE 204TH ST NE S O LYM P I C AVE 51 S T AVE N E 67TH AVE NE 188TH ST NE EN E VA H T95 172ND ST NE 211TH PL NE 204TH ST NE S O L Y M P I C A V E 51 S T A V E N E 67TH AVE NE 188TH ST NE EN E V A H T 9 5 172ND ST NE 9 530 531 W.EEvans Field HighClover Park RiverView Park Lebanon Park ForestTrailPark WoodwayPark WedgewoodPark Skate ParkBill QuakeMemorial Park ForestTrailPark WoodwayPark WedgewoodPark Skate ParkBill QuakeMemorial Park W.EEvans Field HighClover Park RiverView Park Lebanon Park WestonHigh School NW LearningCenter ArlingtonOpen Doors WestonHigh School NW LearningCenter ArlingtonOpen Doors Parks/Open Space Arlington City Limits LEGEND Subareas Airport Property ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN Manufacturing Industrial Center 0 500 1,000250Feet Cascade Industial Center Neighborhoods »The neighborhoods in Cascade Industrial Center are the following: •Airport 37 •Airways Mobile Home Park •Arlington Advanced Manufacturing Park •Arlington Airport Condo •AVR Business Park •BHB Condo 37 •Cascade Business Park •Five Acre Turkey Farms •Fliteline Condo •Gateway Business Park •Hidden Glen Mobile Home Park •Mobile Estates •North End Aviation Homeport Condo •Pleasant Home Mobile Home Park •P.U.D. No. 1 of Snohomish County •Shoultes Green Acres •Smartcap Air North Arlington Industrial Park •Smartcap Arlington Industrial Park •Southwind Hangar Condo •The Outpost •Willett •Williams Investment Commercial Park Figure SU-02: Map of Cascade Industrial Center »More information about the neighborhoods can be found in Appendix A. Section III: Subareas 5 Crown Ridge Vision In 2044 the Crown Ridge subarea is better connected to the rest of Arlington due to the recent extension of 186th St NE to McElroy Rd in Snohomish County. The recent expansion of this subarea through an annexation invites more families into Crown Ridge. Crown Ridge is a residential subarea that is also home to Arlington High School. Existing Conditions Crown Ridge is a small subarea covering 0.28 square miles located on the eastern side of the City. Arlington’s city limit creates the eastern border of the subarea. Highway 9 creates the western border with Arlington Terrace and Gleneagle subareas just beyond the highway to the west. Kent Prairie lies to the north. Crown Ridge is connected to the Kent Prairie subarea via a small section of the Zimmerman Hill Climb Trail that comes down from the north into the subarea. Arlington High School is in the southern part of Crown Ridge and the associated land is classified as Public/Semi-Public in the City’s zoning. The rest of the subarea is residential made up of mostly Residential Low Capacity with two parcels of Residential Moderate Capacity south of the high school. The northern portion of Crown Ridge is made up of single-family homes organized within Crown Ridge Estates. Large trees along the perimeter surround the subdivision and high school. Crown Ridge Blvd is the primary road in the subarea. It runs north to south connecting to Highway 9 at the southern end of the subarea. Four smaller roads break off from Crown Ridge Blvd to form internal circulation within Crown Ridge Estates north of the high school. All roads in Crown Ridge have sidewalks and there are many street trees throughout the subarea. Portage Creek flows towards the northwest and runs through the southeast and northeast corners of Crown Ridge. Prairie Creek enters Crown Ridge from the south and runs along the subarea’s western border along Highway 9. A wetland that is mostly located in unincorporated Snohomish County is in the southern part of Crown Ridge along Prairie Creek, south of the high school. Severe slopes run generally north-south in two places in the Crown Ridge. One runs on the western side of the subarea along Highway 9. The other severe slope makes up much of the northeastern section of Crown Ridge and runs along the eastern border of the subarea. Moderate slopes are located throughout Crown Ridge. This subarea has no public transportation or bike paths. There is no public art or heritage trees in Crown Ridge. Section III: Subareas 6 Eagleeld Dr Burn Rd Burn Rd 9 Arlington High School Arlington High School Cro w n R i d g e B l v d Crown RidgeCrown Ridge ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN 0 500 1,000250Feet Parks/Open Space Arlington City Limits LEGEND Subarea Manufacturing Industrial Center Neighborhoods »The neighborhoods in Crown Ridge are the following: •Bridgemont •Crown Ridge Estates Division 1 •Crown Ridge Estates Division 2 •Crown Ridge Estates Division 3 »More information about the neighborhoods can be found in Appendix A. Figure SU-03: Map of Crown Ridge Section III: Subareas 7 East Hill Vision In 2044, East Hill boasts diverse housing options such as middle housing and small lot single family homes making the East Hill subarea a residential hub. East Hill is well-connected to the rerouted Burn Road and the rest of Arlington via the comprehensive trail network. Existing Conditions The East Hill subarea is located on the eastern side of Arlington along a bluff above the South Fork of the Stillaguamish River. The subarea is 0.5 square miles and is bordered to the north, east, and south by unincorporated Snohomish County. Burn Rd and Kent Prairie subarea form the western border of the East Hill subarea. There are only two additional major roads in the subarea: 95th Ave NE and Tveit Rd. The majority of the subarea is currently zoned Residential Ultra Low Capacity while the southeast corner of East Hill is zoned Residential Low Capacity. There are steep slopes throughout the subarea with a significant concentration in the northern portion of the subarea. Eagle Creek and several tributaries run along the base of these slopes, all flowing to the north. Just north of the subarea Eagle Creek flows through a wetland that extends slightly into the northern portion of East Hill. There are no parks, sidewalks, trails, bike lanes, public transit routes, heritage trees, or public art in the East Hill subarea. Neighborhoods »There is one neighborhood in East Hill: •Quail Ridge »More information about the neighborhoods can be found in Appendix A. 207TH ST NE 207TH ST NE Burn Rd Burn Rd 9 Cro w n R i d g e B l v d East HillEast Hill ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN 0 500 1,000250Feet Parks/Open Space Arlington City Limits LEGEND Subarea Figure SU-04: Map of East Hill Section III: Subareas 8 Edgecomb Vision In 2044 Edgecomb subarea remains a residential area of Arlington. Edgecomb’s residents enjoy the connectivity of the subarea to the rest of the City because of the recent expansion of 172nd St as well as the addition of a roundabout. The subarea allows residents to enjoy the Centennial Trail as Edgecomb is home to the south entrance of the trail. Edgecomb is well-connected to neighboring subareas, the Cascade Industrial Center and Smokey Point Subareas, and is conveniently located adjacent to 67th Ave NE and 172nd St NE. Existing Conditions Edgecomb is a small subarea on the southern boundary of the City that covers 0.18 square miles. Its western boundary runs along 67th Ave NE, its southern boundary runs along 172nd St NE, and its eastern boundary runs along Gleneagle’s western boundary. The majority of Edgecomb is zoned as Residential Low Capacity while the southwestern corner of Edgecomb is zoned as Neighborhood Commercial. All streets within Edgecomb’s boundaries have active sidewalks. The Centennial Trail runs along the western boundary from north to south of Edgecomb and there are three displays of public art in the form of three banners within the southwest corner of Edgecomb’s boundary. Edgecomb’s critical areas are comprised of moderate slopes from the northwest boundary stretching diagonally to the southeast boundary. There are no bike paths, public transportation, or heritage trees. There a several wetlands and Edgecomb Creek runs along the southern boundary of the subarea. Neighborhoods »The neighborhoods in Edgecomb are the following: •Bovee Acres •Centennial Park •Crossing at Edgecomb Creek •Highland View Estates •Woodway Heights »More information about the neighborhoods can be found in Appendix A. ForestTrailPark WoodwayPark WedgewayPark ForestTrailPark WoodwayPark WedgewayPark EdgecombEdgecomb EN E V A H T 7 6 172ND ST NE 173RD PL NE 176TH PL NE TROO N C T MU I R F I E L D C T IRONWOOD S T AMBLES I DE CT GREENLOFT AVE NE GLENWOOD AVE NE SAINT A NDREWSCT RD E G D I R B M A C HIL L S I D E C T 72 N D D R N E EN R D H T 4 7 S CEDARB O U G H L O O P TO P P E R C T 73RD D R NE GLENEAGLE BLVD 73 R D A V E N E RD D R O F X O BOVEE LN UPLA N D D R HI G H L A N D V I E W D R W COUNTRY CLUB DR 531 Crossing AtEdgecomb Creek WoodwayHeights CentennialPark HighlandView Estates Bovee Acres Crossing AtEdgecomb Creek WoodwayHeights CentennialPark HighlandView Estates Bovee Acres Parks/Open Space Arlington City Limits LEGEND Subareas Neighborhoods ManufacturingIndustrial Center ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN DRAF T 5000250125 Feet Figure SU-05: Map of Edgecomb Section III: Subareas 9 Gateway Vision In 2044 rightly named the Gateway subarea is the entry way into not only Kent Prairie, but also Old Town Arlington. With River View Park in this subarea, mixed-use development, and retail opportunities, Gateway provides Arlington with a vibrant environment with diverse entertainment and housing. Existing Conditions Gateway is a small subarea covering 0.18 square miles, located in the northwest corner of Arlington. State Route 530 runs along the northern boundary of the subarea, 67th Ave NE creates the eastern boundary, and 59th Ave NE is situated in the western portion of the subarea. Most sidewalks present in the subarea are categorized as active sidewalks. There are three zoning designations across Gateway. The northwest area of Gateway is zoned General Commercial, the central area, making up the majority of Gateway, is zoned Residential Low Capacity, and the eastern side of Gateway is zoned as Neighborhood Commercial. Moderate and severe slopes run diagonally through the center of Gateway as well as along the northeast boundary of this subarea. Along the northeast edge of Gateway there is also a small area of wetland in this region. There are no trails, bike paths, public art, heritage trees, or public transit in the subarea. Neighborhoods »The neighborhoods in Gateway are the following: •Arlington Ridgeview Estates •Campbell & Roach Addition •Elite Estates •Highland Bluff •Highland Bluff Condo •Peterson •Pioneer Meadows Division 1 •Pioneer Meadows Division 2 •Pioneer Meadows Division 3 •Ronning Road •Willard Condo »More information about the neighborhoods can be found in Appendix A. 211TH PL NE 204TH ST NE 211TH PL NE 204TH ST NE ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLANParks/Open Space Arlington City Limits LEGEND Subarea Manufacturing Industrial Center 0 500 1,000250Feet Airport Property Gateway Figure SU-06: Map of Gateway Section III: Subareas 10 Gleneagle Vision In 2044 Gleneagle boasts beautiful open space and educational resources. Home to Forest Trail Park, Wedgewood Park, a golf course, and Pioneer Elementary School, the Gleneagle subarea is an asset to the City of Arlington. The northwestern mixed-use development and its retail opportunities further diversifies all that Gleneagle has to offer. Existing Conditions Gleneagle is a golf course community, located in the southeastern part of the City. The subarea covers 0.7 square miles. Gleneagle spans from 188th St NE in the north to 172nd St NE in the south. Highway 9 creates the eastern border and 67th Ave NE creates the western border. The are several locations of interest in Gleneagle. Pioneer Elementary School is in the northeastern corner and there is one public art piece near the northwest corner, a sculpture titled “Eagles Come Home.” Gleneagle Golf Course can be found in the center of the subarea and there are two parks, Wedgewood Park in the south and Forest Trail Park runs alongside the golf course. There are several main roads that allow access to Gleneagle and create connections to the rest of the City. Eaglefield Dr goes west to east across the subarea and connects to Highway 9, near Pioneer Elementary. On the west side, Eaglefield Dr turns into W Country Club Dr and then E Country Club Dr creating a loop in the center of the subarea. Gleneagle Blvd links Gleneagle to the surrounding subareas by connecting to 172nd St NE at the southern border and Woodlands Way creates a connection between W Country Club Dr and 67th Ave NE.. Nearly all roads in Gleneagle have sidewalks except for some residential streets in the northwest. A large majority of Gleneagle is zoned Residential Low Capacity. The exceptions are three Public/Semi-Public zoned areas and one small section zoned Neighborhood Commercial in the northwest corner of the subarea. Both the Edgecomb Tributary and the left fork of Prairie Creek are parallel to one another and flow north through the subarea. There are no wetlands in the subarea. There are moderate slopes in a majority of the subarea and there are severe slopes found in the northwest corner. There are no trails, no bike paths, no heritage trees, and no public transportation in the subarea. Section III: Subareas 11 Neighborhoods »The neighborhoods in Gleneagle are the following: •Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 1 •The Woodlands •Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 2A •Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 3A •Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 3B •Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 4B •Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 4C •Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 4D •Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 4E •Gleneagle Division 2 Sector B PH 1 •Gleneagle Division 2 Sector B PH 2 •Gleneagle Division 2 Sector B PH 3 •Legends at Gleneagle •Woodland Greens Condo •Woodland Ponds 1 Condo •Woodland Ponds 2 Condo »More information about the neighborhoods can be found in Appendix A. Gleneagle 67 t h A v e N E 67 t h A v e N E WedgewoodPark Forest TrailPark Eagleeld D r Eagleeld D r 9 ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN LEGEND Parks/Open Space Arlington City Limits Subarea Manufacturing IndustrialCenter 5000250125 Feet Figure SU-07: Map of Gleneagle Section III: Subareas 12 9 Twin Rivers ParkTwin Rivers Park W Burke Ave Terrace Park Terrace Park E 5th St E Division St Haller Park Haller Park Parks/Open Space Cenntenial Trail Arlington City Limits LEGEND Subarea ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN 0 500 1,000250Feet Haller CityHaller City Haller City Vision In 2044, the Haller City subarea is the northern gateway to the City of Arlington and is located adjacent to the confluence of the north and south forks of the Stillaguamish River. Haller City provides Arlington with public services by being the site for the City’s Water Treatment Plant and Wastewater Treatment Plant. Haller City is also home to Haller Park, which is a treasured community asset. This subarea has the main trail head connection for the Centennial Trail and has a vibrant river walk along the Stillaguamish River. Existing Conditions Haller City is a small subarea on the northeastern side of Arlington covering 0.06 square miles located. Haller City is nestled between Arlington’s Old Town to the south and the Stillaguamish River to the north. Division Street creates the southern boundary of this subarea and Highway 9 NE runs just west of Haller City’s western border. Centennial Trail runs along Haller City’s western side, running from north to south. Haller Park is situated in the northern portion of Haller City and contains the city’s popular splash park. There is also a created stormwater treatment wetland that treats the majority of the Old Town stormwater, and has a walking trail throughout the facility. The majority of Haller City is zoned Old Town Business District-3, with the western section and area along the Stillaguamish River zoned Public/Semi-Public. The Cascade District Courthouse is located along the southeast boundary of Haller City. Haller City’s western side houses many public utilities such as the Wastewater Treatment Plant and the Sewer Treatment Facilit y. There are six public art installations in Haller City, concentrated on the western side of the subarea. The subarea does have active sidewalks throughout its boundaries and there is one bus stop near the southeast boundary of Haller City. In Haller Cit y, the south fork of the Stillaguamish River runs from Haller City’s southeast point and runs diagonally to its northern point where it meets the north fork. As for critical areas, there are moderate and severe slopes running from the northwestern corner diagonally to the southeastern corner of Haller Cit y. There are no heritage trees in the subarea. Neighborhoods »The neighborhoods in Haller City are the following: •Coast Condo •Gilman Avenue Condo •Haller City •Riverside Mobile Home Park •Stilly Cottages Condo »More information about the neighborhoods can be found in Appendix A. Figure SU-08: Map of Haller City Section III: Subareas 13 Hilltop Vision In 2044 Hilltop has a diversity of housing types allowing all types of families to call this subarea home. Hilltop is home to many residents of Arlington and has entertainment and retail opportunities for the community. Existing Conditions Hilltop, located in the southeast corner of Arlington, is a 0.56 square mile subarea. Hilltop’s north and northwestern boundaries are bordered with the subarea of Gleneagle. Its northeastern and eastern boundaries run along the city limits. Hilltop’s land is classified under a variety of zones. North Hilltop is zoned as Residential Low Capacity, the southwestern region is zoned as Residential Ultra Low Capacity, the eastern side of Hilltop is zoned General Commercial as well as Residential High Capacity, and the far east of Hilltop is zoned as Public/Semi-Public. Hilltop has two primary roads that intersect within the subarea. 172nd St NE runs through the center of Hilltop from west to east and Highway 9 NE runs though the northeastern boundary to the south of the Hilltop boundary. Most streets within this subarea have active sidewalks and street trees. There is a singular public art display in the roundabout at the intersection of State Route 9/ State Route 531 (172nd St NE). Prairie Creek runs through Hilltop in the center of this subarea, and the headwaters of Edgecomb Creek are located in this subarea. Moderate slopes are located within the northern region of this subarea and severe slopes are located within the southwest boundary. There are no bike paths, trails, heritage trees, or public transportation in the subarea. Neighborhoods »The neighborhoods in Hilltop are the following: •Dogwood Meadows •Eagle Heights •Eagle Heights Division 2 •Eagle Heights Division 2, Lot 1 Replat •Gregory Park •Magnolia Meadows Division 1 Phase 1 •Magnolia Meadows Division 1 Phase 2 •Magnolia Meadows Division 2 •Magnolia Estates •Zahradnik »More information about the neighborhoods can be found in Appendix A. WedgewoodPark Forest TrailPark Hilltop 9 172nd St NE172nd St NE ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN LEGEND Parks/Open Space Arlington City Limits Subarea 5000250125Feet Figure SU-09: Map of Hilltop Section III: Subareas 14 Island Crossing Vision In 2044, Island Crossing is the initial gateway into Arlington, but also serves as the southern gateway to the North Cascades from I-5. It is an attractive, functional, and commercially viable entryway into the City from I-5 with an iconic panoramic view of agricultural lands and the Cascade foothills. Island Crossing serves as a commercial, retail, and accommodation hub that serves not only the greater Arlington community but those travelling along I-5 as well. Existing Conditions Island Crossing is located in the northwest corner of the City at the junction of I-5 and State Route 530. I-5 runs along the west boundary of Island Crossing and State Route 530 runs east-west in the northern portion of the subarea. Bus route 227 runs along Smokey Point Boulevard which creates the eastern boundary of the subarea. The subarea is generally triangle-shaped measuring approximately 0.20 square miles. Each boundary of Island Crossing is also the city limits, surrounded by unincorporated county. There is an entryway sign along State Route 530 welcoming visitors to Arlington. The vast majority of Island Crossing is zoned Highway Commercial. Along Smokey Point Boulevard at the southern tip of the subarea it is zoned Commercial Corridor District. Most of the Island Crossing subarea lies within the 100-year floodplain. A sliver of the subarea falls within the 500-year floodplain. Lower Portage Creek runs through the southern portion of Island Crossing and South Slough runs through the center of the subarea. There are also a few steep slopes around the subarea. There are no parks, sidewalks, bike lanes, trails, or heritage trees in Island Crossing. Neighborhoods »There are no specific neighborhoods in Island Crossing. »More information about the subarea can be found in Appendix A. Figure SU-10: Map of Island Crossing Section III: Subareas 15 Kent Prairie Vision In 2044 Kent Prairie is a lively subarea with easy access to other areas of Arlington. This Subarea is particularly well-connected to Old Town with a recent road improvement project under Highway 9 which has improved the safety for pedestrians and bikers on the Interurban Trail. Businesses in this area are varied and plentiful along both spines of the subarea, Highway 9 and 204th St NE. Mixed-use buildings line 204th St NE, providing diverse housing and job opportunities in this walkable neighborhood. Single family housing, which still dominates the edges of the subarea, Kent Prairie Elementary School, and neighboring Jensen Park attract families to Kent Prairie. Existing Conditions Kent Prairie is a subarea in the northeastern part of the City. It is 0.7 square miles large and has a unique shape creating shared boundaries with many other subareas. Kent Prairie’s main east to west connections are E Highland Dr which becomes 212th St NE along the northern boundary of the subarea and 204th St NE becomes 207th St NE in central Kent Prairie. Highway 9 NE bisects the western side of Kent Prairie running north to south. S Stillaguamish Ave turns into Burn Rd and bisects the eastern side of the subarea also running north to south. Kent Prairie contains many zoning designations. There is a relatively equal distribution of both Residential Low Capacity and Residential High Capacity. There are several Public/Semi-Public spaces including Jensen Park and Kent Prairie Elementary School. There is a large amount of Commercial Corridor and General Commercial on the western side of the subarea and a small portion of Medical Services, part of Cascade Valley Hospital, in the northeast. Portage Creek has two forks that flow north in Kent Prairie. There are also wetlands in the subarea. Five of the wetlands are alongside Portage Creek. The other two wetlands appear in the eastern half of Kent Prairie. There are severe and moderate slopes present in the southeastern and central eastern parts of the subarea. There are also severe slopes in the northwest corner and across the northern section of Kent Prairie. There is one park, Jensen Park, located in central Kent Prairie. There are several trails in Kent Prairie including the Zimmerman Hill Climb Trail, Portage/Kruger Creek Trail, Portage Creek Wildlife Trail, and the 204th Trail. The Zimmerman Hill Climb Trail connects Kent Prairie to Crown Ridge. The Portage/Kruger Creek Trail connects Kent Prairie to Old Town. Sidewalks are present on certain roads in the subarea including S Stillaguamish Ave, Portage St, 207th St NE which turns into 204th St NE, Olympic Place NE, and 77th Ave NE. The local bus runs on 204th St NE/207th St NE and then turns north on S Stillaguamish Ave, connecting Kent Prairie to Old Town. Bus stops are located along the route approximately every ¼ mile. A variety of public art is present in Kent Prairie. There are many banners along 67th Ave NE, four banners at the Highway 9 and 204th St NE intersection, a mural and a metal salmon art piece on 204th St NE, and a painted cows installation in Jensen Park. There are no bike paths and no heritage trees in the subarea. Section III: Subareas 16 Neighborhoods »The neighborhoods in Kent Prairie are the following: •Alexander/Wriglesworth •Arlington Retail •Armstrongs Suburban Acre Tract Replat •Autumn Park •Cedar Village Estates •Cobbs First Addition to Arlington (West of SR 9 Only) •Crystal Creek Estate •Eliason •Farmstead Estate •Highland Haven Condo •Jay Three Two •Jensen Business Park Phase 1 •Jensen Business Park Phase 2 •Jensen Farm Division 1 •Jensen Farm Division 2 •Jensen Farm Division 3 •Kent Prairie 9 & 10 Condo •Kent Prairie 17, 18, 20 Condo •Kent Prairie Condo •Kent Prairie Estates Phase 1 •Kent Prairie Estates Phase 2 •Kona Crest •Mason •Maudlin •McPherson Heights •Peterson •Portage Creek Estates •Portage Green Mobile Park •Reserve at Arlington •Rose Armstrongs Suburban Acre Tract •Southbrook Condo Phase 1 •Stewart •The Colony Division 1 •The Farmstead Estate Condo •Wesley Street Condo •Whitehorse Medical Center Condo •Wisemark Commons »More information about the neighborhoods can be found in Appendix A. 211TH PL NE 211TH PL NE BURN RD BURN RD LegionMemorialPark 204TH ST NE 207TH ST NE 204TH ST NE 207TH ST NE 9 JensenPark Kent PrairieElementarySchool ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN Parks/Open Space Arlington City Limits LEGEND Subarea Manufacturing Industrial Center 0 500 1,000250FeetAirport Property Arlington UrbanGrowth Area Kent Prairie Figure SU-11: Map of Kent Prairie Section III: Subareas 17 Old Town Vision In 2044, the Old Town subarea is a bustling section of Arlington that continues to be the central downtown area boasting historic architecture. Home to beautiful heritage trees, County Charm Park, multiple schools, and iconic stores, Old Town captures Arlington’s rich history and vibrant community. Existing Conditions Old town is the historic downtown of Arlington located in the north part of the city. It is one of the largest subareas, covering one square mile. Old town’s boundaries are defined by Highway 9, or Hazel St, on the western side, E Highland Dr (which turns into 212th St NE) on the southern side, and E Burke Ave and the south fork of the Stillaguamish River on the northern side. Old Town’s eastern boundary is the City’s eastern boundary and the south fork of the Stillaguamish River. Points of interest in Old Town include the County Charm Conservation Area, Stillaguamish Valley School, Post Middle School, Eagle Creek Elementary School, Haller Middle School, Presidents Elementary School, and Cascade Valley Hospital. Centennial Trail is also a main asset of Old Town which runs north-south through the subarea on the west side. There are several parks in Old Town. The parks include Country Charm Park, Terrace Park, Centennial Park, Legion Park, and Lebanon Park. Old Town has a large amount of public art on display including murals, sculptures, a time capsule, a sound garden, and over 75 pieces along Centennial Trail, many being banners. Public art is also located in Terrace Park and the “Leaping Bunnies” sculpture can be seen along East Division St. There are 15 heritage trees in Old Town all located in the western half of the subarea. There are also street trees seen in parts of Old Town. Public transit is present and accessible in Old Town. The local bus route runs along S Stillaguamish Ave south of E 1st St, on E 1st St, on N Olympic Ave, and on a small section on E Division to continue north on N Broadway St and then east on E Burke Ave. There are sidewalks on nearly all roads in Old Town which provide pedestrian access. Bike paths are present on a small stretch of E Division St between West Ave and N Broadway St/N MacLeod Ave. There are three wetlands in the northeastern part of the subarea as well as the south fork of the Stillaguamish River and Eagle Creek. There are moderate and severe slopes throughout Old Town. Two main severe slopes are located in the northeast near Country Charm Park and in central Old Town going towards the southeast. Old Town’s business district is on the western side of the subarea and has three separate zoning designations: Old Town Business District-1, Old Town Business District-2, and Old Town Business District-3. The Old Town Residential District is in the center of the subarea. There are several large Public/Semi Public spaces including County Charm Park in the northeast of the subarea. Medical Services are in the south where Cascade Valley Hospital is located. There is a section of Residential Low Capacity on the eastern side and three sections of Residential High Capacity in the north, central, and southeastern parts of Old Town. A small section of General Commercial is also present in the southwest. This commercial area is mostly located in Gateway to the west of Old Town. Section III: Subareas 18 Neighborhoods »The neighborhoods in Old Town are the following: •Arlington Cemetery •Burgoyne Plat •Cascade Medical Center Condo •Clums First Addition to Arlington •Clums Second Addition to Arlington •Cobbs Addition to Arlington •Eagle Creek Place •French Street South Condo •Giffords First Addition to Arlington •Gilman Walk •Grandview •Grandview Homes •Green-Thom •Kent Ridge •Kunze Acreage Tract •La Verne Heights •Larsen •Les’ Adret Condo •McMahons First Addition to Arlington •Norwood Glen Condo Phase 1, 2, & 3 •Palmers Addition •Park Crest East Condo •Park Hill Estates •Patricia •Pied Piper Heights •The Yarmuth Plat •Town of Arlington •Victor Heights Division 1 •Wrage Addition to Arlington •Wright •Wrobliski Addition »More information about the neighborhoods can be found in Appendix A. HallerPark Stormwater WetlandPark Twin Rivers Park County Charm Park Centennial Park TerracePark HallerPark Stormwater WetlandPark Twin Rivers Park County Charm Park Centennial Park TerracePark Legion Memorial Park Legion Memorial Park Haller Middle School Post Middle School Eagle Creek Elementary School PresidentsElementary School Haller Middle School Post Middle School Eagle Creek Elementary School PresidentsElementary School E 3rd St E 1st St E 5th St N O l y m p i c A v e Parks/Open Space Cenntenial Trail Arlington City Limits LEGEND Subarea ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVE 0 500 1,000250Feet Old TownOld Town Figure SU-12: Map of Old Town Section III: Subareas 19 Smokey Point Vision In 2044 Smokey Point is a vibrant, walkable, mixed-use district nestled between I-5 and the Cascade Industrial Center. Smokey Point is a hub of Arlington and is well connected to the rest of the City and the region. Multimodal transportation options define the subarea’s connectivity. In addition to roads and direct access to I-5 , Smokey Point has sidewalks, dedicated and shared bike lanes, local buses, and the Community Transit SwiftGold Line. Smokey Point residents enjoy a variety of housing options, several parks, job opportunities in their neighborhood, and numerous local businesses on the tree-lined Smokey Point Boulevard. Existing Conditions Smokey Point covers one square mile of the southwest corner of Arlington. Smokey Point is set between the Cascade Industrial Center to the east and the city limits and I-5 to the west. Smokey Point Blvd, a primary street, runs through the length of the Smokey Point subarea. Smokey Point Blvd is connected to 40th Ave via the 173rd Trail. Currently, this trail is only runs from Smokey Point Blvd to 40th Ave NE but will eventually extend to Airport Blvd, making it an alternate travel route. There are numerous active sidewalks throughout Smokey Point. There is also a bike lane that runs along 172nd St NE. There is a Transit Center along Smokey Point Dr with transit lines that run through the center of Smokey Point from north to south with 19 transit stops along the transit line route. There are street trees and 12 public art displays throughout the Smokey Point subarea. Smokey Point has several zoning designations which include Residential Low Capacity, Residential Medium Capacity, Residential High Capacity, Residential Moderate Capacity, a Commercial Corridor, and a Public/Semi-Public zone. Moderate slopes run within the southeast region of the Smokey Point subarea. There are also streams along the southeast corner of the Smokey Point boundary. There are no heritage trees or wetlands in the subarea. The City intends to complete a Smokey Point Subarea Plan, affordable housing code update, and transit- oriented development plan, starting in 2025; all of which will address plans for development near the future Community Transit Swift Gold Line station to be located in Smokey Point. Section III: Subareas 20 Neighborhoods »The neighborhoods in Smokey Point are the following: •Affinity at Arlington •Baker-Mor •Brickwood •Carola Addition •Commercial Plat of Tucson •Cougar Point 2 & 3 Condo •Country Manor 1 Condo •Country Manor 2 Condo •Cougar Point Condo •Dubois Plat •English Station East •Fir Acres •Goldstream •Hidden Hamlet •Highway Home Sites •Inverness Addition •Inverness Place •Ivel •Johnson Tract •Justin Estates •Kelly Place Condo •Linborg •Marsand 1, 2, & 3 Condo •Park Central Condo •Pilchuck Plaza Condo, Phase 1 & 2 •Point Riley •Pony Estates •Professional Services Center Condo •Sapphire •Smokey Point •Smokey Point 18617 Condo •Smokey Point Estates 3A & 4A Condo •Smokey Point Mobile/RV Park •Smokey Point Meadows •Smokey Point Shopping Center •Smokey Point Townhomes, A Condo •Still Scene Estates •Stoneway •Taylor •Timber Park •Timbergrove •Totem Park •Totem Park Division 2 •Totem Park Division 3 •Totem Park Division 4 •Townhouses at The Point Condo •Trellis Court • West Coast •Whispering Breeze »More information about the neighborhoods can be found in Appendix A. YorkMemorialPark Smokey PointPark Smokey PointSmokey Point ArlingtonOpen DoorsWestonHigh School ArlingtonOpen DoorsWestonHigh School SM O K E Y P O I N T B LVD 172ND ST NE 5 531 Smokey PointSmokey Point ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN 0 500 1,000250Feet Arlington City Limits LEGEND Parks/Open Space Subareas Airport Property Manufacturing IndustrialCenter Figure SU-13: Map of Smokey Point Section III: Subareas 21 West Bluff Vision In 2044, the recent annexation of the urban growth area between the western and eastern West Bluff connects the previously disconnected subarea into a continuous one. West Bluff is primarily a residential subarea. Businesses are concentrated along its western boundary. The subarea offers diverse housing options and opportunities for further housing diversification. Existing Conditions The West Bluff subarea is 0.65 square miles. West Bluff is unique from Arlington’s other subareas in that it is split into two by the City’s urban growth area, therefore, there is a section of West Bluff in the northwest region of the City as well as a section just to the east. West Bluff is bordered by the Cascade Industrial Center along its southern and eastern boundaries and follows the city limits to the north. The western West Bluff subarea is made up of three zones, largely Commercial Corridor with some Business Park and Residential Medium Capacity zoned areas. The eastern West Bluff subarea is comprised of two zones, Residential Low Capacity and Residential Moderate Capacity. Both parts of West Bluff’s subarea have a main road running through or along their boundaries. The western West Bluff has Smokey Point Blvd running through it and the eastern West Bluff has Cemetery Road running through it. Western West Bluff subarea has one bus stop located at its southern side and one transit line running through Smokey Point Blvd. The eastern West Bluff subarea has seven bus stops as well as transit lines running through 46th Ave NE, 47th Ave NE, and Cemetery Road. Western West Bluff has active sidewalks located within the southwest side concentrated nearer to the Residential Medium Capacity zoned area. Eastern West Bluff has active sidewalks along the majority of its residential sidewalks. West Bluff has a city park located in the northeast region of eastern West Bluff and street trees can be found throughout both sections of West Bluff. Portage Creek runs through the eastern West Bluff and travels across the northern boundary of western West Bluff. While there are no wetlands within the West Bluff subarea, there are significant wetlands north of both sections of the subarea. The western West Bluff subarea has slopes from the northern most point of West Bluff that are moderate and severe running along the north diagonally to West Bluff’s southwest point. The eastern West Bluff has moderate and severe slopes running throughout the subarea as well. There are no bike paths, trails, public art, or heritage trees in West Bluff. Section III: Subareas 22 Neighborhoods »The neighborhoods in West Bluff are the following: •6511 206th Pl NE Condo •Arlington Cemetery/Robb Division/ Hardwood Cemetery •Brotten •Cedar Village 2 •Cedar Village 3 •Cemetery Road Condo •Claridge Court 1 •Claridge Court 2 •Cote •Evergreen Meadows •Grove Estates •Grove Place Condo •Grove Place Townhomes •Heartland •High Clover Park Div 1 •High Clover Park Div 2 •Janisko •McEwen •Peterson •Pioneer Estates •Prairie Creek Condo •Prospect Point •River Crest Estates •Ronning •Sau Turn Division 2 •Smith •Sky-Blue Estates •Smokey Point Crest Condo •Smokey Point Warehouse Condo •Sweet Water •Terah/ Marie •The Bluff at Arlington Condo •Town Houses at the Point Condo 2018-188th St •Walnut Ridge 1 •Walnut Ridge 2 •Wuthering Heights »More information about the neighborhoods can be found in Appendix A.Figure SU-14: Map of West Bluff Section III: Subareas 23 CascadeIndustrialCenter Kent Prairie Gleneagle Old Town East Hill ArlingtonTerrace Crown Ridge Haller City Smokey Point Edgecomb Hilltop Gateway West Blu Island Crossing CascadeIndustrialCenter Kent Prairie Gleneagle Old Town East Hill ArlingtonTerrace Crown Ridge Haller City Smokey Point Island Crossing Edgecomb Hilltop Gateway West Blu 211TH PL NE 204TH ST NE SM O K E Y P O I N T B LVD 207TH ST NE E BURKE AVE 51 S T AVE N E N O LYM P I C AVE 67TH AVE NE 188TH ST NE BURN RD EN EVA HT95 172ND ST NE 211TH PL NE 204TH ST NE SM O K E Y P O I N T B LVD 207TH ST NE E BURKE AVE 51 S T AVE N E N O LYM P I C AVE 67TH AVE NE 188TH ST NE BURN RD EN EVA HT95 172ND ST NE 530 531 5 9 Source: Esri, USDA FSA Stillaguamish River Stillaguamish River Citywide Map Citywide Map ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN 0 0.25 0.50.13 Mile Arlington City Limits LEGEND Parks/Open Space Subareas Arlington Urban Growth Area Airport Property Manufacturing Industrial Center Figure SU-15. Citywide Subareas Map Book 1: Environment 1 BOOK 1: ENVIRONMENT Introduction The Environment book addresses the preservation, protection, and restoration of Arlington’s environmental assets and guides the development and implementation of environmental policies and regulations. The primary objective of the Environment book is to integrate the natural and urban environments in a sustainable manner. The goals and policies established in the Environment book are related to preservation, equitable distribution of environmental resources, eco-tourism, greenhouse gas emission reduction, climate change resilience, increased tree canopy, public education, and livability. Book 1: Environment 2 Goals and Policies: E-1 Preserve and enhance open space, natural, and cultural resources and strive for equitable geographic and demographic distribution. E-1.1 Protect and enhance the natural environment while planning for and accommodating growth. E-1.2 Protect critical areas and other sensitive resources, such as archaeological and historical sites, as defined in the City’s critical areas regulations using best available science and give special consideration to anadromous fisheries. E-1.3 Protect and mitigate geologically hazardous areas, especially forested steep slopes, for both environmental and aesthetic purposes if appropriate. E-1.4 Protect groundwater resources, including the aquifer located under the airport which provides water to the City of Arlington. E-1.5 Locate development in a manner that minimizes impacts to natural features. Promote the use of innovative environmentally sensitive development practices, including design, materials, construction, and on-going maintenance. E-1.6 Protect, enhance, and restore ecosystems in order to meet tribal treaty rights and conserve culturally important consumptive and non-consumptive resources including foods, medicinal plants, and materials that could be adversely impacted by climate change. E-1.7 Support implementation of and compliance with the Shoreline Master Program. Critical areas consist of critical aquifer recharge areas, fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas, geologically hazardous areas, frequently flooded areas, and wetlands. See WAC 365-190-120 for more information on geologically hazardous areas. Book 1: Environment 3 E-2 Promote environmental justice by not creating or worsening environmental health disparities and ensuring equal access to environmental resources. E-2.1 Ensure that all residents, regardless of race, social, or economic status, have clean air, clean water, and other elements of a healthy environment. E-2.2 Reduce impacts to vulnerable populations and areas that have been disproportionately affected by noise, air pollution, or other environmental impacts, including climate change. E-2.3 Reduce the use of toxic pesticides, fertilizers, and other products to the extent feasible and identify alternatives that minimize risks to human health and the environment. E-2.4 Increase resilience by identifying and addressing the impacts of climate change and natural hazards on water, land, infrastructure, health, and the economy. Prioritize actions to protect the most vulnerable populations. E-2.5 Prioritize urban forestry planning resources and funding for frontline communities that are hurt first and worst by climate change. E-3 Promote eco-tourism and/or agri-tourism. E-3.1 Promote new water-dependent, water-related, and water enjoyment economic development. E-3.2 Encourage local food production, distribution, and choice through the support of community gardens, farmers markets, and other small-scale initiatives. Book 1: Environment 4 E-4 Mitigate climate impact by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and prepare for climate change impacts. E-4.1 Advance the adoption and implementation of actions that substantially reduce greenhouse gas emissions in support of state, regional, and local emissions reduction goals, including targets adopted by the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency. E-4.2 Advance local actions that support resilience and adaptation to climate change impacts. E-4.3 Support implementation of the state’s climate change initiatives and work toward developing a common framework to analyze climate change impacts when conducting environmental review under SEPA. E-4.4 Pursue the development of energy management technology as part of meeting the city’s energy needs. E-4.5 Establish a greenhouse gas inventory development process. E-4.6 Develop a climate action plan specific to local conditions. E-4.7 Reduce energy use by buildings and advance green building design, including green and cool roofs. E-4.8 Integrate clean and local energy that comes from renewable sources such as solar and wind, into building designs. The Stillaguamish River in full autumn color. Book 1: Environment 5 E-5 Identify, protect, and enhance natural areas to foster resiliency to climate impacts, as well as areas of vital habitat for safe passage and species migration. E-5.1 Designate and protect fish and wildlife habitat corridors and restrict the fragmentation of large natural plant communities that provide essential and significant wildlife habitat. E-5.2 Maintain and, where possible, improve air and water quality, soils, and natural systems to reduce impacts of climate change and ensure the health and well-being of people, animals, and plants. E-5.3 Manage open space lands comprised of critical areas as native growth areas and kept in a natural state to maintain existing habitat value. In the case of degraded or impacted lands, these areas may be enhanced to provide a higher value. E-5.4 Preserve existing and native vegetation as much as possible to support wildlife systems, increase groundwater infiltration, and prevent stormwater runoff. E-5.5 Protect salmonid streams, drainage ways, wetlands, and their buffers from adverse impacts of land development that might decrease low flows or increase high peak flows, reduce recharge areas for streams, increase bank or bed erosion, or increase turbidity of the water. E-5.6 Obtain stream corridor dedications where reasonable. E-5.7 Coordinate regionwide environmental strategies with adjacent jurisdictions, tribes, and the County. E-5.8 Use integrated and interdisciplinary approaches for environmental planning and assessment. Book 1: Environment 6 E-5.9 Use the best information available at all levels of planning, especially scientific information, when establishing and implementing environmental standards. E-5.10 Support and incentivize environmental stewardship on private and public lands to protect and enhance habitat, water quality, and other ecosystem services, including protection of watersheds, groundwater quantity, and wellhead areas that are sources of the region’s drinking water supplies. E-5.11 Support the Regional Open Space Conservation Plan by working with adjacent jurisdictions to identify, preserve, and enhance significant open space networks and linkages across jurisdictional boundaries. E-5.12 Preserve and enhance habitat to support healthy wildlife and accelerate the recovery of threatened and endangered species and species of local importance. E-5.13 Reduce stormwater impacts from transportation and development through watershed planning, redevelopment and retrofit projects, and low impact development. E-5.14 Protect and restore natural resources that sequester and store carbon such as forests, farmland, wetlands, estuaries, and urban tree canopy. E-5.15 Support programs that manage and work to reduce the spread of invasive species that are harmful to natural ecological function and habitat throughout the city. E-5.16 Protect and restore wetlands and corridors between wetlands to provide biological and hydrological connectivity that fosters resilience to climate impacts. Pioneer Pond (PC: Deborah Nelson) Book 1: Environment 7 E-5.17 Increase the climate resilience of native species by reducing the threat of invasive species (e.g., fish, plants, insects, etc.) E-5.18 Protect and restore watershed-scale processes to maximize the ecological benefits and climate resilience of riparian ecosystems. E-5.19 Restore the structure, function, and water quality of streams, floodplains, and other local ecosystems to increase habitat climate resilience for cold- water fish and recover the health of Puget Sound E-5.20 Take inventory of and protect climate refugia and habitat connectivity needs for species under stress from climate change. E-5.21 Ensure no net loss of ecosystem composition, structure, and functions, especially in Priority Habitats and Critical Areas, and strive for net ecological gain to enhance climate resilience. E-5.22 Coordinate all programs that can affect fish and wildlife habitat to optimize the ability of local policies, rules, and management activities to protect habitats, and look for gaps or inefficient practices that could impede climate resilience. E-5.23 Support natural resource management plans that address existing stressors, consider climate change impacts, emphasize taking a precautionary approach to reduce risk of environmental harm, and guide adaptive management. Country Charm Park and the Stillaguamish River (PC: Deborah Nelson) Book 1: Environment 8 E-6 Address natural hazards created or aggravated by climate change, including sea level rise, landslides, flooding, drought, heat, smoke, wildfire, and other effects of changes to temperature and precipitation patterns. E-6.1 Promote soil stability and the use of the natural drainage systems by retaining existing native vegetation in critical areas. E-6.2 Identify and address the impacts of climate change on the region’s hydrological systems. E-6.3 Address effects of climate change by siting and planning for relocation of hazardous industries and essential public services away from the 500-year floodplain. E-6.4 Implement and encourage measures to reduce sedimentation in streams resulting from wildfire damage and the associated impacts of landslides and flooding. iStillaguamish River at Haller Park (PC: Deborah Nelson) Book 1: Environment 9 E-7 Remain a Tree City and encourage an increased tree canopy. E-7.1 Preserve significant trees to the extent feasible. E-7.2 Maintain at minimum those requirements necessary for qualifying to be a Tree City under the National Arbor Day Foundation, including: a) Maintain a tree board or department. b) Maintain tree protection rules, regulating the removal of trees and requiring appropriate replacement. c) Maintain a Community Forestry Program with an annual budget of at least $2 per capita. d) Annually hold an Arbor Day observance and proclamation. E-7.3 Enhance urban tree canopy to support ecological function, community resilience, mitigate urban heat, manage stormwater, conserve energy, improve mental and physical health, and strengthen economic prosperity. E-7.4 Ensure that tree species selection and planting guidance are updated to be resilient to climate change. E-7.5 Seek funding to support the assessment and mapping of the urban tree canopy throughout the city and to prepare an citywide forestry management plan. An American Elm Heritage Tree located at the corner of Division Street and French Street. Book 1: Environment 10 E-8 Provide opportunities/resources to educate the public on the importance of preserving natural resources and reducing individual carbon impacts. E-8.1 Protect, maintain, and enhance elements of the environment including clean water, shoreline areas, open space, natural and scenic resources, and natural vegetation through adopted development regulations and a variety of educational, voluntary, and incentive programs. E-8.2 Encourage water conservation, reclamation, and reuse among residents through education and by providing water conservation kits. E-9 Strengthen neighborhood identity by preserving and enhancing unique environmental features on both private and public lands. E-9.1 Maintain a green belt along residential portions of the perimeter of the Airport property, subject to Part 77 restrictions and the possible requirement for low-growing vegetation. E-9.2 Encourage participation in Washington’s small forest landowner assistance cost-share and stewardship programs. E-10 Work towards and maintain an aesthetically pleasing environment that enhances livability for residents. E-10.1 Incorporate and preserve street trees in the streetscape where they don’t adversely affect roadway capacity, safety, or structural integrity. E-10.2 Use landscape buffers or vegetated low impact development facilities to serve as a visual screen between rights-of-way and industrial uses, filter suspended particulates, absorb air pollutants, and reduce noise. Book 1: Environment 11 Figure E-01. Critical Areas Book 1: Environment 12 Figure E-02 Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas and City Wells Book 1: Environment 13 204th St Ne tS htroN 153r Pl Ne 23 rd Ave N e 151st Pl Ne E 3rd St Osp r Rd ht4 wN evA N BAve ht08 eN evA 79 t h Ave N e Her Ct 193rd St Ne ht91 eN evA 58 t h eN evA 38 t h Dr N e Hunter Pl 200th St Ne 3rdDr N e 89t h Av 35 t h Ave N e Pea k Pl 172nd St Nw 59 t h Ave N e 170th Pl Ne 84 t hAv 194th Ave Ne 77 t h Ave N e 189th Pl Ne 150th St Ne Joann Ln E 4th St 25 t h Ave N e 72 n d Dr N e 92nd Av 10 1 s t Ave N e 164th St Ne CarlPl 5t h Ave N e 44 t h Dr N e 156th St Ne 27 t h Ave N e ht61 eN rD ht72 Ave N e 233rd Pl Ne 193rd Pl Ne 165th Pl Ne 19 t h D r N e E Haller Ave 89 t h Av Nob l e Dr 65 t h Dr N e S C o b b Ave 99 t h Ave N e 64 t h Dr N e 178th Pl Ne 196th St Ne ts17 eN evA 182nd St Ne 62 n d Dr N e 183rd Pl Ne178th St Ne 6t h Ave N w 169th Ave Ne164th St Ne 206thSt Ne 32 n d Ave N e 175th Pl Ne 39 t h Ave 200th St Nw 59 t h Ave N e 192nd St Ne 66 t h Ave N e Ox ford Dr 95 t h Ave N e Arl 3rAv 156thSt Ne 40 t h Ave N e 47 t h Ave N e eN evA ts19 42 n d Dr N e 43 rd Ave N e 79 t h Ave N e 89 t h Ave N e W Jensen St 197th St Ne eN evA ht91 31 s t Dr N e 171st Pl N e 88 t h Dr N e Mor Rd 11 t h Ave N e 2n d D r N w 176th Pl Ne 192n d Pl Ne E 2nd St 89 t h Ave N e 162ndSt Ne Upla n d Dr 182n d P l N e 162n dPl N e 73 rd Ave N e Ch a m p i o n s Dr 15 t h Ave N e 158th St Ne 196th Pl Ne 199th St Ne ht08 eN rD 220th St Ne 11 t h Ave N e New p o r t Dr 27 t h Ave N e 23 rd Ave N e Hig hClovBlvd N e 67 t h Ave N e 79 t h Dr N e Vi s t a Dr 35 t h Ave N e 3rd Ave N w 99 t h Dr N e 160th St Ne 59 t h Dr N e Ol y m p i c Pl Smok Point Dr 23 rd Dr N e 31 s t Ave N e 37 t h Ave N e 95 t h eN evA 182nd St Ne High l a n d View D r 194th St Nw E Gilman Ave 152nd St Ne Wood l a n d s Wa 45 t h Dr N e 15 t h eN evA 226 t h P l N e Knutso n R d Mcpherso n Rd Spr i n g Lan e Av Schlom a n R d 8t h Av 25 t h Av 6t h Ave N w 43 rd Ave N e 6thAv 40 t h Dr N e 23 rd Ave N e 164th St Ne Eaglefie l d D r Old Burn R d Mcrae Rd Nw CrRidg eBlvd 234th St Ne Jo rHevly Rd Twi n L a kes Ave 188th St Ne Dik 200th St Ne 236th St Ne I-5 W Burke Ave N French Ave E Highland Dr 186th St Ne N Manhattan Ave 172nd St Ne 74th Ave Ne 169th St Ne 191st Pl Ne 188th St Ne Tveit Rd Cemetery Rd S Stillaguamish AveS French Ave 59th Ave Ne E 1st St Burn Rd 51st Ave Ne Arlington Valley Road 47th Ave Ne Mcelroy Rd 211th Pl Ne 204th St Ne 207th St Ne E Burke Ave S Ol y m p i c Ave N O l y m p i c Ave 212th St Nw Forty Fi v 188th St Ne 172nd St Ne Burn Sm o key Poi n t Blv d 67 t h Ave N e eN evA ht95 Sil 3rd Ave N e Pioneer Hwy E E Division St Airpo r t B 48th Dr 49th Dr 50th Ne Ave Ne 62nd 188th Pl Ne 51st Ave Ave Ne 62nd 192nd St Ne 195th St Ne 180th St Ne eN rD ht95 S R 530 S R 9 S R 5 31 47 TH AVE N E 47 TH AVE N E 59 T H AVE N E 59 T H AVE N E 204TH ST N E204TH ST N E E H i gh l an d D RE H i gh l an d D R S t i l l a g u a m i s h A V E S t i l l a g u a m i s h A V E E 5th STE 5th ST Burn RD Burn RD Burn RD Burn RD Burn RD 172N D ST N E172ND ST N E Airport BLVD Airport BLVD Stilla gu a m ish R i ver 67TH AVE N E 67TH AVE N E 51 S T AVE N E 51 S T AVE N E 1 88T H S T N E188TH S T N E 2 00T H S T N E200TH S T N E Dike RDDike RD Smokey Point BLVD Smokey Point BLVD 1 9TH AVE N E 1 9TH AVE N E Liquefaction Susceptibility L e ge n d H i gh L o w t o M o d e r a te L o w Ve r y L o w Ve r y L o w t o L o w C i ty L i m i ts U r b a n G r o wt h Ar e a Tr a i l s B u i l d i n gs R a i l r o ad S t a te H i gh wa y S ta t e R o u t e A i r p o r t R o a d A r te r i a l C o lle c to r S tr eet ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN 0.5 0 0.50.25 Miles Geologic Hazards Figure E-03. Geologic Hazards Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment Supporting Analysis —November 2024 1 Book 1: Environment Supporting Analysis Introduction The purpose of this book is to consider the relationship between the built and natural environments. Arlington’s natural beauty is a defining feature of the community and draw for residents, employees, and visitors alike. The City is defined by vistas of the Cascade Mountains, mature trees, streams and rivers, open spaces, and agriculture. The City of Arlington has valued environmental protection and enhancement for many years and has numerous programs in place to improve the quality of the natural environment. The Environment Book supports the City’s commitment to Arlington’s beautiful nature, high quality of life, and resilient natural environment with high-quality natural functions and wildlife habitats. The Environment Book includes an overview of the existing conditions in Arlington, including an overview of the City’s critical areas and other natural features such as fauna of significance including endangered and threatened species, water resources, air quality, noise, This Book also includes an overview of the regulations related to the natural environment which span from federal laws to local requirements. To learn more about natural hazards and emergency management see the Public Safety Book. For more information related to the protection and enhancement of open spaces and conservation areas see the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Book. It is important to note that while this Book does not address the requirement to develop a Climate Element by 2029 the City supports actions that will improve the Arlington’s climate resilience and reduce per capita vehicle miles. The goals and policies in this Book support these efforts along with goals and policies associated with the Climate Adaptation and Community Resiliency and Healthy Active Lifestyle foundational principles throughout this plan. Background There are several regulations, policies, and agreements that dictate elements of the Environment Book and require Arlington to protect natural resources and wildlife habitat which have a significant impact on the Arlington’s residents, employees, visitors, wildlife, and the greater Puget Sound region. Federal Planning The Endangered Species Act (ESA) establishes protections for fish, wildlife, and plants and that are listed as threatened or endangered and their habitat. A species may be listed as threatened or endangered under the ESA because of any of the following five factors:  present or threatened destruction, modification, or curtailment of its habitat or range  over-utilization of the species for commercial, recreational, scientific, or educational purposes Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 2  disease or predation  inadequacy of existing regulatory mechanisms  other natural or manmade factors affecting its continued existence The Puget Sound Chinook salmon, Puget Sound Steelhead, and Bull Trout were listed as threatened in 1999, 2007, and 1998, respectively. In 2005, the Southern Resident Orcas were designated as endangered. Arlington supports and participates in regional efforts to restore and protect endangered and threatened species their habitats. The City partners with organizations including the Stillaguamish Tribe, Stilly/Snohomish Task Force, Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA) 5, WRIA 7, and Puget Sound Partnership among others to improve conditions for these species. More about threatened and endangered species in and around Arlington can be found below. The Clean Water Act (CWA) was established to address water pollution. The CWA directs the State of Washington to establish surface water quality standards, identify impaired waterbodies, procedures to restore impaired waterbodies, and establish the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). State Planning The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires Arlington to adopt critical areas regulations and requires the City to use best available science to designate and protect the functions and values of critical areas with development regulations. The GMA defines critical areas as “(a) Wetlands; (b) areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water; (c) fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas; (d) frequently flooded areas; and (e) geologically hazardous areas”. Arlington’s critical areas ordinance can be found in Chapter 20.93 of the Arlington Municipal Code and are described in detail below. The GMA was amended in 2023 with House Bill 1181 with the goal to improve the State’s response to climate change by incorporating climate change into local comprehensive plans. This legislation requires that Arlington develop a new Climate Change and Resiliency element which shall include subelements for greenhouse gas emissions reduction and resiliency by 2029. The City must also update the transportation element accordingly by 2029. The Shoreline Management Act (SMA) was adopted in 1972 with the goal to “prevent the inherent harm in an uncoordinated and piecemeal development of the state’s shorelines.” The SMA encourages water- dependent and water-oriented uses of the State’s shorelines, promotes public access to shorelines, and protects shoreline natural resources. The Stillaguamish River, South Fork Stillaguamish River, Portage Creek, and South Slough are under Arlington’s Shoreline Master Program, updated in 2019. Arlington operates under a Phase II National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. The NPDES permit addresses several government functions that improve water quality and reduce flooding. The permit calls for the City to manage stormwater through regulations and policies, inspection and enforcement, stormwater planning, illicit discharge detection and elimination, mapping, operations and maintenance, and public education and involvement, among other approaches. An anticipated addition to the NPDES permit will require the City to establish tree canopy goals as a stormwater management tool. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 3 Regional and Countywide Planning According to Puget Sound Regional Council’s VISION 2050 the health of communities and the economy are connected to the health of the environment. VISION 2050 multicounty planning policies (MPPs) and Snohomish County countywide planning policies (CPPs) support protecting and restoring natural systems, habitat, water quality, and air quality; encouraging restoration of shorelines to a natural condition for ecological function and value; reducing greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change; and preparing for climate change impacts. The goals and policies in this Environment Book are aligned with VISION 2050 MPPs and Snohomish County CPPs. Existing Conditions Arlington is a growing community that has a wide variety of natural features including critical areas that support the livelihood of the community, including providing potable water. Arlington’s regulations, including the critical areas ordinance found in Chapter 20.93 of the Arlington Municipal Code, are periodically reviewed and updated to protect and enhance the City’s environment. The existing conditions described below provides background data, needs assessments or analysis, and identifies issues. Climate and Weather Climate and weather, while not critical to land use planning, is a consideration in design and engineering. For example, the condition of roadways, public transit, and pedestrian/bicycle pathways is affected by the climate. Temperature variations are significant factors in the level of energy usage, and annual precipitation provides a source of water. The climate also influences economic activity, most notably agricultural production. Summers in Arlington are mild and warm (average daytime temperature in the 70's) and winters are comparatively mild (average daytime temperature in the mid-40's). The frost-free period for the City generally begins in April and ends near the first of October. Precipitation is in the form of rain and snow, averaging 46.34 inches annually (average low of 1.62 inches in July to an average high of 6.15 inches in December). Relative humidity is fairly high due to the water influences. The prevailing wind is westerly or northwesterly most of the year. Sustainability and Climate Change Climate change refers to changes in climate patterns predominantly attributed to human-caused increased levels of atmospheric greenhouse gases.1 As climate change alters the systems that influence the natural environment Arlington is expected to be exposed to more hazards which could affect the City’s infrastructure. Climate change will exacerbate the severity and frequency of storm events, flooding, and wildfires. 1 1 https://www.epa.gov/climate-adaptation/climate-adaptation-and-epas- role#:~:text=Climate%20change%20refers%20to%20changes,projected%20impacts%20of%20climate%2 0change. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 4 The frequency, duration, and intensity of extreme weather events will increase with climate change. Overall, climate variability is likely to increase meaning temperatures will rise and periods of drought and heavy precipitation will last longer.2 A University of Washington report was published in 2021 that analyzed climate change’s impacts on river flooding due to declining snowpack and more intense heavy rain events in Snohomish County, including the Stillaguamish River.3 Snowpack has already declined and is projected to continue declining. Heavy rain events are projected to become more intense particularly in the second half of this century. The Climate Change and Flooding in Snohomish County model indicates that peak flows will increase substantially by the 2080s. Due to more water in streams during flood events that there will be increases in flooding in the Stillaguamish River basin. According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) 2020 Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) small portions of Arlington’s city limits falls within the 100-year floodplain. This area is defined by Snohomish County as “The area flooded by the flood that has a 1-percent chance of being equaled or exceeded each year.”4 The probability of a 100-year flood having a one percent chance of occurring annually is a statistical average only; in fact, it can occur more than once in a short period of time. The frequency of floods in most Western Washington river basins is projected to increase due to warmer, wetter winters.5 Lives, property, transportation systems, and economic centers will be threatened as the capacity of flood protection facilities are expected to be exceeded during future floods. Projections indicate climate change will increase the occurrence to both low-frequency flood events, such as a 100- year flood, and high-frequency flood events, such as a 10-year flood.6 A modeling exercise of the Stillaguamish Watershed indicates that for both 10- and 100-year floods the inundation depth and area inundated will increase with climate change in and near Arlington. Wildfire risk in Washington is being accelerated by climate change. The fire season and areas burned are projected to increase as the climate warms and summers becomes drier in western Washington.7 Climate change is also expected to reduce soil moisture in Washington as a result of increased temperatures and less summer precipitation.8 This can increase tree stress and result in disturbances such as insects and pathogens, resulting in tree mortality. Climate change could also have secondary impacts that will affect natural disasters, public services, and the economy, among other areas. Heavy precipitation events can lead to landslides and sinkholes that 2 https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/chapter/24/ 3 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/84836/UW-Climate-Impact-Group-CIG- Hydrology-Report---Snohomish 4 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/78298/SnoCo_HMP_Voume- 1_09302020_Final?bidId= 5 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/78298/SnoCo_HMP_Voume- 1_09302020_Final?bidId= 6 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/78298/SnoCo_HMP_Voume- 1_09302020_Final?bidId= 7 https://www.dnr.wa.gov/publications/em_climaterresilienceplan_feb2020.pdf?r5qt4w 8 https://www.dnr.wa.gov/publications/em_climaterresilienceplan_feb2020.pdf?r5qt4w Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 5 could compromise the integrity of infrastructure such as roads, railways, and stormwater infrastructure.9 While the impacts of climate change on earthquakes are unknown the secondary impacts could be magnified as a result of climate change.10 For example, steep slopes and dams may have a higher likelihood of failing and fire risk could be enhanced although there are currently no modes to estimate these impacts.11 Arlington has also initiated projects, plans, and partnerships that will make the City more sustainable in the face of climate change. Arlington was designated as a Tree City in 2003 which means the City has developed a comprehensive community forestry program and spends $2 per capita on trees.12 Trees store carbon, filter air, help reduce stormwater runoff, improve water quality, increase habitat.13 The City worked with Western Washington University Sustainable Communities Program to develop a downtown corridor plan that took into account sustainable development practices, climate change, and hazard risk reduction. Snohomish County Public Utility District (PUD) developed the Arlington Microgrid Solar Array as part of an office complex east of the Arlington Municipal Airport. The facility was a “demonstration testbed for several interconnected distributed energy technologies that are constructed to be self- sustaining if disconnected from the electrical grid at large”.14 The office at this site “will serve the entire North county and act as a staging area for recovery in the event of a large-scale disruption of electric service.” The City will continue to assess any information that is relevant to the Stillaguamish and immediate region. The City will implement actions and land use regulations that can help with the adaptation to climate change. The City will seek grants and assistance from organizations like the University of Washington Climate Impacts Group as the risks and impacts of climate change become better understood. Examples of regulations that should allow for adaptive management tools include flood, stormwater, landslide, vegetation species selection and wildfire or Firewise USA programs. Geology and Soils The Arlington urban growth area (UGA) occupies a Pleistocene glacial terrace or glacial outwash lobe from the Cordilleran ice sheet recession, rising southeast from the flood plain of the Stillaguamish River and is in the foothills of the north range of the Cascades. It is on a relatively level series of stepped terraces, rising first from the Stillaguamish floodplain and then again east from the Quilceda-Allen 9 https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/chapter/24/ 10 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/78298/SnoCo_HMP_Voume- 1_09302020_Final?bidId= 11 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/78298/SnoCo_HMP_Voume- 1_09302020_Final?bidId= 12 https://www.arlingtonwa.gov/296/Tree-City 13 https://www.nature.org/en-us/about-us/where-we-work/united-states/washington/stories-in- washington/urban-trees-climate-change/ 14 Snohomish Public Utility District. (2021). 2021 Integrated Resource Plan. Retrieved from < https://www.snopud.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Final_2021_IRP.pdf> Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 6 drainage basin 15. There are portions of the City that exist in the floodplain, as well as the burn hill area which provides for some higher elevation glacial till with steep slope topography. The load-bearing capacity of soil, the hydric properties, erosion potential, and characteristics with respect to shrink-swell potential all play a significant role in development of land. In particular, the hydric properties determine the potential for stormwater infiltration (LID) usage, indicate the existence of wetlands, and signal the potential for other environmental concerns. The Soil Survey conducted by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service includes detailed soil maps that can be used for site selection and planning. The survey explains in great detail each soil's suitability for uses such as agricultural, residential, sanitary facilities (septic), recreational, woodland wildlife habitat, and other land uses. The general soil types in the Arlington area are classified as Everett gravelly sandy loam (hydrologic soil group A), Lynnwood loamy sand (hydrologic soil group A), and Tokul medial loam (hydrologic soil group B). These general soil types are moderately to very deep, moderately well to excessively drained, and level to very steep. Such soils are generally found on till plains and terraces. This soil classification is composed of various primary soils, each with various characteristics and limitations. Note that any development limitations listed are not considered reasons for denying development permits, only that certain precautions must be taken. Such issues are reviewed through the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) process during the development permit application process. The survey conducted by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service provides data that is specific enough to be used to determine site development constraints for particular parcels. The Environmentally Critical Areas regulations also regulate development on steep slopes, seismic areas, and other geologically hazardous areas. Water Resources The City straddles the divide between the Stillaguamish and the Snohomish river basins which are regionally recognized as Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIAs) 5 and 7, respectively.16 Within the City’s UGA, there are about 2.2 miles of riverfront and 14.1 miles of streams.17 Surface Water and Drainage Basins Rivers, streams, lakes, and other surface waters may be important means of transportation or valuable environmental, recreational, and/or scenic areas. The quality of water is important to the entire area's habitat value. Reduction in water quality will not only reduce the environmental and recreational value of the area, but it may also threaten the groundwater that is connected to the surface water system. The most important body of surface water in Arlington is the Stillaguamish River. It is an important regional habitat for various piscine, mammalian, reptilian, amphibian, and avian fauna and aquatic flora. The Stillaguamish River and its conditions are directly linked to the upland uses that modify the historic 15 Which was at one time the route of the Stillaguamish River. The south fork of the Stillaguamish River and Pilchuck were connected. 16 https://www.arlingtonwa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/6832/02--Arlington-Strmwtr-Mgmt-Program_2022 17 https://www.arlingtonwa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/6832/02--Arlington-Strmwtr-Mgmt-Program_2022 Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 7 hydrological cycles. The river is also very important to the economic vitality of the City through the associated outdoor recreation activities. The river is used by boaters and fisherman throughout the year who utilize the entire Stillaguamish Valley, with Arlington being a key hub for those activities. Other important bodies of water in the area include Portage Creek, Prairie Creek, Kruger Creek, Quilceda Creek, Eagle Creek, and March Creek. There are also bodies of water outside of the UGA which the City considers as land uses in their vicinity may have impacts on the UGA. These include upstream and downstream reaches of the tributaries listed above and their associated drainage basins and wetlands. There are also numerous perennial and seasonal wetlands in the UGA (whose importance is discussed below). As with the Stillaguamish River, all of these waterways provide important social, economic, and natural functions that contribute to a healthy living environment and high quality of life. The City has delineated drainage basins into tiers, with larger basins being broken into sub-basins. The Arlington UGA has ten 4th tier drainage basins that influence the City’s receiving waters, the Stillaguamish and Snohomish Rivers. The following 4th tier drainage basins, also seen in Figure 1, are managed by the City’s Stormwater Department:  Old Town  March Creek  Dike Road Reach  Portage Creek  I-5 Reach  Eagle Creek  Old Town Northeast  Burn Road Creek  Tviet Loop Reach  Middle Fork Quilceda Creek In Arlington the surface waters are in a state of recovery. It is of paramount importance that the river and other waterways be protected and managed to recover aquatic species populations. Any development and many redevelopment projects must be designed to minimize impacts to the water quality and reduce runoff to historic conditions. This includes preservation of the land that constitutes the waterways themselves and their associated buffers, and management of the quality of the water that enters them. Future development must consider point source discharges, non-point source discharges, and soil erosion, as well as development that reduces the instream habitat or changes the flow of the water in ways which damage the viability of the ecological system. The City is also taking steps to improve water quality, including restoring a wetland park,18 hosting tree planting events, and litter pickup events. The City also regularly coordinates with partners such as the Stillaguamish Tribe, Sound Salmon Solutions, Snohomish Conservation District, Snohomish County, the Arlington School District, and more entities on stormwater outreach and projects. 18 https://www.arlingtonwa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/404/Wetlands-Brochure-PDF?bidId= Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 8 Figure 1 Arlington Water Bodies and Drainage Basins Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 9 Groundwater Groundwater is derived from precipitation and surface water filtering through the ground to aquifers. The ground where this filtering process takes place is called an aquifer recharge area. The quality of recharge areas and surface waters needs to be protected to ensure the quality of the groundwater used in the immediate area, as well as the quality of water for users down gradient from the recharge zone. Groundwater pollution is very difficult, often impossible to clean. One of the functions of wetlands is to recharge aquifers and purify the water running through them. Aquifer recharge areas can be found in areas other than wetlands. The surficial geologies made up of recessional outwash found in areas around Arlington provide excellent aquifer recharge and storage areas. More information about aquifer recharge areas and wetlands can be found in the Critical Areas section below. Most drinking water in the UGA is provided by Arlington. Some of this water is derived from wells. The Haller well supplies approximately 85%, airport well 5%, and Snohomish County PUD provides 10% of Arlington’s water supply.19 Additionally, some residents use wells as their main source of drinking water. The aquifer for the City wells is found in the central portion of the UGA, mostly under the airport and adjacent to the Stillaguamish River at Haller Park (see Figure 2). The depth of the shallow aquifer is approximately 50 feet; however, the deep aquifer is 150 feet 20 (the airport well is 150 feet deep and Haller wells are 35 – 40 feet deep) and most uses should not affect the water quality if best management practices are used. The water quality is good other than occasional concerns for manganese.21 Review for potential groundwater contamination is performed at the time of development permit application review through the SEPA process. Additionally, the City's Environmentally Critical Areas regulations protect wetlands and aquifer recharge zones providing groundwater replenishment and filtration. And the Water System Plan has a watershed and wellhead protection program.22 19 https://www.arlingtonwa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3392/Arlington-2019-Amendment-to-2017- Amended-Signed-2015-WSP-Entire-document 20 The Ground-Water System and Ground-Water Quality in Western Snohomish County, Washington; U.S. Geological Survey-Water Resources Investigations Report 96-4312. 21 https://www.arlingtonwa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3392/Arlington-2019-Amendment-to-2017- Amended-Signed-2015-WSP-Entire-document 22 https://www.arlingtonwa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3392/Arlington-2019-Amendment-to-2017- Amended-Signed-2015-WSP-Entire-document Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 10 Figure 2 Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas and City Wells Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 11 Critical Areas The GMA requires Arlington to adopt development regulations that protect critical areas which are intended to help preserve the natural environment, maintain fish and wildlife habitat, and protect drinking water.23 The five types of critical areas defined by RCW 36.70A.030(5) are as follows:  Wetlands  Areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers used for potable water (critical aquifer recharge areas)  Frequently flooded areas  Geologically hazardous areas  Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas The City is required to designate critical areas and protect their function and values using best available science. As salmonids are important to the ecosystem, are culturally significant, and are an economic resource the City must “give special consideration to conservation and protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries.”24 Fish habitat should be protected and improved, at least in part because the federal and state governments have a responsibility to ensure tribal rights are upheld. Protecting the City’s critical areas also has a nexus in several federal and state laws including but not limited to the following:  Federal Clean Water Act  Safe Drinking Water Act  Endangered Species Act  National Environmental Policy Act  National Floodplain Insurance Program (administered by FEMA)  Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA)  Shoreline Management Act  Watershed Planning Act  Salmon Recovery Act  Municipal Water Law  GMA Wetlands Wetlands are fragile ecosystems that assist in the reduction of erosion, siltation, flooding, and ground and surface water pollution. Wetlands also provide an important habitat for wildlife, plants, and fisheries. Numerous wetlands have been identified in Arlington and the UGA – some on a very general basis from aerial mapping, some are shown by the soil survey of Snohomish County, and others have been precisely mapped where development has occurred. Generally, as properties develop the wetlands are more accurately delineated and mapped. The wetlands that have been identified in the UGA can be seen in Figure 3. 23 https://www.commerce.wa.gov/serving-communities/growth-management/growth-management- topics/critical-areas/ 24 https://www.commerce.wa.gov/serving-communities/growth-management/growth-management- topics/critical-areas/ Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 12 Review for potential impacts to wetlands is performed at the time of development permit application review through the SEPA process. Additionally, the City's Critical Areas Ordinance protects wetlands and their buffers (Chapter 20.93 of the Arlington Municipal Code). Wetlands in the City of Arlington are protected because they are part of an important natural biological/flood prevention/water provision system that should not be irreversibly altered. Further, the wet soil severely limits structural development. Because of the specificity used in defining wetlands and the quality of available maps, site- specific evaluations performed at the time of project application are necessary for the evaluation of specific parcels per the Critical Areas Regulations. Arlington will continue to restore or re-create wetlands to mitigate for those that were lost during the early years of development. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 13 Figure 3 Critical Areas Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 14 Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas Groundwater supplies a significant portion of the City’s drinking water. The quality the groundwater found in an aquifer is inextricably linked to the aquifer’s recharge area. The City is required by the GMA to classify and designate critical aquifer recharge areas (CARA) where information is available, either through studies or existing soil, geologic, and well log information. While there are no CARAs currently designated in Arlington the City’s Critical Areas Ordinance (Chapter 20.93 of the Arlington Municipal Code) requires developers to conduct hydrogeologic site evaluations, develop best management practices (BMP) plans, and mitigation plans to protect aquifers or groundwater. Frequently Flooded Areas The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has defined areas showing the extent of the 100- year flood boundary in order to establish actuarial flood insurance rates and assist communities in efforts to promote sound floodplain management. Development on floodplains reduces water absorption, restricts the flow of water, and causes hazards downstream by causing higher water and creating flood debris. Arlington participates in the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) which aims to reduce the impact of flooding. This program provides insurance to property owners. As a participant in the NFIP program the City has adopted floodplain management regulations Chapter 20.64 of the Arlington Municipal Code. FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) show only one 100-year floodplain within the City, that being along the Stillaguamish River and generally defined by the toe of the slope of the plateau surrounding the Stillaguamish Valley (though there are some areas of the valley that are high enough to be out of the floodplain (see Figure 2). Generally only small portions of the City limits extend into this area although there is a large 110 acre portion referred to as Island Crossing that is located in the 100-year floodplain. A copy of the FIRM is located at City Hall. The City may require landowners to perform additional modeling of anticipated flood impacts for project proposals in the floodplain. Not being listed on the FIRM does not mean that some of the smaller creeks running through Arlington could not also experience flooding during 100-year (or lesser or greater) storm events, FEMA just does not map these smaller areas. All development permits are reviewed for potential flooding hazards at the time of development permit application review. Additionally, the City's critical area regulations Chapter 20.93 of the Arlington Municipal Code and floodplain development regulations Chapter 20.64 of the Arlington Municipal Code prohibit most types of development within the 100-year floodway, allowing only those types of uses that are non-impactive. Geologically Hazardous Areas Geologically hazardous areas are susceptible to erosion, sliding, seismic activity, or other geological events. They pose a threat to the health and safety of citizens when used as sites for incompatible development. These areas are classified by Arlington based on the history of landslides, unstable soils, steep slopes, high erosion potential, or seismic hazards. The City has defined the following geologically hazardous areas in Chapter 20.93 of the Arlington Municipal Code: erosion hazard areas, landslide hazard areas, slopes, and seismic hazard areas. Erosion hazard areas are unstable areas prone to erosion and slides. Landslide hazard areas include areas at severe risk of a landslide. Slopes greater than or equal to a Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 15 slope greater than 33 percent are considered steep slopes. Moderate slopes are areas with slopes between 15 and 33 percent. Seismic hazard areas are areas subject to severe risk of earthquake damage due to settlement, shaking, slope failure, or soil liquefaction. Arlington contains areas of steep and moderate slopes, most notably in the eastern portion of the city near city limits (see Figure 4). We also have seismic hazard areas subject to liquefaction. Everything within the floodplain of the Stillaguamish River (including Island Crossing) is rated as high potential for liquefaction, and everything on the 2nd geologic tier (on which the airport and most of Arlington sits) is rated as low to moderate potential. Due to instability, visual impacts, and fire hazard, areas of steep slopes or unstable soils are not recommended for development without specific measures being taken to reduce or eliminate these potential impacts. Chapter 20.93 of the Arlington Municipal Code contains restrictions on development in these areas. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 16 Figure 4 Geologically Hazardous Areas Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 17 Fish and Wildlife Habitat Conservation Areas Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas are habitats maintained for species within their natural geographic distribution so that isolated subpopulations are not created. Cooperative and coordinated land use planning is critically important among counties and cities in this region. Arlington defines fish and wildlife habitat of local importance as follows: A seasonal range or habitat element with which a given species has a primary association, and which, if altered, may reduce the likelihood that the species will maintain and reproduce over the long-term. These might include areas of relative density or species richness, breeding habitat, seasonal range, and movement corridors. These also include habitats of limited availability or high vulnerability to alteration, such as cliffs and wetlands. Disturbance of ecological communities and division into isolated habitats are the major causes for the decline in animal and plant species. Conserving viable ecological habitats in an interconnected system is the most effective way of conserving vegetation and wildlife. Many habitats that are conserved for environmental or scenic reasons cannot survive division into small, isolated land parcels. The concept of managing wildlife habitat on a regional scale is one of the precepts on which the GMA is based. The theory is that regionally significant habitats and wildlife corridors would be protected by limiting development in the County by concentrating growth within urbanized UGAs where significant habitat no longer exists or is difficult to maintain due to the effects of growth. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Priority Habitats and Species Program provides information on which species in Arlington’s region are priority species and which habitats should be managed and conserved. WDFW has identified twenty priority habitat types, five of which are found in Arlington UGA: freshwater pond, freshwater emergent wetland, freshwater forested/shrub wetland, riverine, and wetlands.25 The City and UGA have deciduous and coniferous trees (Douglas fir, cedar, and maple, among others)26 as well as native shrubs, herbs, grasses, and wetland plants. Large and medium animals such as deer and bald eagles 27 are still found occasionally within the City limits, but more frequently in some of the rural areas outside of the UGA. The riverine habitat and streams support seasonal and year-round fish and waterfowl.28 Even though many of the habitat areas had been greatly impacted by humans, many of our stream corridors (riparian areas) are healing through the maturing of past stream and wetland restoration projects. It is important to minimize further impacts, and review for potential impacts to wildlife and habitat is performed at the time of development permit application review through the SEPA process. Additionally, the City's Critical Areas regulations are intended to protect wildlife and habitat. 25 https://geodataservices.wdfw.wa.gov/hp/phs/ 26 https://www.arlingtonwa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/3807/Heritage-Tree-Walk-2020- 27 https://geodataservices.wdfw.wa.gov/hp/phs/ 28 https://geodataservices.wdfw.wa.gov/hp/phs/ Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 18 Fauna The Arlington area supports moderate numbers of numerous species of fish, birds, amphibians, reptiles, and insects and other invertebrates, some of which are state and federal listed. Please refer to Table 1 for a listing of all such species that the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife knows of in Region 4 (North Puget Sound), which includes Arlington, that are state endangered, state threatened, state sensitive, state candidate, or species of concern, as well as species listed or proposed for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or the National Marine Fisheries Service. This list does not include insects or mollusks. Most species on this list do not live in Arlington, and there is low probability of finding them here. However, some may have a relationship with the ecological functions affected by actions in Arlington, such as feeding on salmon from our local streams. Some sensitive species have been observed but are not on the WDFW database, probably due to the historical lack of reporting of such species. Endangered species (listed under the Endangered Species Act), Threatened, and other notable species that are known to exist in the UGA include:  Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentis) – A federally listed threatened species under the Endangered Species Act,29 bull trout habitat has been listed in Arlington’s UGA. According to WDFW’S PHS map the mainstem, north fork, and south fork of the Stillaguamish River is habitat for the bull trout.30 The presumed use would be only rearing or refuge, as Bull trout spawning is believed to occur in the upper reaches of the Stillaguamish watershed in the cooler headwater streams.  Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tschawytscha) – Chinook salmon are considered a threatened species under the Endangered Species Act.31 Chinook are considered to use the Stillaguamish River, larger streams, side channels, and riverine wetlands rather than the smaller streams traveling through Arlington. Therefore, the areas of town that lay alongside the main stem and south fork Stillaguamish River are considered areas of Chinook usage. The majority of Chinook spawning occurs in the upstream areas but there are normally occasional redds found in lower areas of the river. A majority of the juvenile population travel downriver during the spring high flows to spend time growing in the highly productive estuary. A small percentage (5- 8%) of the juveniles are considered riverine and will over-winter to head for the estuary as a one-year old smolt. The current population of Chinook is around 1,400 annually returning adults 32.  Steelhead (Onchorhynchus mykiss) – May 7, 2007 Puget Sound Steelhead were listed as Threatened under the Endangered Species Act.33 Steelhead are considered to use the Stillaguamish River, larger streams, side 29 https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/species/8212 30 https://geodataservices.wdfw.wa.gov/hp/phs/ 31 https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/west-coast/endangered-species-conservation/puget-sound-chinook- salmon 32 Technical Assessment and Recommendations for Chinook Salmon Recovery in the Stillaguamish Watershed, Stillaguamish Technical Advisory Group, September 2000. 33 https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/species/steelhead-trout Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 19 channels and potentially the streams in Arlington’s City Limits.34 National Marine Fisheries Service completed the ESA Recovery Plan for the Puget Sound Steelhead in 2019which provides guidance to jurisdictions on how to participate in the recovery of the species.35 Steelhead are different that salmon in that they can return multiple times to spawn and move from freshwater to saltwater multiple times throughout their life span. Similar to bull trout due to physical ability and habits a steelhead may travel anywhere a coho salmon will travel. Table 1 WDFW Snohomish County Species of Concern (Including Arlington) Common Name Status Federal State Found in Arlington Bull Trout T C Chinook Salmon T Steelhead T C A Small Chance of Being Found in Arlington Chum Salmon T Bocaccio Rockfish E Canary Rockfish T Yelloweye Rockfish T River Lamprey C Olympic Mudminnow S Oregon Spotted Frog T E Western Toad C Western Pond Turtle (formerly Pacific Pond Turtle) E Common Loon S Marbled Murrelet T T Western grebe C Golden Eagle C Northern Goshawk C 34 https://geodataservices.wdfw.wa.gov/hp/phs/ 35 https://media.fisheries.noaa.gov/dam-migration/final_puget_sound_steelhead_recovery_plan.pdf Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 20 Common Name Status Federal State Yellow-billed Cuckoo T E Northern Spotted Owl (formerly called Spotted Owl) T E Black-backed Woodpecker C Oregon Vesper Sparrow E Gray Whale E E Orca (Killer Whale) E E Harbor Porpoise (formerly called Pacific Harbor Porpoise) C Townsend’s Big-eared Bat C Keen's Myotis (formerly Keen’s Long-eared Bat) C Cascade Red Fox E Fisher E Grizzly Bear T E Lynx T T Wolverine C Western Bumble Bee C Johnson's Hairstreak C Key: E = Endangered, T = Threatened, C = Candidate, P = Proposed, S = Sensitive, SC = Species of Concern Air Quality Three agencies have jurisdiction over the ambient air quality in the Puget Sound area: the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the State of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology), and the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA).36 These agencies establish regulations that govern both the allowable concentrations of pollutants in the outdoor air (i.e., ambient air) and allowable contaminant 36 https://www.pscleanair.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1525/2003-Washington-State-Compliance- Assurance-Agreement-for-Air-Programs-PDF?bidId= Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 21 emissions from air pollution sources.37, 38 Although their regulations are similar in terms of stringency, each agency has established its own standards. Unless the state or local jurisdiction has adopted more stringent standards, the EPA standards apply. Table 3 lists the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) as adopted by EPA and Ecology. The NAAQS consist of primary standards designed to protect public health and secondary standards designed to protect public welfare (e.g., preventing air pollution damage to vegetation).39 Table 2 National and State of Washington Ambient Air Quality Standards Average Time Air Quality Standards40 Primary Secondary Carbon Monoxide (ppm) 8-hour Averagea 9 1-hour Averagea 35 Particulate Matter (µg/m3) PM10 24-hour Averageb 150 150 PM2.5 Annual Averagec 12 15 24-hour Averaged 35 35 Lead (µg/m3) Rolling 3 Month Averagee 0.15 0.15 Sulfur Dioxide 3-hour Averagea No standard 0.5 ppm 1-hour Averagef 75 ppb No standard Ozone (ppm) 8-hour Averageg 0.07 0.07 Nitrogen Dioxide (ppb) 37 https://ecology.wa.gov/Air-Climate/Air-quality/Air-quality-targets 38 https://ecology.wa.gov/Air-Climate/Air-quality/Business-industry-requirements 39 https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants/naaqs-table 40 https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants/naaqs-table Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 22 Average Time Air Quality Standards40 Primary Secondary Annual Averageh 53 53 1-hour Averagef 100 No standard Notes: ppb = partners per billion by volume ppm = parts per million by volume PM10 = particles 10 microns or less in size PM2.5 = particles 2.5 microns or less in size µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter a = Not to be exceeded more than once per year b = Not to be exceeded more than once per year on average over 3 years c = annual mean, averaged over 3 years d = 98th percentile, averaged over 3 years e = Not to be exceeded f = 99th percentile of 1-hour daily maximum concentrations, averaged over 3 years g = Annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour concentration, averaged over 3 years h = Annual Mean Ecology and PSCAA operate ambient air quality monitors throughout the Puget Sound region.41 Most of the monitors have intentionally been placed at locations most likely to experience degraded air quality (e.g., near industrial facilities or at heavily-congested downtown areas). A few monitors have been operated in outlying areas to measure ambient concentrations in typical suburban or rural settings where concentrations are acknowledged to be low. The Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA) monitors air quality. PSCAA’s the nearest air quality monitor is in Marysville, WA. According to that agency’s available documentation air quality in the Arlington area is of good to moderate quality though there are periodic concerns. Summary data for this site indicate PM2.5 exceeded the agency’s health goal of 25 micrograms per cubic meter 11 times in 2019, 15 times in 2020, 3 times in 2021, and 18 times in 2022. While no specific data exists for the immediate Arlington area, one can assume that air quality is better than in the areas that are monitored. The PSCAA indicates there are two criteria air pollutants that remain of concern for the region. These are: Particulate Matter (PM2.5 and PM10) Particulate matter is particles of solid or aerosol particles of dust, soot, organic matter and compounds containing sulfur, nitrogen, and metals. Particulates enter the air directly from industrial operations, motor vehicles (automobiles, buses, and trucks), fuel combustion (woodstoves and fireplaces), construction, and other sources. Smaller particles are of particular concern for our health. Particle matter (PM) is measured in two ways: PM2.5 which includes fine particles below 2.5 microns (μm), and PM10 which includes particles below 10 microns in diameter. PM2.5 can be breathed deeply into the lungs, producing injury by itself or in conjunction with gases. The elderly, those suffering from respiratory illness, and young children are especially prone to the deleterious effects of particulates. 41 http://map.pscleanair.gov/?lat=47.6768311&lon=-122.4756425&z=9 Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 23 Soiling of buildings and other property, and reduced visibility are other results of high particulate matter levels. Although the region has made progress in reducing particulate matter pollution wood smoke continues to be a major source of particle pollution, particularly in colder months. Additionally, transportation sources continue to be a significant source, including from cars and trucks. Source: Puget Sound Clean Air Agency 42 Ozone (O3) Ozone is a pungent smelling, colorless gas produced in the atmosphere when nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds chemically react under the effect of strong sunlight. It is a pulmonary irritant that affects lung tissues and respiratory functions. Ozone impairs the normal function of the lung and, at concentration between 0.15 and 0.25 ppm, causes lung tightness, coughing, and wheezing. Other oxidants that often accompany ozone cause eye irritation. Persons with chronic respiratory problems, such as asthma, seem most sensitive to increases in ozone concentration. Ironically, ozone is beneficial when it occurs very high in the atmosphere, miles above the earth, where it protects us from harmful ultraviolet radiation. The highest levels are measured on hot days from mid-May to mid-September, and because of weather patterns the highest ozone values normally occur south to southeast of the major cities or source areas. There are no monitoring stations in Snohomish County; the closest are in Anacortes and Seattle. According to the Washington Department of Ecology, between 2020 and 2022 Seattle’s ozone level was below the national standard and Seattle is usually in the “good” air quality index range.43 However, Seattle does at times range into the “moderate” or “unhealthy for sensitive groups” range during extreme heat or wildfire events. 42 https://pscleanair.gov/163/Criteria-Air-Pollutants 43 https://apps.ecology.wa.gov/publications/documents/2302115.pdf Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 1: Environment —September 2024 24 Noise By urban standards, Arlington is relatively quiet, and this is one of the amenities mentioned when people talk about why they have moved here. Unfortunately, we have no measurements of ambient noise levels within the City limits, or the means to conduct them. The most noise is generated by traffic, especially along the federal and state highways and major arterials. This is particularly true along I-5 in Smokey Point, where more houses have been built along the freeway and traffic has increased. Other noise is generated by industrial uses within the industrial zone. Lastly, there are somewhat frequent sounds of airplanes using the airport. None of these noise sources has been a major issue up to this point. However, it is anticipated that as more residential development continues to occur adjacent to the highways or around the border of the industrial zone noise will become a greater concern. Additionally, we would expect that as the airport receives more traffic and the areas surrounding develop airplane noise would become a bigger issue. The land use plan should take into account any potential noise problems generated by incompatible land uses and appropriate designators should be placed on subjected properties. Book 2: Land Use 2 BOOK 2:LAND USE Introduction The Land Use book is the foundation of the Comprehensive Plan. The Land Use book ensures Arlington can support future population growth, employment growth, and the infrastructure needed to support projected land uses. The primary objective of the Land Use book is to encourage sustainable, equitable growth that will improve the City’s quality of life for generations to come. The goals and policies established in the Land Use book are related to social capital and community resiliency, equitable access to City resources and programs, collaboration with other jurisdictions, land uses, energy conservation, annexation, future growth, and development regulations. Book 2: Land Use 3 Growth Allocations The table below identifies the City’s growth targets for population, housing, and jobs through 2044, allocated by Snohomish County. Appendix C - Land Use Forecasts - and Appendix F - Forecast Methodology and Discussion - demonstrate that the City has sufficient capacity to meet these growth targets by 2044. Appendix F goes on to identify, however, that the City’s developable land providing opportunities jobs within the UGA is expected be completely redeveloped by 2044. Due to this forecast, the City anticipates the need to expand the UGA to accommodate job growth anticipated to occur beyond 2044. AREA 2020 BASELINE 2044 GROWTH TARGET 2044 CAPACITY DIFFERENCE Population 19,868 35,506 55,449 +19,943 Housing 7,689 15,780 25,677 +9,897 Jobs 10,267 24,751 25,782 +1,031 Table 01. Arlington’s Allocated Population, Housing, and Job Growth Targets for 2044, and the City’s Capacity to accommodate the growth. Book 2: Land Use 4 GOALS AND POLICIES LU-1 Provide unique places and context for the growth of social capital and community resiliency. LU-1.1 Ensure both publicly- and privately-owned civic spaces are included throughout the City to provide adequate gathering spaces. LU-1.2 Establish development standards and regulations based on the availability and serviceability of developable lands to maintain a balanced mix and arrangement of land uses in the City. LU-1.3 Encourage designs of public buildings and spaces that contribute to a sense of community and a sense of place. LU-1.4 Encourage development patterns that provide safe and welcoming environments for walking and bicycling. LU-2 Ensure equitable access to City resources and programs through proactive and transparent outreach efforts, completed on multiple platforms, and where appropriate, in multiple languages. LU-2.1 Regularly review existing development regulations to remove requirements that unnecessarily hinder the development process. LU-2.2 Conduct inclusive engagement to identify and address the diverse needs of the City’s residents and workers. LU-2.3 Employ outreach efforts to gain input from residents and business owners on public improvements and land use actions that have the potential to affect the identity of existing neighborhoods. Book 2: Land Use 5 LU-2.4 Review city projects to mitigate displacement risk and minimize impacts to private property owners, including consideration of projects that may necessitate property condemnation, right-of-way acquisition, and/or eminent domain. LU-3 Address cross-jurisdictional growth, social, and cultural issues by working with affected jurisdictions. LU-3.1 Coordinate growth and development with adjacent jurisdictions to promote and protect inter-jurisdictional interests. LU-3.2 Enter into and maintain Interlocal Agreements with adjacent jurisdictions that address joint planning, reciprocal mitigation and impact fees, and other mutually beneficial issues. LU-3.3 Work with the Stillaguamish Tribe to develop rules and procedures for protecting significant cultural and archeological resources. LU-3.4 Consider the potential impacts of development to culturally significant sites and tribal treaty fishing, hunting, and gathering grounds. LU-3.5 Recognize and work with contiguous systems that cross jurisdictional boundaries, including natural systems, land use patterns, and transportation and infrastructure systems, in community planning, development, and design. LU-3.6 Protect tribal reservation lands from encroachment by incompatible land uses and development both within reservation boundaries and on adjacent land. A gazebo scene in Old Town, Arlington Book 2: Land Use 6 LU-4 Encourage local businesses through the continued application of mixed-use residential corridors and multiple locations for neighborhood serving businesses. LU-4.1 Support development proposals to increase existing and establish new Neighborhood Commercial zones, when the criteria of Title 20 of the Arlington Municipal Code are met, and where deemed appropriate by the City. LU-4.2 Promote the development of new retail, service, and civic mixed-uses and promote the enhancement of existing spaces to create urban centers. LU-4.3 Support the transformation of key underutilized lands, such as surplus public lands or environmentally contaminated lands, to higher density, mixed-use areas to enhance and complement the development of neighborhood centers. LU-4.4 Encourage the development of neighborhood centers throughout the City, including transit station areas. LU-4.5 Tailor concurrency programs for urban centers and other subareas to encourage development that can be supported by transit. LU-4.6 Encourage developments that place employment areas and living areas in close proximity in order to maximize transportation choices, minimize vehicle miles traveled, optimize the use of existing and planned transportation systems and capital facilities, and improve the jobs-housing balance. LU-4.7 Encourage coordination among the City, transportation providers, and developers to ensure that joint- and mixed-use developments are designed to promote and improve physical, mental, and social health, and reduce the impacts of climate change on the natural and built environments. The Lux Apartments plaza and fountain area. Book 2: Land Use 7 LU-5 Minimize the adverse impacts of industrial uses to adjacent and abutting incompatible uses, including residential properties. LU-5.1 Concentrate manufacturing, industrial, and warehouse/distribution uses in the vicinity of the Arlington Airport and the Cascade Industrial Center to ensure appropriate services for the use are provided and to reduce impact on existing residential and commercial areas. LU-5.2 Support industrial development proposals that are consistent with the Arlington-Marysville Manufacturing Industrial Center Subarea Plan. LU-5.3 Separate industrial uses from incompatible land uses by utilizing transitional zoning, required setbacks and buffer areas, and other techniques to lessen impacts on adjacent uses. LU-5.4 Develop and maintain industrial design standards to encourage cohesive development patterns within the City's industrial zones, both inside and out of the Cascade Industrial Center subarea. LU-5.5 Administer a process, consistent with the Growth Management Act and the Countywide Planning Policies, to identify and site essential public facilities in a way that reduces incompatibility with adjacent land uses. LU-5.6 Encourage the development of supportive uses and discourage the siting of incompatible uses near the Arlington Airport. Smokey Point looking east to the Cascade Mountain Range. Book 2: Land Use 8 LU-6 Identify, protect, and enhance community resiliency to climate change impacts, including social, economic, and built environment factors, that support adaptation to climate impacts consistent with environmental justice. LU-6.1 Amend and adopt land development regulations as needed to adequately protect the attributes, functions, and amenities of the natural environment in all projected growth scenarios for the City. LU-6.2 Ensure land development patterns minimize or prevent impacts on natural open spaces and resource lands. LU-6.3 Development patterns shall be responsive to critical areas and other environmental factors, while minimizing the fragmentation of the built environment. LU-6.4 Encourage the use of existing and new tools and strategies to address Book 2: Land Use 9 vested development rights in a way that ensures future growth meets existing permitting and development standards. LU-6.5 Establish best management practices that protect the long-term integrity of the natural environment and adjacent land uses. LU-6.6 discourage the siting of incompatible uses adjacent to general aviation airports. LU-7 Promote energy conservation by developing incentives and/or requirements for energy-saving transportation, land development patterns and practices, and building construction and operation methods and materials. LU-7.1 Encourage energy-efficient site and building design, construction and building operation practices, and the use of energy-conserving materials in all new construction and retrofits of existing buildings. LU-7.2 Support and provide incentives to increase the percentage of new development and redevelopment, both public and private, to be built at higher-performing energy and environmental standards. LU-7.3 Use innovative development standards, design guidelines, regulatory incentives, and applicable low-impact development measures to provide compact, high-quality communities. Snohomish County PUD Office building located in Arlington. See Goal E-5 in the Environment Book for additional groundwater protection policies. Book 2: Land Use 10 LU-8 Ensure new services and facilities are provided within a reasonable time after the annexation of unincorporated Urban Growth Areas. LU-8.1 Prohibit sewer extension outside City limits into unincorporated Urban Growth Areas. LU-8.2 City infrastructure, utilities, and other services shall be planned for and made available for extension concurrently with, or within a reasonable time after, annexing land to the City. LU-8.3 The following criteria shall be used to determine the feasibility of a proposed annexation: a) Evaluate the existing levels, both in quantity and quality, of the urban services and facilities serving the potential annexed area; b) Evaluate the anticipated costs and potential revenue offset of bringing necessary urban services and infrastructure to the area; and c) The area has, or could have, compatibility with the City's adjacent land uses and transportation systems; LU-8.4 After annexation, and where deemed appropriate, the City may honor pre- existing mitigation agreements, conditions on permits, inter-jurisdictional studies, and agreed-upon standards that may apply to the annexed properties. LU-8.5 Entire rights-of-way adjacent to an annexation area shall also be included in the total area to be annexed unless an existing agreement between the City and the County requires otherwise. LU-8.6 Annexations of unincorporated Urban Growth Areas shall be contiguous land with the City’s boundaries. Agricultural farmland in Arlington Book 2: Land Use 11 LU-8.7 Prepare neighborhood or subarea plans for unincorporated Urban Growth Areas that consider future land use development standards, utility and street infrastructure, critical areas and environmental impacts, and open space and parks, prior to annexation. LU-8.8 Coordinate with Snohomish County to annex all areas within Arlington’s MUGA, to the extent feasible, by then end of this planning period. LU-8.9 Work with Snohomish County to establish new boundaries for Arlington’s Urban Growth Area. LU-9 Encourage a mix of residential densities throughout the City. LU-9.1 All recommended changes in residential densities shall be evaluated on the following: a) The overall impact to surrounding properties; b) The general impact to the existing transportation network; c) The availability and capacity of urban services and utilities in the area; and d) Consistency with Growth Management Act’s growth targets and buildable land supply. LU-9.2 LU-10 LU -10.1 Develop design standards and land use regulations to ensure compatibility of residential densities and surrounding non-residential uses. Future growth in the City will be accommodated and served consistent with the PSRC Regional Growth Strategy. Regularly assess the land with the City’s limits to ensure there is sufficient space to accommodate projected 20-year population and employment Park 77 Apartment Complex in the Kent Prairie Subarea. Appendix F - Arlington’s Forecast Methodology and Discussion - indicates that all developable land providing job opportunities within the UGA will be redeveloped by 2044, and recommends the City consider expanding the UGA to accommodate job growth anticipated to occur beyond 2044. Book 2: Land Use 12 forecasts. LU-10.2 Adopt and maintain development regulations that ensure growth is consistent with State and County laws; and ensure growth monitoring is based on Snohomish County Tomorrow's most recent Growth Monitoring Report and Buildable Land Analysis. LU-10.3 Proposed Urban Growth Area expansions should prioritize land suitable for urban development, consistent with the Growth Management Act, and be located where utilities and infrastructure can be provided at reasonable costs. LU-10.4 Unincorporated areas within the City's Urban Growth Area should be pre- designated on the City's Future Land Use Map and pre-zoned on the City's Official Zoning Map. LU-10.5 Evaluate planned growth areas for their potential physical, economic, and cultural displacement of marginalized residents and businesses, and utilize a range of strategies to mitigate displacement impacts. LU-10.6 Consider impact on and coordinate with local tribes when expanding the City’s Urban Growth Area. Book 2: Land Use 13 LU-11 Ensure coordination between development regulations and local organization efforts to address and improve healthy lifestyle options within the City. LU-11.1 Support development patterns that promote public health and provide opportunities for safe and convenient physical activity and social connectivity. LU-11.2 Reduce disparities in access to opportunity for the City’s residents through inclusive community planning and targeted public and private investments that meet the needs of current and future residents and businesses. LU-11.3 Identify and address any existing health disparities by integrating health and well-being regulations into appropriate city planning practices and decision-making processes. LU-11.4 Develop and implement design guidelines to encourage construction of healthy buildings and facilities to promote healthy people. LU-11.5 Streamline development standards and regulations, especially in neighborhood centers and high-capacity transit station areas to provide flexibility and accommodate a broader range of project types and land uses. Healthy building refers to an emerging area of interest that supports the physical, psychological, and social health and well-being of people in buildings and the built environment. Book 2: Land Use 14 Figure LU-01. Future Land Use Map Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 2: Land Use Supporting Analysis —November 2024 1 Book 2: Land Use Supporting Analysis Introduction The Land Use Book is concerned primarily with the accommodation of the City of Arlington's spatial growth; that is, the use and the mix of land uses that will serve future population, employment, public service and recreational needs, and other aspects of city life. This Land Use Book has been developed in accordance with RCW 36.70A.070 of the Growth Management Act (GMA). It responds to GMA guidelines for the update of the former 2015 Plan. In 2024, the “horizon year” changed from 2035 to 2044, and land use assumptions have changed, all of which have been incorporated into the 2024 Plan’s Land Use Book. It is a key element in implementing Arlington's Comprehensive Plan. Other Books support and will be implemented through land use policies and regulations and contain related information required by the GMA. To find discussions about environmental justice see the Environment Book. While all Books promote physical activity and reducing greenhouse gas emissions the Transportation and Environment Books have specific information. The Capital Facilities & Utilities and Public Safety Books review drainage, flooding, and other stormwater issues. In addition, the Public Safety Book has information related to wildfires. This Land Use Book inventories and analyzes the distribution and location of existing land uses and considers the intensity and density of future development. The Plan is also consistent with the Puget Sound Regional Council’s (PSRC) VISION 2050 and updated Snohomish County Comprehensive Plan, including population, employment, and housing targets. This Book has also been developed in accordance with the Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs) and PSRC VISION 2050 multi-county planning policies (MPPs). Snohomish County’s growth targets for Arlington reflect significant increases expected for Arlington employment (an additional 14,462 jobs between 2020 and 2044), population (an additional 15,088 people between 2020 and 2044), and housing units (an additional 7,913 housing units between 2020 and 2044). This is a reflection of the expected employment activity in the Cascade Industrial Center and new housing development activity and redevelopment in East Hill, Hilltop, along and near Smokey Point Boulevard, and scattered around the City. The City will adopt Figure 1 (Future Land Use Map) as its official land use and zoning map. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 2: Land Use Supporting Analysis —September 2024 2 Figure 1: Future Land Use Map Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 2: Land Use Supporting Analysis —September 2024 3 Land Use Descriptions The official Land Use Map shows how land uses will be distributed throughout Arlington to accommodate 2044 population, housing, and employment targets, along with the public facilities to serve them. It represents policy. The Zoning Map is a regulation that implements the Land Use Map. It is the intention of the council that Arlington Municipal Code section 20.04.060 implement the planning policies adopted by the council for the city and its urban growth area, as reflected in the comprehensive plan, utility plans, airport plan, and other planning documents. There is a very close relationship between the Land Use and Zoning maps. Different zones may exist within similar land use designations. Map overlays for the Airport Protection District, Airport Safety Zone, the Floodplain and Floodway Districts, Shoreline Management, the Mixed Use, and Master Planned Neighborhood overlay zones further refine how development can occur within designated areas. Development is also subject to restrictions where applicable per the Shoreline Master Plan. Finally, the Land Use and Zoning maps depict the Contract Rezones in effect for the Gleneagle neighborhood in the Gleneagle Subarea and the Pioneer Meadows neighborhood in the Gateway Subarea. Following is a brief description of the purpose of the different designations and zones on the Land Use and Zoning maps: Residential Districts Residential Ultra Low Capacity The Residential Ultra Low Capacity (RULC) district is established primarily to accommodate detached single-family residential development in areas not currently served by public sewer and water facilities. Larger lots are required to accommodate a septic system and reserve area as required by the Snohomish Health District. Residential Low Capacity The Residential Low Capacity (RLC) district is established primarily to accommodate detached single- family residential uses at lower capacity levels typically on 7200 – 9600 square foot parcels, but also allows for recreational, quasi-public, and public uses that customarily serve residential development. Some types of two-family residences are allowed in this district on larger lots. Residential Moderate Capacity The Residential Moderate Capacity (RMod) district is designed primarily to accommodate medium capacity housing types, especially smaller multifamily and single family attached, such as duplex, triplex, fourplex, row houses, and garden apartments, typically situated on 4000 – 6200 square foot parcels, but also allows for recreational, quasi-public, and public uses that customarily serve residential development. Residential Medium Capacity The Residential Medium Capacity (RMC) district is established primarily to accommodate higher capacity housing, such as larger multi-family developments, townhomes, condominiums, and the use of the Unit Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 2: Land Use Supporting Analysis —September 2024 4 Lot Subdivision process to create fee-simple housing. Live/work units may also be allowed in this zone with additional requirements. Typical parcel size ranges from 2800 – 3600 square feet, but also allows for recreational, quasi-public, and public uses that customarily serve residential development. Residential High Capacity Residential High Capacity (RHC) district is designed primarily to accommodate the highest capacity residential developments, that are designed to be compatible with their sites and surroundings, building types are typically large scale multifamily buildings, mixed use buildings, and live/work units. Old Town Residential The Old Town Residential (OTR) district is designed primarily to single-family residential development while preserving the historic quality of the traditional town center. Further, this zone is intended to promote residential development that is in character with the older, existing homes in the area. The Old Town Residential District may also allow for duplex, triplex, fourplex, and garden style housing units (missing middle housing) that are designed to match the context of the existing neighborhood they are placed within. This is accomplished through strict design elements, orientation, and scale of the building. Commercial Districts Neighborhood Commercial The Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone is established to accommodate commercial activities that would meet the daily convenience needs of people residing or working in the environs. Old Town Business District The Old Town Business District (OTBD) zone is established to accommodate a mix of a wide variety of commercial activities and vertically oriented, high-capacity residential uses in a pedestrian-oriented environment. The Old Town Business District is comprised of three different sub districts, identified as, Old Town Business Districts 1, 2, and 3 with each one having its own nuances regarding permissible uses, parking, and signage. General Commercial The General Commercial (GC) zone is established to accommodate commercial uses generally similar, though more intensive, to the types permissible in the Old Town Business District. However, it is intended that this zone be placed along arterials to cater to commuters or as a transition in some areas between a Highway Commercial zone and a residential zone. Highway Commercial The Highway Commercial (HC) zone is established to accommodate the widest range of commercial activities. Uses allowed here include those allowed in other commercial districts, but also those that require highway access or that should be separated from residential uses. Business Park The Business Park (BP) zone is established to promote and accommodate office, certain manufacturing and light industrial uses, training/educational facilities, high technology research and developments, and Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 2: Land Use Supporting Analysis —September 2024 5 related uses in a park-like, master-planned setting. The Business Park also allows for Public/Semi-Public uses within this zone. Commercial Corridor The Commercial Corridor (CC) zone is established to create pedestrian oriented, urbanized, mixed use neighborhoods, along designated transit routes. Design elements to include widened sidewalks, drop lanes with on street parking, mid-block pedestrian crossings, planted medians, and bike lanes. These zones are established to utilize the stringent use of the Mixed-Use Development Regulations/Form Based Code, therefore negating the underlying zoning to accommodate mixed use as the primary land use. Manufacturing Districts General Industrial and Light Industrial Districts The General Industrial (GI) and Light Industrial (LI) districts are established primarily to accommodate enterprises engaged in the manufacturing, processing, creating, repairing, renovating, painting, cleaning, or assembling of goods, merchandise, or equipment. The performance standards set forth in AMC Chapter 20.44 place limitations on the characteristics of uses located in these districts. The Light Industrial district is distinguished from the General Industrial district in that the Light Industrial district is intended to be a cleaner, more business park-like area, whereas the General Industrial district allows more resource-based manufacturing has a greater tolerance of the nuisances that typically accompany such manufacturing. Furthermore, the limitations in the Light Industrial district are more restrictive than those in the General Industrial district. Aviation Flightline District The Aviation Flightline District (AF) zone is established to allow only aviation related uses proximate to airport runways and taxiways. Aviation related uses include any uses related to supporting aviation that require direct taxiway access as a necessary part of their business operations, such as aviation services, manufacturing of aviation-related goods, general services whose primary customers would be those engaged in aviation-related activities (e.g., restaurants primarily catering to pilots, employees, or passengers), or other uses that are clearly related to aviation. Medical Services District The Medical Services District (MS) zone is established to allow hospitals and related medical services uses that have developed around the Cascade Valley Hospital in an otherwise residential neighborhood. Medical services include hospitals, doctors’ offices, birthing centers, and other related uses, but not including manufacturing of medical equipment. Public/Semi-Public District A Public/Semi-Public (P/SP) district is established to accommodate public and semi-public uses, such as schools, government services and facilities, public utilities, community facilities, parks, etc. on publicly owned land. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 2: Land Use Supporting Analysis —September 2024 6 Overlay Districts Master Planned Neighborhood Overlay District The Master Planned Neighborhood (MPN) district is established as an “overlay” district, meaning that this district is overlaid upon other districts and the land so encumbered may be used in a manner permitted in the underlying district only if and to the extent such use is complies with the requirements of AMC section 20.44.032 (Master Planned Neighborhood Developments). Thereafter, this overlay district shall be removed from the property for which the master plan is approved by the City Council. Floodplain and Floodway Districts The Floodplain and Floodway Districts are established as “overlay” districts, meaning that these districts are overlaid upon other districts and the land so encumbered may be used in a manner permitted in the underlying district only if and to the extent such use is complies with the restrictions found in AMC Chapter 20.64 (Floodplain Development Regulations). Shoreline Management District The Shoreline Management District is established as an “overlay” district, meaning that this district is overlaid upon other districts and the land so encumbered may be used in a manner permitted in the underlying district only if and to the extent such use is also permitted in the applicable overlay district and a Shoreline Development Permit has been granted, if necessary, pursuant to the Shoreline Master Program. Mixed Use Overlay District The Mixed-Use Overlay District is established as an “overlay” district, meaning that the underlying zoning applicable within each commercial zone remains as the primary or principal zoning designation. The overlay allows for a mix of diversified residential development to co-exist within a proportionate share of the commercially zones areas of Highway Commercial (HC), General Commercial (GC), and Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zones where typical retail and other support services would be located, thus creating a walkable neighborhood concept. The Mixed-Use Overlay will also be applied to the Residential Moderate Capacity (RMod), Residential Medium Capacity (RMC), and Residential High Capacity (RHC) zones along Smokey Point Boulevard corridor. The overlay will provide for the efficient use of property by requiring the mixed use of properties in a manner that allows for residential development to co-exist with commercial, retail and specific light manufacturing uses. This promotes the creation of attractive, sustainable neighborhoods which enable walkability and less automobile dependency. The performance standards/design guidelines set forth in AMC Chapter 20.110 places limitations on the characteristics of uses located in these districts. Airport Protection District The purpose of the Airport Protection District (APD) is to protect the viability of the Arlington Municipal Airport as a significant resource to the community by encouraging compatible land uses and densities, reducing hazards to lives and properties, and ensuring a safe and secure flying environment. The AP district modifies the density and land use requirements of the underlying zoning districts. These modifications are based on the guidelines within the WSDOT Aviation Division's "Airports and Compatible Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 2: Land Use Supporting Analysis —September 2024 7 Land Use, Volume 1" and provide for maximum protection to the public, health, safety and general welfare of the community, airport users, and citizens working and residing within the airport protection district. The Airport Protection District overlay consists of four subdistricts (A, B, C, and D) and five safety zones (1, 2, 3, 4, and 5) that are laid over the existing land use designations and zoning classifications on the City’s Official Land Use Map and Zoning Map (Figure 1). The APD overlay boundaries were determined by aircraft accident data from the National Transportation Safety Board, the Federal Aviation Regulation Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces and FAA AC 150/5200-33A, and Hazardous Wildlife Attractants on or near airports. Contract Rezone The Contract Rezone (CR) overlay consists of residential developments that deviate from some of the underlying zoning regulations based on a mutually accepted agreement between a developer and the City. These typically include master planned communities where some of the densities and uses would not otherwise be permitted. The purpose of the Contract Rezone overlay is to identify lands within the City that are subject to modified development regulations based on an agreed upon contract between the City and a developer. The Contract Rezone provides for flexibility in the City’s zoning regulations generally in exchange for some benefit provided to the City. The City currently has two residential developments under a contract rezone: Gleneagle and Pioneer Meadows. Major Land Use Considerations The biggest consideration that arises at every periodic update of this Plan is: How do we want to grow? Under the GMA, we are obligated to plan for and accommodate 20-years’ worth of projected growth. As a regional partner, Arlington has accepted the 2044 population, housing, and employment targets adopted by Snohomish County and the Puget Sound Regional Council; however, the community, through its local plan, has control over where development occurs and what it will look like. The City is able to accommodate the 2044 forecasted growth of over 15,000 residents and almost 15,000 new employees within the City’s existing zoning. However, the City will be reaching capacity within the existing zoning once these targets are met. At this point the City can choose to accommodate higher densities or expand its boundaries. To preserve the unique nature of the community the City will pursue an urban growth area expansion to accommodate additional employment targeted to be accommodated west of the existing UGA and additional housing to be accommodated southeast of the exiting UGA. This plan emphasizes coordinating with the City of Marysville for both proposed expansion areas, discussed further below. In 2044, the City envisions most growth to occur in the following areas:  Population:  Smokey Point subarea and corridor  Gateway subarea  Kent Prairie subarea Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 2: Land Use Supporting Analysis —September 2024 8  East Hill subarea  Hilltop subarea  Other areas depicted on Figure 1 (Residential Capacity)  Employment:  Cascade Industrial Center  Other areas depicted on Figure 1 (Employment Capacity) The Capital Facilities & Utilities Book and Transportation Book emphasizes these areas as those where the greatest infrastructure impacts will be. Issues related to where and how we grow our land uses include, among others:  The infrastructure needed to accommodate growth including cost and financing.  The location of new roads and utility improvements.  Urban design—what the new growth will look like.  Preserving the spirit of Arlington while accommodating growth.  Ensuring a continued economically viable industrial center. Land Capacity Analysis To analyze whether Arlington with its current city limits and UGA has sufficient developable land to accommodate its projected population (35,506) and employment (24,751) targets, Snohomish County completed a Buildable Lands Report in 2021. The purpose of the Buildable Lands Report (BLR) is to review the urban densities that are being achieved within both the city and county portions of the Urban Growth Area and, based on the densities achieved, determine whether the UGA has an adequate supply of suitable residential, commercial, and industrial land to accommodate the population and employment growth projected to occur during the remaining portion of the 20-year GMA planning horizon. The City and County concluded that the City would meet its 2044 targets based on the Buildable Lands Report. Following the Buildable Lands Report the City continued to track development and redevelopment projects and analyzed the vacant and underutilized land. This information was used to adjust the BLR for the baseline data used to create development scenarios. To ensure the targets could be met five scenarios were developed to reflect different potential development outcomes, described in detail in Appendix C. One scenario met the employment target and was used as the basis for this plan. This plan assumes a certain portion of Arlington residents work from home based on data available. The assumptions found in Table 1 were used for development density. The average household size in Arlington is 2.68. This plan assumed an average household size of 2 persons per household was used for multifamily development, and 3 for single family properties. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 2: Land Use Supporting Analysis —September 2024 9 Table 1: Development Density Assumptions Vacant and Underutilized Land Density Mixed Use and Commercial Zones 6,600 rentable building area/acre* Industrial Zones 10,000 rentable building area/acre* Old Town Business District 400 square feet/job** Other Commercial Zones 500 square feet/job** Industrial Zones 2,000 square feet/job** Single Family Residential Zones 3-7 dwelling units/acre*** Smokey Point Area 27 dwelling units/acre*** Residential High Capacity Zones 34 dwelling units/acre*** Mixed Use Zones 34 dwelling units/acre*** *Rentable building area per acre is the area within a building that will be rented to or owned by job-creating tenants, this does not include residential spaces. These calculations are based on density of recent development projects to ensure accuracy. See Appendix C for more information. **Square feet per job were estimated based on existing density estimates, allowed density, City input, density assumptions per the North American Industry Classification System, and density of recent development projects to ensure accuracy. See Appendix C for more information. ***Dwelling units per acre were estimated based on the BLR, allowed density, City input, and density of recent development projects to ensure accuracy. See Appendix C for more information. Table 2 shows the results of the land capacity analysis. The analysis completed for this plan indicates Arlington’s existing zoning has sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional 15,088 residents, 7,913 housing units, and 14,462 employees as allocated by Snohomish County. The analysis highlighted the forecasted surplus of residential land capacity in 2044 of nearly 10,000 additional housing units. This analysis assumed higher capacity for development than the BLR in the Smokey Point area where Bus Rapid Transit is anticipated to operate starting in 2027. The analysis also indicated that while the City is able to accommodate the employment target Arlington will nearly be at capacity based on the density of recent development projects which are lower than those anticipated in the BLR. Table 2: Arlington Land Capacity Analysis Results Target 2044 Target 2044 Capacity Population 35,506 55,449 Housing Units 15,780 25,677 Employment 24,751 25,782 Jobs-Housing Ratio A jobs-housing ratio compares the number of jobs to the number of housing units. A jobs-housing ratio is considered balanced when a community has roughly attained the regional average ratio, which was 1.35 in 2019. In 2020, Arlington had a job/housing ratio of 1.31. With the forecasted population, housing and employment estimates described above, the ratio in 2044 would be closer to 1.57 jobs for every Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 2: Land Use Supporting Analysis —September 2024 10 household. Arlington has a balanced jobs-housing ratio and aims to keep a balanced ratio as the City continues to grow. Future UGA Expansion/Annexation The land capacity analysis completed for this plan indicates that the City will be reaching the City’s employment capacity within the existing zoning once these targets are met. One factor contributing to this is recent development in the Cascade Industrial Center is lower than the projected densities. To ensure the City is able to accommodate future growth the City is planning to pursue an UGA expansion. To ensure the City has a balanced jobs-housing ratio the City will pursue two areas for UGA expansion. A UGA expansion area is proposed to accommodate additional employment west of the existing UGA and adjacent to the existing Cascade Industrial Center as seen in Figure 2. A second UGA expansion area is proposed to accommodate additional housing and associated land uses, such as parks, southeast of the existing UGA. These areas fall within the Arlington’s coordinated water service area. The west proposed expansion area shares a boundary with the City of Marysville city limits on 184th St NE. Both proposed expansion areas are adjacent to or areas the City of Marysville is also considering for future land use planning. This plan emphasizes coordinating with the City of Marysville for both proposed expansion areas. Additionally, it will be important to coordinate with Snohomish County, Puget Sound Regional Council, Tribes, service providers, property owners, and other entities operating or regulating these areas. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 2: Land Use Supporting Analysis —September 2024 11 Figure 2: Future UGA Expansion Study Area Map Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 2: Land Use Supporting Analysis —September 2024 12 Subarea Plans The Land Use Book will be implemented in large part through the development strategies pursued in each of the City’s subareas. To see more information about each subarea see Section III: Subareas and Appendix A. Book 3: Housing 2 BOOK 3: HOUSING Introduction The Housing book addresses Arlington’s housing supply and needs. The primary objective of the Housing book is to: understand the local and regional housing market, identify Arlington’s projected housing needs by income level, assess the land capacity to meet identified needs, identify barriers to achieving needed levels of affordable housing, and address and seek to undo policies and regulations resulting in racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion. The goals and policies established in the Housing book are related to a quality and diverse housing stock, affordable, workforce, and special needs housing, housing assistance, mixed-income and mixed-use neighborhoods, sustainable practices, stable neighborhoods, and healthy, active lifestyles. Book 3: Housing 3 Housing by Income Band As amended by HB1220, RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c) requires cities to show sufficient land capacity to meet housing needs of moderate, low, very low, and extremely low-income households, defined by household income as a percentage of area median income (AMI), and show capacity for permanent supportive housing and emergency housing and shelters. In total, Arlington must plan to accommodate 7,794 new permanent units by 2044, and an additional 482 emergency housing units. The analysis and methodology to demonstrate capacity for these targets is located in Appendix D - HB1220 Analysis. Table 01. Arlington’s Allocated Housing Targets by Income Band. Book 3: Housing 4 GOALS AND POLICIES H-1 Encourage a quality and diverse housing stock within the City. H-1.1 Maintain a supply of land zoned to accommodate a variety of housing types and densities. H-1.2 Allow and encourage the development of moderate density and middle housing in single-family residential zones to increase the variety in housing types. w H-1.3 Reduce barriers to building ADUs and DADUs in residential zones. H-1.4 Support cottage housing in low to moderate density residential zones. H-1.5 Review and continue to streamline development standards and regulations to reduce barriers to development, provide flexibility, and minimize additional costs to housing. H-1.6 Minimize housing production costs by considering the use of a variety of infrastructure funding methods, such as existing revenue sources, impact fees, local improvement districts, and general obligation bonds. H-1.7 Consider the economic implications of proposed building and land use regulations so the intended public benefit is achieved with limited additional cost to housing. Pilchuck Village Apartments Book 3: Housing 5 H-2 Provide housing options affordable to all demographics and incomes in all areas and zoning districts of the City. H-2.1 Align with the Regional Growth Strategy and Snohomish County Growth Targets by providing capacity for the 20-year allocations, including special needs and affordable housing. H-2.2 Allow for a range of housing options to accommodate the City’s present and future needs across all income levels (including extremely low, very-low, low, and moderate-income households) and demographics (age, race, ethnicity, cultural background, and household types) while recognizing historic inequities in access to homeownership opportunities for communities of color. H-2.3 Cooperate with Snohomish County Tomorrow, the Alliance for Housing Affordability, the Housing Consortium of Everett, and similar inter- jurisdictional organizations to assess housing needs, create affordable housing opportunities, track the provision of housing by type and affordability, and coordinate a regional approach to funding and planning for the housing needs of current and future populations. H-2.4 Work with Snohomish County on the Growth Monitoring Report (GMR) to make annual assessment of progress towards meeting the City’s housing goals, including housing that addresses the needs of extremely-low, very- low, low-, moderate-income households, and those with special housing needs. Book 3: Housing 6 H-2.5 Ensure housing options for extremely-low to moderate-income households are dispersed throughout the City, inclusive of a variety of housing types, and located near amenities, such as commercial and employment areas, education centers, public services, transportation facilities, existing planned residential communities, and recreational opportunities. H-2.6 Protect existing naturally affordable housing including mobile home and manufactured home parks. Encourage the rehabilitation and preservation of existing, legally established, houses for residents of all income levels. H-2.7 Incentivize developers to produce affordable housing that is well-distributed and thoughtfully located throughout the City. Within this affordable housing should be various entry points into homeownership and the property ladder (condominiums, duplexes, tiny homes, etc.). The City should provide criteria and a process for ensuring those units remain affordable over time. H-2.8 As part of any rezone that increases residential capacity, the City should consider requiring a portion of units to be affordable to extremely-low, very- low, low-, moderate-income households. H-2.9 Evaluate the effectiveness of the zoning regulations to produce housing developments that meet the diverse housing needs identified in the Housing Characteristics and Needs Report for the community. Single family residences in the Old Town Subarea Book 3: Housing 7 H-3 Encourage development of housing opportunities to accommodate the elderly and those who have special needs (disabled, people with medical conditions, homeless individuals and families, and displaced people). H-3.1 Provide capacity for senior housing and special needs housing; ensure it is well-distributed and thoughtfully located throughout the City (in close proximity to hospitals, public transportation, retail/service centers, medical facilities, parks, and other essential services). H-3.2 Allow a range of special needs housing types (group housing, assisted living, skilled nursing care facilities, and supportive housing) available to all income levels. H-3.3 Allow all classes of group homes and essential public residential facilities (as required by RCW 36.70A.200) in appropriate residential and mixed-use zones, and streamline the permitting process for this type of development. H-3.4 Support nonprofit organizations, housing and service providers, and other regional groups to provide a coordinated effort to shelter populations with special housing needs. H-3.5 Ensure Planning Commission reviews State and federal housing programs and makes recommendations to City Council regarding future grant applications. Independent senior living housing located in Smokey Point Book 3: Housing 8 H-4 Strive to provide equal access to housing and to keep residents in their homes. H-4.1 Disseminate information regarding assistance available from the electric and gas utility companies, charitable organizations, and public agencies. H-4.2 Strengthen tenant rights and protections to ensure housing stability. H-4.3 Ensure impact fee programs add no more to the cost of each housing unit produced than a fairly-derived proportionate share of the cost of new public facilities necessary to accommodate the housing unit as determined by the impact fee provisions of the Growth Management Act cited in chapter 82.02 RCW. H-4.4 To the extent feasible use a range of strategies to mitigate displacement of low or fixed income households, historically marginalized populations, and neighborhood-based small business owners that may result from planning, public investments, private development, and market pressure. H-5 Encourage mixed-income and mixed-use neighborhoods. H-5.1 Promote diverse, inclusive, mixed-income residential neighborhoods where residents of varying income levels can live and interact. H-5.2 Encourage residential development in commercial areas to help create an economically vibrant and diverse environment. H-5.3 Promote neighborhoods that have a mix of jobs and housing. Strategies to reduce displacement risk can include increasing access to and affordability of housing, which involve increasing the supply and stability of housing with in the City. Book 3: Housing 9 H-6 Encourage energy efficiency, sustainable and climate-resilient building practices, and conservation measures in new residential development and remodels. H-6.1 Incentivize developers and residents to participate in programs such as Built Green and LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design). H-6.2 Encourage residential retrofits that make housing more energy efficient and resilient to natural disasters, climate change, and poor air quality. H-6.3 Share informational resources with homeowners regarding updated environmentally sustainable building techniques and materials when they choose to retrofit their homes. Mixed Use building located in the Kent Prairie Subarea Book 3: Housing 10 H-7 Incentivize affordable multi-family, single family, and workforce housing near transportation and employment centers. H-7.1 Encourage multi-family housing close to commercial and employment centers, transportation facilities, public services, schools, and park and recreation areas. H-7.2 Promote well-connected housing, jobs, and services by allowing mixed-use development in commercial zones. H-7.3 The City should implement zoning, regulation, and incentive changes near transit oriented development (TOD) sites to guide sustainable and equitable development patterns that incorporate affordable housing production and public benefits. H-7.4 Implement strategies and programs to help ensure a range of housing opportunities affordable to Arlington’s workforce. H-7.5 Preserve existing multi-family housing near transportation and employment centers as growth occurs. The Outpost Apartments courtyard located in Smokey Point Book 3: Housing 11 H-8 Ensure stable residential neighborhoods through public investment in infrastructure, preservation of the existing housing stock, and accommodation of new development in a manner that enhances Arlington’s quality of life, its natural environment, and its historical and cultural amenities. H-8.1 Coordinate with willing neighborhood-based groups and other volunteer organizations to promote community revitalization efforts along with housing rehabilitation. H-8.2 Maintain code enforcement programs to catch problems early, avoid extensive deterioration of housing units, and to motivate owners to repair and improve maintenance of their structures. H-9 Use equitable and measurable planning tools to preserve neighborhood architectural character in existing homes and provide regulatory context for new construction or re-development of existing housing stock. H-9.1 Develop and refine the Development Design Standards to preserve existing architectural character and ensure new development is aesthetically consistent. H-9.2 Require new and updated residences in the “Old-Town” residential area to follow Old Town Residential District Design Standards. Book 3: Housing 12 H-10 Work towards ensuring all Arlington residents have access to a healthy active lifestyle. H-10.1 Encourage new residential developments to include community gardens and green spaces to promote outdoor recreation. H-10.2 Encourage new residential developments to include fitness and recreational amenities, such as gyms, pools, and sports facilities, for residents’ use. H-10.3 Ensure the amenities in senior and assisted living facilities are age and ability appropriate. Arlington Runners Club 5K Color Run Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 3: Housing Supporting Analysis —November 2024 1 Book 3: Housing Supporting Analysis Background information for the Housing Book may be found in the following documents within the Appendices: • Appendix B – “Racially Disparate Impact Analysis.” The Racially Disparate Impact (RDI) Analysis includes an assessment of Arlington’s current housing policies for any racially disparate impacts that may result from those policies. Additionally, the RDI also includes a demographic analysis of the City’s residents and housing stock, and identifies any historic racially restrictive covenants or other historic action take that may have racially disparate impacts. • Appendix D - “HB1220 Analysis.” The HB1220 Analysis includes analysis of Arlington’s compliance with the new statewide regulations resulting from HB 120’s amendments for the Growth Management Act, requiring jurisdictions to evaluate land capacity for all housing needs as well as to make adequate provisions to accommodate all housing needs. • Appendix E - “Emergency Housing Template.” The Emergency Housing Template includes an analysis on Arlington’s ability to accommodate the 2044 emergency housing growth allocations provided by Snohomish County. • Appendix F - “Forecast Methodology and Discussion.” The Forecast Methodology and Discussion includes an analysis of different development scenarios to forecast where the growth necessary for meeting Arlington’s 2044 Snohomish County growth allocations, for both housing and jobs, is most likely to occur within the City. Book 4: Economic Development 1 BOOK 4:ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Introduction The Economic Development book addresses the City’s commitment to a sustainable local and regional economy. The primary objective of the Economic Development book is to create conditions for economic growth and improve the quality of life in Arlington by providing living-wage jobs. The goals and policies established in the Economic Development book are related to a strong economy, diverse employment options, cooperation with other agencies and local businesses, the Arlington Municipal Airport as an economic engine, enhancing the Cascade Industrial Center, supporting the natural environment, unique economic hubs, and quality of life. Book 4: Economic Development 2 Goals and Policies ED-1 Support a range of employment options at different income levels and a variety of amenities are available throughout the city. ED-1.1 Encourage a diversified and vibrant economy in order to facilitate high and stable rates of employment within the city, available at a range of income levels. ED-1.2 Establish and support economic development activities that help to attract, retain, expand, and diversify businesses throughout the city, particularly those that provide living-wage jobs. ED-1.3 Promote diverse and sustainable employment sectors to support and encourage residents to live and work in Arlington. ED-1.4 Foster an equitable business and regulatory environment that supports the establishment and growth of startups, small businesses, locally owned, and women- and minority-owned businesses. ED-1.5 Coordinate with educational providers to encourage availability of high- quality education and job training to all residents to foster a well-trained workforce that is prepared for emerging jobs markets. ED-1.6 Identify and use a range of strategies to mitigate the potential physical, economic, and cultural displacement of existing locally-owned, small business, that may result from redevelopment and market pressure. ED-1.7 Promote equity and access to opportunity in economic development policies and programs. A small business grand opening ceremony Book 4: Economic Development 3 ED-1.8 Foster economic development activities in areas with historically low access to opportunities that improve opportunities for current and future residents. ED-2 Promote a strong, diversified, and sustainable local and regional economy. ED-2.1 Plan for adequate land capacity to support commercial and industrial uses and to provide sufficient employment meeting the 20-year employment targets for Arlington. ED-2.2 Plan for adequate retail sales base (i.e., commercial land base) to provide financial support for the services the City provides. ED-2.3 Develop an Economic Development Plan to provide a technical foundation upon which economic development strategies and decision-making within Arlington can be based. ED-2.4 Provide sufficient and proactive investments in public infrastructure to improve the City’s economic base and accommodate overall growth. ED-2.5 Leverage Arlington’s visibility from Interstate-5 and encourage the development and enhancement of the city’s gateways to attract additional consumer base. ED-2.6 Recognize the contributions and support the growth of Arlington’s and the surrounding area’s culturally and ethnically diverse communities, including the Stillaguamish Tribe, to assist in the continued expansion of the local and regional economic base. ED-2.7 Coordinate economic development plans with the City’s transportation, housing, and land use policies and plans, and the Regional Growth Strategy, to support economic development that is compatible citywide. Amazon building located in Smokey Point Book 4: Economic Development 4 ED-2.8 Maintain land use patterns and available infrastructure to allow for a high jobs-to-housing ratio. ED-2.9 Identify sectors of the economy within Arlington where opportunities might exist to create additional jobs and identify potential strategies for attracting employment in those fields. ED-3 Actively cooperate with other agencies and local businesses to support economic development. ED-3.1 Maintain a favorable business climate through fair and consistent implementation of City of Arlington regulations, a streamlined and predictable permit process, and excellent customer service. ED-3.2 Collaborate with businesses to identify specialized infrastructure, building design, transportation, or other needs required to maintain business operation. ED-3.3 Work with the Stilly Valley Chamber of Commerce and the Downtown Arlington Business Association to identify ways in which the City and local businesses can cooperate on economic development needs and strategies for addressing those needs. ED-3.4 Participate or otherwise assist in business sponsored activities to increase local awareness of goods and services available in Arlington. ED-3.5 Provide opportunities to include local business owners and associations in economic development plans, strategies, and decision-making processes. ED-3.6 Strive to equitably allocate the cost of growth by utilizing mitigation and impact fees to provide funds for necessary infrastructure improvements. Coca Cola Building Book 4: Economic Development 5 ED-3.7 Coordinate with Snohomish County on potential tourism grants to support citywide and regional tourism efforts. ED-4 Promote and support the Arlington Municipal Airport as a fixture for employment and an economic engine within the city and region. ED-4.1 Encourage the growth of the airport as a major employment center by considering innovative public-private partnerships, tax incentives, and economic development planning to promote this growth. ED 4.2 Support and actively promote the Arlington Municipal Airport as a Premier General Aviation Airport in Washington. ED-4.3 Develop strategies, consistent with the Airport Master Plan, for marketing the Airport to strengthen aviation economic development in the city and region. ED-5 Preserve and enhance the designated Cascade Industrial Center to support its long-term regional economic benefits. ED 5.1 Provide a supportive business environment for start-up, light manufacturing, and assembly businesses in the airport/industrial area. ED-5.2 Implement economic development and marketing strategies, consistent with the Arlington Marysville Manufacturing Industrial Center Plan, to further promote the expansion of the Cascade Industrial Center. ED-5.3 Work to reduce the risk of industrial displacement from incompatible and encroaching uses. ED-5.4 Monitor and periodically review compliance of the Cascade Industrial Arlington Airport looking East at Cascade Mountain Range Book 4: Economic Development 6 Center with applicable Puget Sound Regional Council requirements. ED-5.5 Explore potential annexation options as the Cascade Industrial Center approaches the zoned capacity. ED-6 Guide economic development practices within the city that protect and support the natural environment. ED-6.1 Encourage the development of existing and emerging industries and services that promote environmental sustainability, particularly those addressing climate change and resilience. ED-6.2 Encourage economic development activities that take into consideration the capacities of the area’s natural resources, public services, and facilities. ED-6.3 Explore and encourage ways in which the downtown commercial area and businesses can highlight and be linked to the Stillaguamish River. ED-6.4 Remain aware of and up to date with potential sustainability-focused grant opportunities. ED-6.5 Support the expeditious processing of development applications. Continue requiring development activities to meet all applicable environmental protection, land use, and other applicable provisions and standards. ED-7 Encourage the development of unique economic hubs at various scales throughout the city to adequately serve residents and the region. ED-7.1 Promote the viability of Old-Town Business District, Smokey Point Boulevard, the Cascade Industrial Center, and Island Crossing as regional economic draws, while maintaining and improving upon smaller neighborhood hubs to serve local residents. Book 4: Economic Development 7 ED-7.2 Further develop Smokey Point Boulevard as a mixed-use destination, providing necessary business and office spaces. ED-7.3 Encourage and promote a diversity of retail, restaurants, crafts industries, services, civic facilities, and mixed uses to achieve a vibrant shopping, dining, and entertaining experience in both Old Town and along the Smokey Point Boulevard corridor and other developing districts. ED-7.4 Promote the general redevelopment of Old-Town Business District, while preserving and protecting the historic buildings and features of Olympic Avenue. ED-7.5 Become an active sponsor and promoter of attracting new retail businesses to Arlington that provide a mixture of goods and services, which would allow residents to shop locally without leaving Arlington. ED-7.6 Encourage businesses to plan for shared parking when redeveloping existing commercial areas in order to provide adequate parking. Reduce additional vehicle trips, provide multi-modal transportation options, and encourage pedestrian activity in commercial hubs. ED-7.7 Develop economic development strategies to differentiate and enhance the different subareas of the city. ED-7.8 Invest in transportation and other infrastructure needed to support and provide connections the various commercial centers throughout the city. ED-7.9 Improve access to a variety of jobs opportunities for residents by prioritizing multi-modal transportation connections between residential areas and the commercial and manufacturing/industrial centers in the city. ED-7.10 Consider the limitations of resources, services, and infrastructure when reviewing applications for new commercial and industrial development. Meet Me in Arlington Pop-Up Shop at the Arlington Innovation Center Book 4: Economic Development 8 ED-8 Support economic development activities that enhance the quality of life for Arlington residents. ED-8.1 Identify and implement ways to provide services that will improve the quality of life for residents. ED-8.2 Encourage businesses that process and sell locally- produced resources, particularly healthy food products. ED-8.3 Develop a variety of strategies aimed at enhancing the diversity of Arlington’s tourism base, with particular focus on agritourism, farm-to-table, and local crafts industry products. ED-8.4 Maintain and enhance arts and cultural institutions in Arlington to foster an active and vibrant community life for residents and attract visitors to the city and surrounding area. ED-8.5 Support the development of the Whitehorse Trail to Darrington, promote Arlington as the hub for trail users, and consider locations to enhance activity around the trail. ED-8.6 Develop and promote Arlington as an outdoor recreation destination. Enhance the use of the Stillaguamish riverfront, existing and potential riverfront parks, and extensive trail systems. Craft industries encompass goods that are handmade by artisans or those skilled in a particular trade. Vendors displaying goods along trail Cultural crafts and art at Arlington Farmers Market Book 4: Economic Development 9 204th St Ne 179thPl Ne tS htroN 153r Pl Ne 23 rd Ave N e 151st Pl Ne E 3rd St Osp r Rd 4t h Ave N w N BAve 185th Pl Ne 80 t h Ave N e 79 t h Ave N e Her Ct 200th St Ne 193rd St Ne 180th St Ne ht91 eN evA ht85 eN evA 38 t h Dr N e 3rdDr N e Abbey Pl 89t h Av 35 t h Ave N e 172nd St Nw 59 t h Av 170th Pl Ne 77 t h Ave N e 189th Pl Ne Joann Ln E 4th St 25 t h Ave N e 72 n d Dr N e 92nd Av 10 1 s t Ave N e 164th St Ne eN evA ht72 63 rd Ave N e 5t h Ave N e 44 t h Dr N e 156th St Ne 27 t h Ave N e ht61 eN rD 233r Pl Ne 188th St Ne 193rd Pl Ne 165th Pl Ne 19 t h D r N e E Haller Ave 89 t h Av 162nd St Ne Nob l e Dr 65 t h Dr N e S C o b b Ave Balm o rDr 195th St Ne 99 t h Av 64 t h Dr N e 178th Pl Ne 196th St Ne ts17 eN evA 190th Pl Ne 62 n d Dr N e 183rd Pl Ne 178th St Ne 151st St Ne 6t h Ave N w 169th Ave Ne 164th St Ne 206thSt Ne 32 n d Ave N e 175th Pl Ne 39 t h Ave 200th St Nw 59 t h Ave N e 192nd St Ne Arl Heights R d 66 t h Ave N e Ox ford Dr 95 t h Ave N e 3rAv 156thSt Ne 40 t h Ave N e 47 t h Ave N e eN evA ts19 42 n d Dr N e 43 rd 180th St Ne MorRd 89 t h Ave N e Kn o ll Dr 197th St Ne W Jensen St eN evA ht91 171st Pl N e 88 t h Dr N e 11 t h Ave N e 2n d D r N w 176th Pl Ne 192nd Pl Ne E 2nd St 162ndSt Ne Upla n d Dr 182n d P l N e 162n d Pl Ne 73 rd Ave N e 19t h Dr N e Ch a m p i o n s Dr 15 t h Ave N e 23 rd Ave N e 158th St Ne 196th Pl Ne 199th St Ne ht08 eN rD 220th St Ne 11 t h Ave N e New p o r t Dr 160th St Ne 27 t h Ave N e Hig hClovBlvd N e 67 t h Ave N e 79 t h Dr N e Vis t a Dr 35 t h Ave N e 3rd Ave N w 99 t h Dr N e Ol y m p i c Pl Smokey Point Dr 31 s t Ave N e 37 t h Ave N e ht59 eN evA 182nd St Ne High l a n d View D r 194th St Nw E Gilman Ave 152nd St Ne Wood l a n d s Wa 45 t h Dr N e ht51 eN evA Knuts o n R d 226 t h P l N e Mcpherso n Rd Sp r i n g La n e Av Schlom a n R d 25 t h Av 6t h Ave N w dr36 eN evA 43 rd Ave N e 6th Av 40 t h Dr N e 164th St Ne 23 rd Ave N e Eaglefie l d D r Old Burn R d Mcrae Rd Nw CrRid g e Blvd 234th St Ne Jo rHevly Rd Twi n L a k 188th St Ne Dik 200th St Ne 236th St Ne I-5 W Burke Ave N French Ave E Highland Dr 186th St Ne N Manhattan Ave 172nd St Ne 74th Ave Ne 169th St Ne 191st Pl Ne 188th St Ne Tveit Rd Cemetery Rd S Stillaguamish AveS French Ave 59th Ave Ne E 1st St Burn Rd 51st Ave Ne Arlington Valley Road 47th Ave Ne Mcelroy Rd 211th Pl Ne 204th St Ne 207th St Ne E Burke Ave S Ol y m p i c Ave N O l y m p i c Ave Forty Fiv 212th St Nw 188th St Ne 172nd St Ne Burn Sm o key Poi n t Blv d eN evA ht76 eN evA ht95 Sil eN evA dr3 Pioneer E Division St Airpo r t B 48th Dr 49th Dr 50th Ne Ne 61st Ave 188th Pl Ne 51st Ave Ave Ne 62nd 192nd St Ne 195th St 180th St Ne eN rD ht95 0 0.5 10.25 Miles 47TH AVE N E 47TH AVE N E 59 T H AVE N E 59 T H AVE N E 204TH S T N E204TH S T N E E H i gh l an d D RE H i gh l an d D R St i l l a g u a m i s h A V E St i l l a g u a m i s h A V E E 5th STE 5th ST Burn RD Burn RD Burn RD Burn RD Burn RD 1 72N D ST N E172ND ST N E Airport BLVD Airport BLVD Sti ll a gu a m ish R ive r 67TH AVE N E 67TH AVE N E 51 S T AVE N E 51 S T AVE N E 1 88T H S T N E188TH S T N E 200T H S T N E200TH S T N E Dike RDDike RD Smokey Point BLVD Smokey Point BLVD 1 9 TH AVE N E 1 9 TH AVE N E S R 530 S R 9 S R 531 L e ge n d Ar l i n gt o n M u n i c i p a l Ai r p o r t C a s c a d e I n d u s tr i a l C e n te r C i ty L i m i t s U r b a n G r o wt h Ar e a C i ty P a r k s Tr a i l s R a i l r o a d S t a te H i gh wa y S t a te R o u t e Ai r p o r t R o a d Ar t e r i a l C o lle c t o r S t r eet ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN 0.5 0 0.50.25 Miles Cascade Industrial Center Figure ED-01. Cascade Industiral Center Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 4: Economic Development Supporting Analysis —November 2024 1 Book 4: Economic Development Supporting Analysis Background information for the Economic Development Book may be found in the document entitled “Forecast Methodology and Discussion”, Appendix F. The Forecast Methodology and Discussion includes an analysis of different development scenarios to forecast where the growth necessary for meeting Arlington’s 2044 Snohomish County growth allocations, for both housing and jobs, is most likely to occur within the City. Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces 1 Introduction The Parks, Recreation, and Open Space book addresses the present and future park, recreation, and open space needs of those living and working in Arlington. The primary objective of the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space book is to ensure there are sufficient, diverse, high-quality, equitably distributed open space, trail, and park facilities, and recreation programs and services throughout Arlington. This book also aims to support the 2024 Parks & Recreation Plan. The goals and policies established in the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space book are related to an equitable recreation system, impact mitigation, an effective financing strategy, protection of unique environmental amenities, a highly connected trail system, consistent and high-quality facilities, and collaboration with other recreation providers. BOOK 5:PARKS, RECREATION, AND OPEN SPACES Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces 2 GOALS AND POLICIES P-1 Develop an equitable, high-quality parks and recreation system that provides a diversity of recreational, cultural, and educational opportunities that are inclusive and welcoming for all. P-1.1 P-1.2 P-1.3 P-1.4 P-2 P-2.1 P-2.2 Support the development of parks and recreation facilities that vary in type and sizes, are easily accessible, and well-distributed throughout the city. Encourage multi-purpose uses of parks and recreation facilities. Parks and recreation facilities open to the public shall meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Maintain and support a diverse range of recreational, cultural, and educational activities, such as the existing Byrnes Performing Arts Center and other existing and new opportunities. Ensure the equity and availability of potentia l funding streams and provide transportation improvements consistent with the Capital Improvement Plan in prioritizing and financing. Prioritize programs and projects that provide access to opportunities while preventing or mitigating negative impacts to people of color, people with low incomes, and people with special transportation needs. Identify desirable lands within the Urban Growth Area for parks, trails, and open space, and pursue acquisition through dedication and purchase. Develop at least one community <or neighborhood?> park within each subarea and provide a new central community park within the Smokey Point neighborhood. Music in the Park event at Legion Park in downtown Arlington Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces 3 P-2.3 Identify and pursue new parks in areas of potential future urban growth area expansion to serve employees and residents upon annexation. P-2.4 Encourage the provision of art, as well as interpretive and educational displays, in parks and public buildings and spaces citywide. P-3 Thoroughly mitigate impacts to the parks, recreation, and open space system P-3.1 Require new residential development to mitigate impacts through payment of GMA parks impact fees, dedications of properties, and improvements for public use to serve the growing demand on the parks, recreation, and open space system citywide. P-3.2 All parks and recreation land to be dedicated to the City should have all infrastructure improvements in place concurrent with the implementation of a project or be bonded for completion prior to acceptance by the City. For the purposes of this policy, “concurrent” means at the time of final plat approval (for residential projects) or at the time of final building inspection for multi-family. P-3.3 Follow the level-of-service standards and participation demands and needs identified in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan when planning and acquiring funding for the expansion and enhancement of Arlington’s parks and recreation system. Stormwater Wetlands Park and Eagle Trail along the Stillaguamish River Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces 4 P-4 Create an effective and efficient financing strategy for parks, recreation, trails, and open space projects that distributes the costs and benefits to the general public. P-4.1 Pursue short-term financing mechanisms such as grants and establish long-term financing mechanisms to ensure adequate parks and recreation facilities are funded and available within Arlington. P-4.2 To meet level-of-service standards and participation demands, use Capital Funds to improve existing parks and recreation facilities and provide for new parks and facilities citywide and in future annexation areas. P-4.3 All parks, trails, open spaces, and other recreation facilities should be well maintained. P-4.4 Prioritize the development and maintenance of parks, trails, and open spaces based on need and available funding. P-4.5 Maintain the Adopt-A-Park program for the maintenance of parks, trails, and open spaces within the city. P-5 Utilize the parks and recreation system to protect unique environmental qualities, natural amenities, wildlife habitats, forest lands, and scenic areas within the city. P-5.1 Enhance the resilience of the parks and recreation system by assessing and addressing climate hazards and impacts. P-5.2 Locate, plan, and manage parks and recreation facilities so they enhance wildlife habitat, minimize erosion impacts, and complement the natural site features. Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces 5 P-5.3 Encourage passive recreational activities on non-critical area (usable) open space lands. P-5.4 Inventory and protect significant historical and cultural resources. P-5.5 Enhance and preserve scenic viewpoints for public enjoyment when siting parks and recreation facilities. P-5.6 Support the development of a system of water access and water trails. P-5.7 Maintain existing resource-oriented facilities and support the development of new opportunities such as fishing sites, hand-carried boat access, swimming beaches, and picnicking areas. P-6 Provide a trail system that creates links between commercial and residential areas in Arlington and connects to regional trails, parks, recreation facilities, and open spaces. P-6.1 Create a continuous and connected system of parks and recreation facilities via a robust trail network. P-6.2 Support a comprehensive system of trails, including off-road hike and bike trails that link scenic, environmental, historic, and open space attractions in and around Arlington. P-6.3 Aligning with the level-of-service standards in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, locate a park, trail, open space area, or recreation facility within a five-minute walking distance of all Arlington residents. P-6.4 Develop and improve trails so they are suitable for multi-modal and non- motorized transportation and so they provide opportunities for recreation and education. iCentennial Trail looking north over the Haller Railroad bridge See the Walkshed Map on page 25 of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan in Appendix G. Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces 6 P-6.5 Develop a marketing strategy for the Centennial Trail to attract more residents and visitors to Old Town and the downtown business district. P-7 Create design standards for the parks, recreation, and open space system to establish a standard of consistency and quality. P-7.1 Develop a thematic signage program to establish a distinctive, inviting, and easily recognizable parks and recreation system. P-7.2 Maintain an up-to-date map of the local trail system that is easily accessible to the public to help encourage trail use. P-7.3 Provide restrooms, activities, and facilities accessible to all age groups in each community park. P-8 Continue to work collaboratively with neighboring jurisdictions, public and private agencies, and other groups to enhance and expand the City of Arlington’s parks and recreation system. P-8.1 Offer a variety of indoor and outdoor recreation facilities and programs for special populations, children, teens, seniors, and the general population that are of major interest to city residents of all ages, skills, incomes, and cultures. P-8.2 Work with Snohomish County, the Arlington School District, the Lakewood School District, the Arlington Boys and Girls Club, the Little League, and other agencies to cooperatively provide joint use agreements and increase available parkland and recreation facilities, including programming for youth, senior citizens, and other segments of the population. Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces 7 P-8.3 Support and continue to collaborate with the Snohomish County Parks and Recreation Department on the creation and maintenance of current and future projects, including the Whitehorse Trail. P-8.4 Work with foundations, organizations, associations, trusts, developers, landowners, and neighboring and regional governments to develop and/ or preserve parks, trails, and open space by encouraging donations and dedications, conservation easements, innovative land use contractual agreements, and other methods. P-8.5 Evaluate and implement mechanisms that enhance the City’s ability to acquire properties and provide services including inter-jurisdictional/ inter-agency relationships, district designations, or other appropriate mechanisms. P-8.6 Align with Snohomish County’s Regional Open Space Conservation Plan. The gazebo at Legion Park Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces 8 Figure P-01. Existing Facilities Map Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Supporting Analysis —November 2024 1 Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Supporting Analysis Introduction Background information for the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Book may be found in the document entitled “Park & Recreation Master Plan” (Appendix G), set to be adopted in 2024. The Park and Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) includes goals and policies, an analysis of existing park and recreation facilities in Arlington and the surrounding community, public involvement and other processes used to develop the recommendations, forecasts to determine current and future demands and needs, proposals in line with the 20-year vision for Arlington, and an overview of the existing finances and prospective finances. The proposals are related to resource conservancies or open spaces, resource parks, trails, athletic parks, community facilities, special use facilities for special uses such as plazas, and support facilities such as for maintenance and administration. The PRMP includes proposals for Arlington’s parks, recreation, and open space system which are summarized below in Table 1. The PRMP notes that the proposals are conceptual and for some proposal studies and coordination are required. Table 1: Park & Recreation Master Plan Proposed Facilities Plan Element Proposed Facility Conservancies Portage Creek Corridor: Conserve and enhance the riparian habitat along Portage Creek from that flows north through Arlington High School then west through and around Portage Creek Wildlife riparian habitat along March Creek that flows west from SR-9 to the Stillaguamish River. Middle Fork Quilceda Creek Corridor: Conserve and enhance the riparian habitat along the Middle Fork of the Quilceda Creek that flows north through Gleneagle Golf Course then south along Charm Park through this site and then to Post High Clover Park: Install picnic tables and shelter Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Supporting Analysis —September 2024 2 the Airport Trail to residential neighborhoods and employment centers on 1) 180th Street NE west to J Rudy York Memorial Park – 0.7 miles, 2) 173rd Place NE – 0.5 miles, 3) 43rd Avenue NE – 0.5 miles, 4) 51st Avenue NE, - 0.5 miles and 5) 59th Avenue NE – 0.4 miles. Add airport observation perimeter trail west onto Dike Road north along from SR-9 to Portage Creek Wildlife Area along Zimmerman Hill Extension: Extend the trail south alongside SR-9 to Pioneer Elementary School and a connection to 188th Street Connector Country Charm Park along Stillaguamish River from Alcazar Avenue west under SR-530 to the Centennial Trail and Haller Park. Creek Elementary School through Post Middle School then down the slope to the Stillaguamish River and north to connect with Country Charm Trail east along Gilman Avenue to connect with First Street/Haller Middle Trail: Develop trail from Centennial Trail at Legion Park east past Haller Middle School to Kruger-Portage Trail on south on 59th Avenue (Kraetz Road) to Portage SR-530/Pioneer Highway south on Smokey Point Boulevard to 188th Street (Bjorn Road) then east Road south on 62nd Drive NE then 63rd Avenue NE extended south across SR-530/172nd Street NE Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Supporting Analysis —September 2024 3 Street NE south on 174th Avenue NE to 191st Place 182nd Street NE then south on 89th Avenue NE to NE east on 169th Street NE through the natural materials to compliment the park’s High Clover Park: Children's play area for ages 5 Smokey Point Park: Children's playground for ages Athletic Parks – Skateboard Dots and Pump Tracks Forest Trail Park: Install skateboard dot in park High Clover Park: Install skateboard dot in park High Clover Park: Install sport court in park fields with baseball diamonds in corners Country Charm Park: Develop large open fields fountains with shade trellis and seat walls; Gazebo/performance stage facing grass lawn; 2 Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content—Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Supporting Analysis —September 2024 4 and 2 handicap stalls on 178th Place NE; 6 off square foot event kitchen; 30+ outdoor dining spaces; Precast concrete restroom facility; Playground area with aviation related play High Clover Park: Install pea path garden plots Country Charm Park: Designate open field for limited off-leash exercise area; Install fenced areas with separation for small and large dogs; Install splash pond, water fountain, exercise equipment amenities for dogs; Install benches, covered seating area, water fountain, pooper-scooper for The 2024 Arlington PRMP is incorporated into the City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan by reference and therefore serves as the background report for the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Book. Book 6: Transportation 1 BOOK 6:TRANSPORTATION Introduction The Transportation book addresses the multi-modal transportation system serving Arlington residents, workers, and visitors including roads, public transit, rail transportation, non-motorized facilities (bike lanes, multiuse trails, sidewalks, and crosswalks), and the Arlington Municipal Airport. This book also aims to support the 2024 Transportation Master Plan. The primary objective of the Transportation book is to ensure Arlington has a well- connected multi-modal system that offers safe and easy travel options that are accessible, build climate resiliency, and promote livability. The goals and policies established in the Transportation book are related to efficient and equitable services, environmental impacts, energy conservation, fewer vehicle miles traveled, walkability, concurrency, safety, connectivity, annexation, and coordination with other agencies. Book 6: Transportation 2 GOALS AND POLICIES T-1 Ensure capital facilities and utilities achieve efficient delivery of services, support equitable distribution of services, minimize environmental impacts, and maximize value for the community. T-1.1 Minimize and mitigate the adverse impacts of transportation facilities including culverts, bridges, or other road crossings on designated critical areas, resource lands, cultural resources, or parks through the implementation of performance standards and design guidelines in accordance with WDFW current Fish Passage, and WSDOT Cultural Resources and Archaeology guidelines. T-1.2 Develop the transportation system in a manner that encourages conservation of energy and natural resources, following a grid system where feasible and allowing meandering when necessary to avoid environmentally critical areas. T-1.3 Route new roads to avoid traversing areas identified as critical wildlife habitat or publicly owned natural preserves, parks, and recreation areas, except in cases of overriding public interest. T-1.4 Avoid building roads in areas prone to natural hazards including erosion. T-1.5 Reduce air pollution emissions associated with land use and transportation in accordance with national, state, regional, and local policies, and standards. Haller Railroad Bridge at the intersection of the North and South Forks of the Stillaguamish River (PC Deborah Nelson) Book 6: Transportation 3 T-2 Ensure the equity and availability of potential funding streams and provide transportation improvements consistent with the Capital Improvement Plan in prioritizing and financing. Prioritize programs and projects that provide access to opportunities while preventing or mitigating negative impacts to people of color, people with low incomes, and people with special transportation needs. T-2.1 Develop and charge a multimodal transportation impact fee for the purposes of building a transportation network that supports multiple travel operations. T-2.2 Update the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) annually as projects are completed and re-prioritized on an annual basis. T-2.3 Require developers to construct those streets directly serving new development and to pay a proportionate share of the costs for specific off- site improvements necessary to mitigate any adverse impacts determined through the review to be created by the development. T-2.4 Update transportation improvement cost estimates annually to determine appropriate shares from developers and users as established. T-2.5 Investigate alternative methods of obtaining financing for transportation improvements, including: local option taxes, bonding, Local Improvement Districts, combining efforts with other agencies, investigating possible grant and loan opportunities such as Safe Routes to School funding, federal grant programs and interlocal agreements for mitigation costs with Snohomish County. Centennial Trail intersection at 67th Ave NE and Lebanon Street Book 6: Transportation 4 T-2.6 If funding is unavailable, or if development is progressing beyond the ability to provide sufficient transportation facilities, the City should consider development moratoriums, as necessary, until the transportation facilities can be brought into alignment with approved LOS. T-3 Minimize the adverse impacts of industrial uses to adjacent and abutting residential properties. T-3.1 Sign and maintain Truck Route(s) and enforce their use. T-4 Ensure adequate utility, capital facility, and transportation services to accommodate businesses providing jobs, goods, and service. T-4.1 Maintain the existing and future transportation system through maintenance and preservation programs. T-4.2 Make transportation investments that improve economic and living conditions so that industries and skilled workers continue to be retained and attracted to Arlington. T-4.3 Coordinate planning and management of rail line and aviation systems and support capacity expansion that is compatible with state and regional plans and minimize health, air quality, and noise impacts. Book 6: Transportation 5 T-5 Develop transportation strategies that encourage the use of pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit facilities that will lead to savings of nonrenewable energy sources and reduce vehicle miles traveled. T-5.1 Encourage non-motorized travel by providing safe and efficient movement of bicycles and pedestrians along streets and highways through constructing sidewalks and other footpath systems as well as bicycle paths. T-5.2 Construct a multi-use trail network that connects the schools and downtown area with athletic fields/parks near the airport. T-5.3 Coordinate bicycle/pedestrian facility improvements, including the Centennial and Airport Trails, with neighboring jurisdictions to connect routes, where possible. T-5.4 Protect existing mass transit rights-of-way. T-5.5 Continue to coordinate with agencies and neighboring jurisdictions involved with public transportation to identify what works best for the City and participate in those ventures and proposals that benefit Arlington. T-5.6 Coordinate with surrounding communities to support public outreach efforts regarding transportation and land use strategies that encourage the use of public transportation. T-5.7 Continue to maintain the transit levels of service used by Community Transit. T-5.8 Develop pedestrian and bicycle level of service guidelines to assess completion of the established pedestrian and bicycle network in the Arlington Complete Streets Plan. Community Transit bus stop Book 6: Transportation 6 T-6 Implement Travel Demand Management and Transit Oriented Design to create a more walkable city. T-6.1 Encourage measures or facilities in both private and public development that support alternate modes of transportation, such as showers/dressing rooms, lockers, and secure bike parking. T-6.2 Develop a bicycle commuter strategy, involve local users of all levels to define all needs. T-6.3 Encourage transit-oriented development and multi modal planning in new developments through the permitting process. T-6.4 Encourage major employers to develop carpools, commuter routes, and provide company incentives if carpools are used. T-6.5 Encourage and plan for “pedestrian-scale” neighborhoods and centers to enhance access and mobility for active transportation users. T-6.6 Support the development of Mobility as a Service (MaaS) to provide a diverse menu of transport options, including public transportation, active modes such as walking and cycling, ride/ car/bike-sharing, ride-share services, etc. Crosswalk in Old Town Arlington Schematic of future Smokey Point Boulevard Corridor Project Book 6: Transportation 7 T-7 Create a resilient transportation system, minimize environmental impacts caused by the transportation system, and promote energy conservation by developing incentives and/or requirements for energy- saving transportation, land development patterns and practices, and building construction and operation methods and materials. T-7.1 Explore the feasibility of reducing the impervious surface used in right-of- ways, sidewalks, parking lots and roads by using new pervious materials (e.g., grasscrete, EssentialSoil, etc.). Applications of these technologies will be approved on a case-by-case basis by the City Engineer. T-7.2 Investigate modifications to detention requirements, including the use of innovative designs and/or materials that improve drainage. T-7.3 Use L.I.D techniques in lieu of conventional methods of stormwater treatment/control wherever possible and create programs to evaluate and maintain new L.I.D facilities. T-7.4 Strive to achieve silver certification using the Sustainable Transport Council’s “Greenroads” sustainability rating system for transportation improvement projects that exceed $500,000 in costs, where feasible and appropriate, apart from arterial resurfacing and sidewalk repair projects. T-7.5 Partner with Snohomish County and other local jurisdictions to promote public outreach related to pollution reduction programs including noise mitigation and energy conservation. T-7.6 Retrofit existing roadways to meet or exceed current stormwater requirements where possible. Book 6: Transportation 8 T-7.7 Meet and maintain federal and state air quality requirements by working with the state, regional and local agencies, or jurisdictions to develop transportation control measures and/or similar mobile source emission reduction programs T-7.8 Reduce the need for new capital improvements through investments in operations, pricing programs, demand management strategies, and system management activities that improve the operational and energy efficiency of existing transportation systems. T-7.9 Provide for the efficient movement of traffic through advanced traffic control measures, intelligent transportation system (ITS) technologies, speed management, access management, channelization improvements and multimodal design features. Use advanced technologies to better manage traffic volumes on major arterials and improve the efficiency and coordination of traffic signals. Aggressively pursue improvements to the state highways through or near Arlington. T-7.10 Require installation of electric vehicle charging facilities with new multifamily and commercial developments. T-7.11 Support the transition to a cleaner transportation system through investments in zero emission vehicles, low carbon fuels, and other clean energy options. T-7.12 Provide infrastructure sufficient to support widespread electrification of the transportation system. T-7.13 Advance the resilience of the transportation system by incorporating redundancies, preparing for disasters and other impacts, and coordinated planning for system recovery. Electric Vehicle charging stations Book 6: Transportation 9 T-7.14 Assess and plan for adaptive transportation responses to potential threats and hazards arising from climate change. T-8 Plan, develop, and maintain a balanced multimodal transportation system for the efficient movement of people, goods, and services within the City and between the community and other activity centers in the region. T-8.1 Ensure that safe, convenient, and efficient multimodal transportation facilities are provided for all residents and visitors to the City, including accessibility improvements to existing facilities as well as improvements to serve growth areas. T-8.2 Design the street system to enable walkability. Encourage alternatives to single-occupancy vehicle trips and distribute vehicle trips along appropriate corridors. T-8.3 Provide opportunities for public review and comment in significant transportation decision making activities. T-8.4 Implement the adopted Complete Streets Program to ensure that all transportation projects include safe and appropriate facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users accommodating persons of all ages and abilities. T-8.5 Maintain a safe, convenient, and efficient multimodal transportation system for people and freight that allows freight to support the continued growth in goods movement and the growing needs of global trade and state, regional and local distribution of goods and services. Bicycle sculpture in Legion Park Book 6: Transportation 10 T-8.6 Prepare for and be responsive to changes in transportation technologies and mobility patterns for people and goods, and encourage partnerships with the private sector, where applicable. T-8.7 Cooperate in efforts to acquire and/or purchase abandoned railroad right-of-way in order to preserve options for alternative transit corridors, such as commuter rail, and consider co-existing uses, such as freight rail, nonmotorized transportation, and recreational activities. T-9 Ensure concurrency by providing an effective multimodal transportation network with adequate capacity to meet the demand for travel within the City at the adopted Level of Service (LOS) standard. T-9.1 Ensure that all development permits require transportation improvements in accordance with Arlington’s ability to provide and/or maintain the adopted levels of service. Transportation dedications and improvements for projects that exceed the existing level of service shall be in place with the final approval of a subdivision or short plat or at the time of final building inspection for non- subdivision projects. In lieu of immediate installation of such improvements, and as a condition of permit approval by the City, a performance bond or other security mechanism may be provided by the developer guaranteeing installation within six years of final approval. BNSF Train at the Depot in Legion Park Book 6: Transportation 11 T-9.2 Traffic impacts of proposed projects shall be determined through project- provided impact assessment reports, which shall be required of every project for which the concurrency test must be applied. The City may waive this requirement where such impacts may be determined administratively and/or the project applicant agrees to mitigate any administratively determined impacts. T-9.3 Establish and adopt a multimodal concurrency program and level of service standards or guidelines. Prepare an annual report on concurrency for Arlington. T-9.4 Encourage the use of the railroad by ensuring easy access to railroad loading stations via City streets by both automobiles and trucks and by ensuring efficient travel of the railroad where it crosses City streets. T-10 Maintain and enhance the safety of the transportation system, including non-motorized networks, and reduce the chance of accidents. T-10.1 Maintain mapped inventory of the Arlington transportation system, traffic data such as traffic counts and accident data. Conduct studies to support operational and traffic safety improvements. T-10.2 Create a Local Roads Safety Plan to identify prevalent crash types and crash risk with corresponding recommended proven safety countermeasures and prioritize and implement safety improvements. T-10.3 Prioritize the maintenance of the multimodal transportation system according to condition, putting the facilities with poor condition as the highest priority. Book 6: Transportation 12 T-10.4 Prioritize sidewalk and shoulder improvements in areas of high traffic volumes or pedestrian activity to improve safety. T-11 Future growth in the City will be accommodated and served consistent with the PSRC Regional Growth Strategy. T-11.1 Focus transportation system improvements on connecting transportation centers and supporting existing and planned development consistent with future growth strategy. T-11.2 Prioritize multimodal transportation investments in centers and station areas. T-12 Coordinate the planning and implementation of the City’s multimodal transportation system with adjacent and regional jurisdictions and agencies. T-12.1 Work with WSDOT, Snohomish County and Marysville in planning transportation-related facilities within and adjacent to the UGA. T-12.2 Review impacts to the City created by the actions of other agencies. Actively solicit action by the State of Washington and Snohomish County to implement those improvements necessary to their respective facilities to maintain the level of service standards adopted by the City. T-12.3 Consider designating transportation service areas that provide the geographic basis for joint projects, maintenance, level of service methods, coordinated capital and mitigation programs and finance methods for transportation facilities and services. Roundabout at Hwy 530 and 59th Ave NE Book 6: Transportation 13 T-13 Consider the special needs of subarea transportation facilities including appearance and safety. T-13.1 Encourage the use and growth of the Arlington Airport by ensuring easy access to the Airport via City streets by both automobiles and trucks. T-13.2 Improving the appearance of existing corridors shall be a priority and primary objective in designing and maintaining the street system in Arlington. Appropriate design standards, including landscape requirements, for the construction of new streets shall be maintained. T-13.3 Consider adopting alternative road standards for built neighborhoods, where necessary, to preserve the character of neighborhoods and provide safe alternative modes of travel. T-14 Ensure new development and new services and facilities will arrive concurrently prior to the annexation of unincorporated Urban Growth Areas. T-14.1 Coordinate land use proposals and density of development identified in the Land Use Book of the Comprehensive Plan with transportation centers within the City to support and encourage the use of public transit. T-14.2 Encourage land use patterns that facilitate multi-purpose trips and reduce the number and length of trips by single-occupancy vehicles. Book 6: Transportation 14 T-15 Use “Vision Zero” and “Safe Routes to School” guidelines to provide safe walking and biking routes for our residents. T-15.1 Require new residential development to evaluate safe routes to school and provide walking routes, where safe walking routes do not exist. T-15.2 Encourage new development to provide pedestrian access from the development to parks, playgrounds, or other roads or facilities if such access is not conveniently provided by sidewalks adjacent to the streets. In such a case, the developer may be required to reserve an unobstructed easement of at least 10 feet in width to provide this access. T-16 Develop a transportation system that minimizes negative impacts to, and promotes, human health. T-16.1 Prioritize multimodal transportation projects that increase connectivity between commercial and residential areas and regional trails. T-16.2 Provide a trail system that creates links between commercial and residential areas in Arlington and connects to regional trails. Pedestrian crossing at Pioneer Elementary School Book 6: Transportation 15 Figure T-01. New Functional Classification Book 6: Transportation 16 Figure T-02. New Freight Routes Book 6: Transportation 17 Figure T-03. Non-Motorized Plan Book 6: Transportation 18 Figure T-04. Community Transit Stops and Routes Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 6: Transportation Supporting Analysis —November 2024 1 Book 6: Transportation Supporting Analysis Background information for the Transportation Book may be found in the document entitled “Transportation Master Plan”, set to be adopted in 2024, located in Appendix H. The Transportation Master Plan (TMP) includes existing conditions of roadways, public transportation, non-motorized facilities, air transportation, and freight transportation including truck routes and rail; projected future conditions as 2044; a transportation systems plan; a financing program and funding strategies to address project and program estimated costs; and a description of how the TMP is aligned with other agencies such as the Puget Sound Regional Council and the Washington State Department of Transportation. Two new recommendations of the TMP are for the City to adopt level of service standards for the non- motorized system and to implement a Adopt the Downtown Sidewalk program. The 2024 Arlington TMP is incorporated into the City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan by reference and therefore serves as the background report for the Transportation Book. Figure 1: Non-Motorized Plan Book 7: Public Safety 1 BOOK 7: PUBLIC SAFETY Introduction The Public Safety book addresses fire and emergency medical services, police protection, and hazards and emergency management with respect to natural, humanmade, and technological disasters. The primary objective of the Public Safety book is to identify the wide-ranging public services and resources that address public safety and ensure the basic needs of the City’s residents are met. The goals and policies established in the Public Safety book are related to social services, community resiliency, natural hazards, climate change, hazardous materials, safe neighborhoods, and a strong social network. Book 7: Public Safety 2 Goals and Policies PS-1 Provide services and coordinate with other agencies and organizations to support a safe and welcoming community and provide opportunities for access to social services that are accessible to all who need them. PS-1.1 Support non-profit organizations that provide funding for social services. PS-1.2 Continue to partner with Snohomish County Housing Authority to provide housing solutions in Arlington. PS-1.3 Address the needs of unhoused individuals in Arlington by supporting individual safety to those experiencing homelessness through the Arlington Police Department, working toward housing stability, and participating in a regional approach to address homelessness. PS-1.4 Connect low-income residents and those at risk of becoming homeless to service organizations. PS-1.5 Maintain the Community Outreach program and social workers funded by the City of Arlington. PS-1.6 Support retention and expansion of medical offices and ambulance and EMT services consistent with community needs. PS-1.7 Support and expand facilities that provide access to resources and programs for Veterans and seniors. See the Housing Book for more housing policies. Book 7: Public Safety 3 PS-2 Protect community members from hazards associated with critical areas and specific land uses. PS-2.1 Regularly review critical areas, including geologic hazards, as part of the development review process. Require consistent compliance with critical areas provisions. PS-2.2 Prohibit development on unstable land. PS-2.3 Require land uses surrounding the Arlington Airport to be compatible with the operation of the airport and restrict development of potentially hazardous obstructions or other hazards to flight. Prohibit uses that may impact airport operations or do not meet aviation standards. PS-3 Provide outreach and communications to support community preparedness, prevention, emergency response, mitigation, and recovery in an inclusive, equitable, compassionate, and efficient manner. PS-3.1 Maintain an emergency management plan. PS-3.2 Maintain an emergency preparedness and response network. PS-3.3 Cooperate and coordinate with public safety agencies on a continuous basis. PS-3.4 Coordinate city-provided services and support other agencies in preparing for the capability to respond to natural disasters in an immediate way. PS-3.5 Provide robust training and exercise program in emergency management response operations for City employees. PS-3.6 Provide public safety and emergency services, support other agencies providing public safety and emergency services, and maintain sufficient response times in alignment with growth and development. Book 7: Public Safety 4 PS-3.7 Use early warning notification systems to notify residents by wireless emergency alert of the need to evacuate in the event of an emergency. PS-3.8 Coordinate, design, and plan for public safety services and programs, including emergency management. PS-4 Provide support and education to Arlington residents related to the challenges of climate change to promote community resiliency. PS-4.1 Provide effective leadership, inclusive decision-making, stakeholder involvement, and planning integration when addressing community resilience. PS-4.2 Ensure residents have access to resources that will enable survival of extreme weather events and the changing climate. PS-4.3 Improve access to better indoor air quality to protect against smoke and wildfire. PS-4.4 Offer community training and outreach materials on emergency prevention, preparedness, and response to build capacity among residents to respond to an emergency. PS-4.5 Strengthen programs that seek to minimize storm-induced flooding hazards. See related policies in the Capital Facilities and Environment Books regarding flood reduction. City workers clearing snow from the Legion Park parking lot Book 7: Public Safety 5 PS-5 Minimize the risk to life and property caused by fires, floods, and geologic hazards. PS-5.1 Locate critical facilities and utilities in a way that minimizes exposure to hazards. PS-5.2 Implement and enforce fire and building codes. PS-5.3 Manage vegetation and the urban forest in compliance with the Wildland Urban Interface code to reduce combustible load, erosion, and other fire risks exacerbated by climate change. PS-5.4 Continue to be in full compliance and good standing under the National Flood Insurance Program. PS-5.5 Provide surface water management planning and related GIS analysis and stormwater modeling to reduce and minimize flooding risks and provide information to customers in emergency situations. PS-5.6 Provide surface water management planning and related GIS analysis and stormwater modeling to reduce and minimize flooding risks. PS-5.7 Implement and enforce regulations to minimize seismically related structural hazards in new and existing buildings. PS-5.8 Work with other public agencies to reduce potential damage from earthquakes to “lifeline” utility, economic, and transportation systems. PS-5.9 Provide funding for agencies minimizing the risk to life and property in Arlington, including but not limited to the Arlington Police, EMT, and fire department services. See related policies in the Environment Book regarding natural hazards. Flooding in Island Crossing Book 7: Public Safety 6 PS-6 Minimize health and safety impacts related to the use, storage, manufacture, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials. PS-6.1 Review proposed facilities that would produce or store hazardous materials, gas, natural gas, or other fuels. Identify, and require feasible mitigation for, any significant risks. PS-6.2 Plan to prevent industrial and transportation accidents involving hazardous materials, and enhance the City’s capacity to respond to such incidents PS-6.3 Through enforcement of standard conditions of approval and relevant code provisions, ensure buildings and sites are or have been investigated for the presence of hazardous materials and/or waste contamination before development. If there is reason to believe an existing building or site may contain hazardous materials that pose a threat to possible users. PS-6.4 Promote responsible energy use and energy facilities that do not significantly affect public safety or the natural environment. Book 7: Public Safety 7 PS-7 Deliver police services in a manner consistent with the values of the community members of Arlington. PS-7.1 Annually review the Level of Service (LOS) provided by the Arlington Police Department. PS-7.2 Deliver police services in a professional, timely, objective, and impartial manner. PS-7.3 Interact respectfully with everyone, using force only per Arlington Police Department policy. PS-7.4 Maintain a police department environment that is open, accessible, responsive, and seeks feedback in a way that is beneficial to Arlington residents, workers, and visitors. PS-7.5 Emphasize the need for the police force to have positive, day-to-day interactions with the public that encourage collaboration on problem- solving, rather than responding only to crises. PS-7.6 Work with social services agencies and providers to explore potential mutual strategies to address social problems. PS-7.7 Set benchmarks to not only reduce violence and the incidence of crimes but to increase the sense of security throughout the city. City of Arlington Police Department vehicles Book 7: Public Safety 8 PS-8 Foster safety and community involvement in all Arlington neighborhoods. PS-8.1 Create a Community Liaison position which would manage discussions between the City residents, community representatives, and homeowner associations, to build trust, increase transparency, and give weight to community concerns. PS-8.2 Apply Crime Prevention through Environmental Design principles in the design of new development as identified in the National Crime Prevention Council’s Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Guidebook. PS-8.3 Work with Arlington Public Schools to support schools as safe places for students, teachers, staff, and visitors and as places where all youth can experience success in education and preparation for future productive lives. PS-8.4 Encourage the development of partnerships among the City, schools, social services providers, and others to address the needs of children and families. PS-8.5 Maintain the School Resource Officer in Arlington Public Schools to build relationships with students and be available during emergency situations. PS-8.6 Identify high-risk accident locations and develop countermeasure strategies to improve the safety at these locations as funding allows. PS-8.7 Investigate and mitigate community-driven safety traffic concerns. PS-8.8 Provide local safety improvements and traffic-calming measures. Fun activities at the Police Department Bike Rodeo Book 7: Public Safety 9 See related policies in the Land Use and Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Books for more information about recreational and community facilities. See related policies in the Transportation Book regarding multi-modal transportation. PS-9 Create and support strong, vibrant social networks. Provide a public realm including parks, trails, and recreation facilities that promotes social interaction and community cohesiveness. PS-9.1 Identify, enhance, and create safe, inviting, and accessible venues, parks, recreational facilities, and community places that encourage beneficial social interaction and community cohesiveness. PS-9.2 Provide walkable and bikeable streets, as well as trail systems, to encourage active transportation to and from daily origins and destinations while promoting healthy, active lifestyles. PS-9.3 Build neighborhood identity and improve communication between residents and the City. PS-9.4 Bring community members, organizations, and neighborhoods together to support events and activities which provide opportunities to improve communication of community resources. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —November 2024 1 Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis Introduction The Public Safety Book addresses fire and emergency medical services, police protection, and hazards and emergency management with respect to natural, humanmade, and technological disasters. The City of Arlington (City) seeks to protect the citizens of Arlington and enhance their quality of life by providing professional and progressive services. The Police Department provides Arlington citizens protection from criminal activity through identification and apprehension of offenders, detection of crime, and crime prevention programs. The Fire department provides fire suppression, rescue, emergency medical care, and hazardous materials response. The Fire department also administers fire safety inspections and education programs aimed at reducing fire and medical emergencies. The Emergency Operations Plan is currently being developed to prepare the community for emergencies, prevent an emergency or reduce the damaging effects of an emergency through mitigation measures, respond to emergencies, and recover from emergencies. Arlington’s level of service for police, fire, and emergency medical services has generally been adequate as new growth and development have occurred. Arlington can maintain its level of service and accommodate growth with appropriate planning, adequate funding, and coordination. Individual service providers prepare for the future based on assumptions of growth from the Land Use and Housing Books of the Comprehensive Plan. The Public Safety Book supports the provision of adequate public safety services. This includes supporting existing and future development and the correction and prevention of any existing deficiencies to ensure a sense of security. The policies in this Book lay out the equitable, efficient, timely, and adaptive management approaches that are needed to protect all members of the Arlington community. This Book is interconnected with the Environment (Book 1), Land Use, (Book 2), Housing (Book 3), and Capital Facilities Books (Book 9). The Environment Book contains deeper context around the environmental setting of Arlington, climate change, and resiliency, all of which influence natural disasters. The Land Use and Housing Books designate future population growth, the proposed distribution and extent of land uses (including housing), and population and building densities which will impact the services discussed in this Book. The Capital Facilities Book reviews the capacity of existing capital facilities and forecasts a need for future facilities, including those for police, fire, and emergency services. The purpose of this Book is not to discuss capital facilities although supporting analysis is found here. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 2 Background There are several regulations, policies, and agreements that dictate elements of the public safety Book and allow the City to mitigate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from an emergency, disaster, or other event. An emergency is any occasion or instance that warrants action to save lives and to protect property, public health, and safety, such as during a hurricane, tornado, storm, flood, tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, mudslide, snowstorm, fire, explosion, nuclear accident, or any other natural or humanmade catastrophe.1 According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) a disaster is “an occurrence of a natural catastrophe, technological accident, or human-caused event that has resulted in severe property damage, deaths, and/or multiple injuries.”2 A large-scale disaster is a disaster that exceeds the capacity of a local jurisdiction to respond and requires involvement of the State and potentially the federal government. A major disaster, as defined by the Stafford Act, is “any natural catastrophe [...] or, regardless of cause, any fire, flood, or explosion, in any part of the United States, which in the determination of the President causes damage of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant major disaster assistance under [the] Act to supplement the efforts and available resources or States, local governments, and disaster relief organizations in alleviating the damage, loss, hardship, or suffering caused thereby.” Federal Planning Snohomish County’s Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP), which covers the City of Arlington, must be regularly updated to comply with the Disaster Mitigation Act (DMA). The DMA and Stafford Act mandate advanced planning for mitigation efforts. The Stafford Act provides the authority for most federal disaster response activities. The Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 amended the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act), creating the framework for governments (state, local, tribal and territorial) to engage in hazard mitigation planning to receive certain types of non-emergency disaster assistance. Snohomish County’s HMP was most recently updated in 2020 to comply with the DMA and is discussed in the Countywide Planning section below. The City is a participant of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) which provides flood insurance to reduce the socio-economic impact of floods. When the City joined the NFIP program, the City was required to adopt and enforce floodplain management regulations that help mitigate flooding effects. More information can be found in the Flood section. The City of Arlington and the Emergency Management Division of the Washington Military Department (Military) have a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which allows the Military to use the Arlington Airport as necessary for a State Staging Area for emergency or disaster preparation, response, and 1 https://www.fema.gov/pdf/plan/glo.pdf 2 https://www.fema.gov/pdf/plan/glo.pdf Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 3 recovery activities. The Staging Area would be needed for managing life sustaining commodities, including water, food, generators, and more. The current MOU is valid through 2028. State Planning There are few State-level requirements that guide the City’s public safety program. The State requires the following per RW.35.103.010.3 The legislature intends for city fire departments to set standards for addressing the reporting and accountability of substantially career fire departments, and to specify performance measures applicable to response time objectives for certain major services. The North County Fire Authority’s response time objectives can be found in the Fire and Emergency Medical Services section below. In addition, the Washington Emergency Management Division encourages multi-jurisdictional hazard mitigation planning. Snohomish County has led these efforts with respect to the City of Arlington. More information can be found in the Countywide Planning section below. Regional Planning When the City of Arlington faces an emergency and the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) is activated, the Emergency Management team will work with appropriate City departments, the Arlington School District, Cascade Hospital as well as various county, state, and federal agencies to respond effectively and quickly to provide for the continuity of services to the public. Countywide Planning Snohomish County Department of Emergency Management (DEM) provides emergency management services through an inter-local agreement to the City of Arlington. Snohomish County follows the National Preparedness Goal’s five mission areas: prevention, protection, mitigation, response, and recovery. Table 1 outlines the ways in which the County addresses these five mission areas. 3 https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=35.103&full=true Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 4 Table 1 National Preparedness Goal Mission Areas Addressed by Snohomish County  Complex- Coordinated Terrorist Attacks  Crisis Communications Plans  Strategic Plan  Community Outreach and Education  Crisis Communications Plans  Training and Exercise Planning  Hazard Mitigation Plan  Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan  Incident Annexes and Department and Emergency Support Function Specific Operational Plans  Recovery Framework Snohomish County has identified the following priorities during an emergency:  To protect lives  To protect private and government property  To protect the environment  To preserve the economy The Snohomish County Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (HIRA) identifies the County’s hazards, their potential, and their estimated consequences. The HIRA includes impacts to residents, buildings and infrastructure, the economy, and the natural environment. The HIRA identifies those hazards the County is at risk for as the basis for an all-hazards approach to preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery. Snohomish County DEM is compliant with the Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) and the four corresponding performance requirements:4  Conduct an annual Training and Exercise Planning Workshop and maintain a Multiyear Training and Exercise Plan.  Plan and conduct exercises in accordance with the HSEEP guidelines.  Develop After Action Report/Improvement Plans (AAR/IP).  Track and implement corrective actions identified in the AAR/IP. The City of Arlington is a participating jurisdiction in Snohomish County’s 2020 Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP). The HMP is in compliance with the Stafford Act and the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000. The HMP 4 Snohomish County. (December 2019). Snohomish County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP). Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 5 identifies resources, information, and strategies for reducing risk from natural hazards and guides and coordinates mitigation activities throughout Snohomish County. The City of Arlington is also a participating jurisdiction in Snohomish County’s Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP).5 As a participating jurisdiction the City receives mitigation, preparedness, planning, training, exercises, and recovery programs and assistance. The CEMP establishes an all-hazards framework for the County to manage emergencies and disasters. The emergency management activities coordinated by the County’s Department of Emergency Management cover the City of Arlington. The CEMP identifies actions, responsible parties, and resources to address mitigation, preparedness, the emergency response, and initial recovery activities. City of Arlington Planning The City of Arlington, through the combined efforts of its many departments and public and private partnerships, seeks to protect the citizens of Arlington and enhance their quality of life. The City provides professional and progressive Emergency Management Services in the event of a catastrophic incident within the City of Arlington. The City of Arlington is planning to develop an Emergency Operations Plan. The City’s regulations reduce the likelihood of an emergency by adopting the following by reference:  Floodplain Management Regulations  International Building Code  International Fire Code  International Plumbing Code  International Mechanical Code  International Property Maintenance Code  International Residential Code  International Existing Building Code  International Code Council Performance Code Existing Conditions Fire and Emergency Medical Services During the February 9, 2021 Special Election, voters overwhelmingly approved annexing the Arlington Fire Department to North County Regional Fire Authority (NCFA). As of August 2021, the NCFA provides fire and emergency medical services to the City of Arlington. NCFA has five divisions: Operations, Emergency Medical Services, Community Risk Reduction/Fire Marshal/Fire Prevention, Logistics, and Training Center. These divisions provide the following services:6  Fire Suppression 5 Snohomish County. (December 2019). Snohomish County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP). 6 North County Regional Fire Authority 2022 Annual Report Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 6  Basic Life Support (BLS) Emergency Medical Services and Transport  Advanced Life Support (ALS) Emergency Medical Services and Transport  Hazardous Materials "Operations Level" by all staff, with 6 Technician level members  Fire Prevention, Inspections, and Plan Review  Public Education  Wildland Firefighting  Rescue Swimmer  Community Resource Paramedic The Operations division provides emergency response and incident management for fires, rescues, medical emergencies, hazardous materials incidents, and disasters. The Emergency Medical Services division provides both BLS and ALS. The Community Risk Reduction/Fire Marshal/Fire Prevention division aims to minimize the probability and severity of occurrence of fire, natural disasters, and humanmade disasters. The Logistics department provides fire suppression, rescue, and medical response services. The Training Center division manages a Firefighter Training Center. While the Firefighter Training Center is not yet complete, members were able to complete a significant amount of training in 2022, the first year as a merged entity. The Washington Survey and Rating Bureau requires 120 hours of category-specific training per member to be accredited. The training program includes emergency medical services, fire, rescue, administrative, and other categories. All members completed well above the required training. Members completed a total of 37,651 hours of training in 2022, an average of 409 hours per member. Participants received training on ventilation, driving, aerial placement, and other specialized techniques. There are also several community programs operated by NCFA including the following:  North County Community Emergency Response Team (NC CERT)  Fire Explorers Post 697  Address Signs  First Aid/CPR Classes  Station Tours  Blood Pressure Checks The NC CERT program is a growing group of volunteers in the Arlington-Stanwood area that have received FEMA-approved hands-on training to help the community in the event of a disaster. This training teaches volunteers disaster preparedness, building safety after a natural disaster, search and rescue, fire suppression, medical triage, first-aid, and team organization. If the capacity of NCFA has been exceeded or there is an obstruction and professional first responders are not the first on the scene the NC CERT volunteers have been trained to ensure non-professional response is as safe and effective as possible. While there are 5 staffed fire stations that NCFA operates, two are in the City of Arlington, Station 46 and 48. Station 46 is located in downtown Arlington and has a medic unit, an engine, and a brush truck (a wildland suppression engine). Station 48 is located at the Arlington Airport and has a medic unit, ladder, and aid unit. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 7 Figure 1 North County Regional Fire Authority Stations NCFA has adopted response time standards throughout the region they serve. The adopted response times for the City of Arlington can be seen in Table 2 and Table 3. Response times are a combination of the turn out time and the travel time. Turn out time is the time from when the unit is dispatched to when the crew has the appropriate gear on and are in the vehicle to respond. Travel time is the time from when the vehicle starts moving to when it arrives at the destination. NCFA must meet these response times 50% of the time but strives to meet the objectives 90% of the time. Table 2 North County Fire Authority Response Time Standards 7 Turn Out Time Whole Department 2:00 Travel Time 1st Arriving Engine City of Arlington 8:00 Travel Time 1st EMTs City of Arlington 6:00 7 North County Regional Fire Authority 2022 Annual Report Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 8 Adopted Response Time Objectives Response Area Minutes Travel Time 1st Paramedic City of Arlington 6:00 Travel Time 1st HazMat Technician City of Arlington 10:00 Travel Time Marine Rescue Whole Department 15:00 Table 3 North County Fire Authority 2022 Response Times Standards for Urban Areas* Fire 1:59 4:30 6:25 EMS 1:14 4:20 5:29 HazMat 1:14 3:59 5:13 *Urban Areas consist of the City of Arlington and the City of Stanwood NCFA is funded through tax levies based on assessed property value, one for fire and one for EMS. As the calls for NCFA increase, the cost for personnel, equipment, fuels, maintenance, and medical supplies increases.8 However, NCFA is limited to a one percent revenue increase per year (less than inflation).9 Over time, levy rates drop as property values rise to limit NCFA to a set amount of revenue each year plus a one percent increase allowed by state law (or any other voter-approved increase). Even if property values double, NCFA can only collect one percent more. This is called “levy compression” and impacts a fire authority’s ability to provide emergency services. On August 1, 2023 a primary election ballot asked voters for an EMS levy lid lift.10 EMS is NCFA’s most used service, accounting for 86% of emergency calls. If passed, the levy lid lift would support an additional six firefighter/EMTs or firefighter/paramedics per shift to provide an additional transport unit and full-time staffing at Station 96 in Freeborn. It would also replace three ambulances and fund local training programs. NCFA developed a 2019-2024 strategic plan in response to an increase in demand. However, NCFA did not start serving the City of Arlington until 2021, so this strategic plan does not address the City. One of the challenges identified in the 2022 Annual Report are large wildland fires. NCFA has 3 brush trucks that are available for wildland fires. The brush trucks are smaller than standard fire engines to allow for access to remote terrain. In 2022, NCFA responded to 44 calls to extinguish wildland fires within 8 https://www.northcountyfireems.com/about-us/strategic-plan/strategic-plan 9 https://www.northcountyfireems.com/home/showpublisheddocument/1260/638248380392330000 10 https://www.northcountyfireems.com/home/showpublisheddocument/1134/638188754520670000 Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 9 the response area. NCFA also responded to 2 state mobilizations, totaling 21 days of deployment and 17,966 acres of wildland fires. The current edition of the International Fire Code is adopted by reference as the City’s fire code. This includes the following chapters of the International Fire Code’s appendix: B, E F, G, H, I, J and K. The International Fire Code is published by the International Code Council as set forth in Washington Administrative Code Chapter 51-54. It is then adopted by the state building code council under the provisions of RCW 19.27. Police The Arlington Police Department’s mission is to, in partnership with the community, provide exceptional law enforcement services 24 hours a day to improve the quality of life in Arlington. The Police Department is responsible for law enforcement patrol, parking enforcement, and traffic enforcement. Services include complaint response, investigations, school safety, and records and evidence control. The department also offers a social worker program, bicycle registration program, fingerprinting services, and concealed pistol licenses. The Arlington Police Department is guided by the following five core values: • Teamwork - Setting aside individual motivations to serve the common purpose of community safety. • Respect - Enforcing the law courteously and appropriately without fear or favor, malice or ill will. • Integrity - Our decisions and actions are based on trust and honesty. • Professionalism - Our sense of duty to conduct ourselves to the highest level of competence and character. • Innovation - To better protect our community, deter and solve crime, while keeping pace with expectations to meet the level of complexity of future threats. Level of Service standards for police services include the following performance goals: Table 4 11 Crime Rate per 1000 pop. Crime Clearance Rate % Emergency Response Time in Minutes Events per Officer per Year The Arlington Police Department has 37 total personnel. The organization of the department is shown below in Figure 2 12. 11 11 (arlingtonwa.gov) 12 arlingtonwa.gov/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/176 Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 10 The Patrol Division is the largest division in the department, headed by the Operations Lieutenant who oversees 4 patrol sergeants, 16 patrol officers, and 2 Canine (K9) teams. The Patrol Division is responsible for handling 911 calls for service, traffic enforcement, and pro-active crime prevention in the city. Theft is the number one reported crime in the City with double the amount of theft incidents than any other crime (Figure 3 13). There were 690 traffic collisions reported in 2022, up 4% since 2018 (Figure 4 14). 13 arlingtonwa.gov/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/176 14 arlingtonwa.gov/ArchiveCenter/ViewFile/Item/176 Figure 2 - Arlington Police Department Organizational Chart Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 11 2022, Arlington Police Department adopted and implemented a new training program, Vector Solutions, to improve the administration, management, and efficiency of trainings for staff. The implementation and transition of this new training system was a significant undertaking to modernize the agency. The adoption and implementation of this system was necessary to meet the expanded training standards and requirements for Peace Officers in the State of Washington. The project has continued into 2023 with creation and utilization of the Department’s Field Training Program in Vector, as well as processing all historical training records for active staff members from 2021 and before. In 2022, Arlington Police Department’s staff received a total of 4,323 training hours. 2,136 of those hours were “required” training consisting of 696 “In-Service” hours and 1,440 Basic Law Enforcement Academy training hours. Arlington Police Department also invested a total of 2,187 hours of Professional Development training into staff members, accounting for 51% of all training for the year. The Embedded Social Worker Program is an important resource within the City of Arlington Police Department to effectively focus on issues related to homelessness, substance addiction and mental health that are interrelated. This is a Co-Response Team that involves one full time City of Arlington Police Officer and one full time Social Worker. This outreach team is visible and pro-active within the community. The team takes both an outreach and enforcement role to address identified problems. They work collaboratively with City of Arlington, local, and state services. During the 2022 period the team tracked the following data:  28 homeless persons housed  530 camp, car, park, business checks  444 contacts  133 new clients  147 enforcements related to trespass, parking, camping, other arrests\  160 transports to required services Figure 3 - Crime Statistics 4 - Traffic Collisions Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 12 The Arlington Police Department also utilizes a Mobile Integrated Health (MIH) program. The goal of MIH is to reduce the over-utilization of emergency services by addressing the root cause of the issues leading to consistent 911 calls. The Arlington Police Department works with the Center for Justice Social Work to assist community members in need of behavioral health or social supports. In 2020, the City received $750,000 to integrate a two-year pilot program to demonstrate how providing integrated social services to community members can decrease the use of 911 emergency calls for non-emergent requests. February 2022 reports show that 50 clients were served, 41 new referrals were made, and 222 services were provided, including therapeutic intervention, assessments of needs, planning with clients, coordination of care, home visit, and advocating for clients. Hazards & Emergency Management The City of Arlington is a participating jurisdiction in Snohomish County’s Hazard Mitigation Plan. Snohomish County (County) has ranked the probability of select hazard events occurring in Arlington, seen in Table 5.15 Table 5 Hazard Probability, Exposure, and Vulnerability Natural Hazards Earthquake High May cause building damage, infrastructure damage to transportation, water supply and sewer systems, and physical and emotional threat to humans. Flood High Major flooding impacts Arlington directly and indirectly through inundation of property as well as transportation interruptions. Potential to impact Haller Well field. Precipitation and flooding events are increasing in magnitude due to climate change. Mass Earth Movement High Damage can be site specific or adjacent to a location that can cause direct harm or indirect harm to municipal services such as water, sewer, transportation. Areas most susceptible to this occurring would be along Burn Road, Tveit Road, and properties located within the East Hill area. Tsunami Low Pending creation of County mapping (CW35) damage is unknown but may occur along the river channel at Island Crossing. Volcanic Hazard Low The main threat from lahar would be impacts to the Haller Well field, Water Reclamation plant, and 15 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/78297/SnoCo_HMP_Volume- 2_09302020_Final?bidId= Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 13 Human life impacts should be limited due to ample notification. Weather Events High Wind, rain or snow all present physical destruction and flooding hazards depending on the magnitude of the event. Wildfire High Due to climate change, there is potential for urban wildfires to impact structures, potentially first within the mapped low to moderate hazard zones. Wildfire is also a threat due to increased temperatures and temporal changes to frequency of precipitation events. Threats are to human, wildlife and fish depending on Natural Resources, limited snowpack, and local weather conditions. Each year, human-caused fires damage on average more than 4,000 acres of state-protected lands in Washington. As Arlington becomes more urbanized, hardscapes are replacing areas where natural fuels once existed, reducing the potential for widespread wildfire. Humanmade Hazards Aircraft Accident Medium Dam Failure Low No dams exist within the riverine systems that would affect Arlington. Epidemic High All of Arlington is potentially exposed to human health hazards and epidemics. COVID-19 is an excellent example of this. Technological Hazards Cybersecurity Incident Medium Hazardous Materials High Accidental releases of petroleum, toxic chemicals, gases, and other hazardous materials occur frequently throughout Snohomish County. They occur on transportation corridors that include highways, railroads, air/flight paths, pipelines, and navigable waterways. The likelihood of this becoming more prevalent may increase as the Cascade Industrial Center continues to expand. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 14 The County also did an assessment of critical infrastructure and facilities exposed to hazards. Table 6 indicates which critical infrastructures and facilities are at risk of natural hazards based on best-available data. Figure 5 displays where the critical infrastructures and facilities are located in Arlington. Table 6 Critical Infrastructures and Facilities Exposed to Hazards Infrastructures Infrastructures Airport 2 2 2 Bridge 2 1 2 1 Fire/Emergency Medical Services Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 15 Figure 5 Critical Infrastructures and Facilities 16 The City of Arlington must be prepared for a significant emergency or region-wide disaster and be able to respond using only those resources located within the City in the most efficient manner. A disaster or emergency could cause the City to be isolated for a period of several days and exist solely on its own resources. Because of this possibility, the City is planning to develop an emergency operations plan, which will address roles, responsibilities, and procedures to be followed in the case of an emergency. According to the County’s CEMP “training and exercises are conducted using the HSEEP process to regularly test planning and preparedness efforts”.17 Snohomish County’s Training and Exercise Plan forecasts training needed to support emergency management. Natural Hazards Unlike in many other parts of the United States, the risk of natural disasters is relatively low in the Arlington area. Tornados, hurricanes, extreme freezes, blizzards, locust infestation, debilitating heat 16 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/78297/SnoCo_HMP_Volume- 2_09302020_Final?bidId= 17 P. 7 of CEMP Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 16 waves and pestilence are unknown in the region. However, the below listed natural events do have various probabilities of occurring. Snohomish County’s Hazard Mitigation Plan lists Arlington’s severe event history, seen in Table 7.18 Table 7 Severe Hazard Event History (if applicable) Assessment (if Severe Winter Storm 4418/DR December 2018 Severe Storm 4249/DR November 2015 Severe Windstorm 4242/DR August 2015 Oso Slide Support March 2014 Severe Winter Storm 1825/DR 2012 FEMA assistance $250 Severe Winter Storm 1825/DR 2012 FEMA assistance $111,048 Severe Winter Storm 1817/DR January 2009 $96,323 Severe Winter Storm 1825/DR December 2008 $239,256 Severe Storm 1671/DR November 2006 $2,700 Windstorm N/A January 2003 $30,000 Flood/Landslide 1172/DR March 1997 $160,247 Flood 896/DR March 1990 $168,948 Flood The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has defined areas showing the extent of the 100- year flood boundary to establish actuarial flood insurance rates and assist communities in efforts to promote sound flood plain management. Development on flood plains impedes their ability to absorb water, restricts the flow of water, and causes hazards downstream by causing higher water and creating flood debris. FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) were most recently updated in and around Arlington in 2020. The FIRM show only one 100-year floodplain within the City, that being along the Stillaguamish River and 18 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/78297/SnoCo_HMP_Volume- 2_09302020_Final?bidId= Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 17 generally defined by the toe of the slope of the plateau surrounding the Stillaguamish Valley (though there are some areas of the valley that are high enough to be out of the floodplain). Generally, only small portions of the City limits extend into this area, as they are parts of parcels mainly on the upper plateau. There is a large 110-acre portion of the City referred to as Island Crossing that is located in the 100-year floodplain. Not being listed on the FIRM does not mean that some of the smaller creeks running through town couldn’t also experience flooding during 100-year (or lesser or greater) storm events: FEMA just doesn’t map these smaller areas. The City may require landowners to perform additional modeling of anticipated flood impacts for project proposals in the floodplain. All development permits are reviewed for potential flooding hazards at the time of development permit application review. Additionally, the City's Environmentally Critical Area regulations and flood prevention regulations prohibit most types of development within the 100-year floodway, allowing only those types of uses that are non-impactive. The National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is administered by FEMA, which works with private insurance companies to offer flood insurance to property owners and renters. In order to qualify for flood insurance, a community must join the NFIP and agree to enforce sound floodplain management standards. The City of Arlington has been a participant of the National Flood Insurance Rate Program since 1983.19 Anyone in a community that participates in the NFIP, including Arlington, can purchase flood insurance. According to the HMP there are no FEMA identified repetitive flood loss properties, severe repetitive loss properties, or repetitive loss properties that have been mitigated. As seen in Table 7, however, several floods caused damage in the City in the 1900s. Earthquake An earthquake is shaking of the ground caused by an abrupt shift of rock along a fracture in the earth or a contact zone between tectonic plates. An earthquake results from sudden stress changes in the earth due to the slip of a fault, or volcanic activity, and the resulting ground shaking and radiated seismic energy.20 Earthquakes can last from a few seconds to over five minutes; they may also occur as a series of tremors over a period of several days. The City of Arlington is at high risk for experiencing an earthquake. Residents should be prepared for the occurrence of an earthquake, which the area has experienced as recently as 2001 (6.8 on the Richter scale). Recent studies suggest that magnitude 8 earthquakes or greater have occurred in the region and that similar events are possible.21 Earthquakes in the Puget Sound region could result from crustal, shallow earthquakes, the Cascadia Subduction Zone, or deep earthquakes, as seen in Figure 6. 19 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/78297/SnoCo_HMP_Volume- 2_09302020_Final?bidId= 20 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/78298/SnoCo_HMP_Voume- 1_09302020_Final?bidId= 21 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/78298/SnoCo_HMP_Voume- 1_09302020_Final?bidId= Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 18 Figure 6 Earthquake Types in Western Washington State 22 Today's building code considers this risk in its requirements. There is currently no reliable way to predict the day or month that an earthquake will occur at any given location. Therefore, every household should practice an earthquake response plan. Landslides A landslide is the sliding movement of masses of loosened rock and soil down a hillside or slope. In general, landslide hazard areas are where the land has characteristics that contribute to the risk of the downhill movement of material, such as:  Steep slopes (greater than 33 percent)  A history of landslide activity  Water activity that has caused erosion or cut into a bank that causes surrounding land to be unstable  Presence of an alluvial fan  Presence of impermeable soils, such as silt or clay, which are mixed with granular soils, like sand and gravel Arlington is at high risk for mass earth movements, including landslides. The nearest landslide that caused a FEMA disaster declaration was the 2014 Oso landslide. This landslide is the only known landslide known to have caused fatalities in Snohomish County. 22 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/78298/SnoCo_HMP_Voume- 1_09302020_Final?bidId= Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 19 Severe Weather Snohomish County’s HMP defines severe weather as “dangerous meteorological or hydro-meteorological phenomena of varying duration with risk of causing major damage, serious social disruption, and loss of human life, and requiring measures for minimizing loss, mitigation, and avoidance.”23 Severe weather can include severe thunderstorms, flash floods, damaging winds, extreme heat, large hail, and winter storms. Low-lying areas, like near rivers and streams, are more susceptible to flooding and wind events are most damaging to areas that are heavily wooded. Predicting the frequency of severe weather events in a constantly changing climate is a difficult task. Weather events are considered high risk in Arlington with wind, rain or snow all presenting physical destruction and flooding hazards depending on the magnitude of the event. Volcanoes Glacier Peak, at 10,541 feet, is a stratovolcano located roughly 45 air miles east of Arlington. Glacier Peak has produced larger and more explosive eruptions than any other volcano in Washington. It is thought to have erupted as recently as the eighteenth century.24 Glacier Peak’s most eruptive periods were between 6,000 - 13,000 years ago, the debris caused by the eruptions flowed down the Stillaguamish channel to at least Arlington and I-5. Its biggest explosion was about 12,500 years ago, when it discharged debris four to five times as massive as the Mount St. Helens eruption in 1980. In fact, a debris dam created by the eruption caused the White Chuck and Suiattle rivers to change course from the Stillaguamish to the Sauk at Darrington. Lahars are one of the greatest hazards associated with volcanoes such as Glacier Peak. A lahar is a type of mudflow and debris flow often corresponding with a volcanic eruption. They can travel great distances, placing people living in valleys draining the volcano at risk.25 As seen in Figure 7, Arlington is within the lahar path for Glacier Peak. It is unlikely that Arlington would be at risk of ashfall from a Glacier Peak eruption due to prevailing winds blowing toward the east. However, if winds blow westward, heavy ashfall could be possible. That said, Arlington falls within the ashfall hazard zone for Mount St Helens. Therefore, another Mount St. Helens eruption could affect the City. 23 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/78298/SnoCo_HMP_Voume- 1_09302020_Final?bidId= 24 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/78297/SnoCo_HMP_Volume- 2_09302020_Final?bidId= 25 https://www.dnr.wa.gov/publications/ger_washington_geology_2000_v28_no1-2.pdf Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 20 Figure 7 Simplified Hazard Map for Glacier Peak 26 Wildfire A wildfire is any uncontrolled fire that involves vegetative fuels that occurs in the wildland or wildland- urban interface areas (WUI). WUI areas are areas where wildland vegetation meets urban and suburban development. Arlington falls within the WUI, the greatest potential danger zone (Figure 8). However, according to Snohomish County’s Wildfire Hazard Map, the City of Arlington is largely in the lowest wildfire risk zone (Figure 9). A fire’s behavior is dependent on fuel, weather, and terrain. Fire season in Snohomish County typically begins in May and continues to September or October. However, this season can be extended depending on local conditions including drought, snowpack, and high winds. As a result of these conditions, there have been wildfires every month of the year and climate change is expected to contribute to more frequent and/or more severe fires. Wildfires pose a considerable risk to wildlife habitats and result in the destruction of forests, brush, field crops, grasslands, and property. The most at risk of significant damage to property and life are WUI areas. Wildfires can also lead to other concerns such as landslides, flooding, contamination of reservoirs, 26 https://www.dnr.wa.gov/programs-and-services/geology/geologic-hazards/volcanoes-and- lahars#washington-volcanoes.2 Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 21 damaged fisheries, erosion, spread of invasive plans, disease and insect infestations of forests, destruction of habitat for endangered species, and soil sterilization. Smoke and air pollution from fires can be a health hazard, particularly for children, the elderly, those with respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, and other sensitive populations. Wildfires are typically caused by human activity, therefore it is not possible to predict when one may occur. Factors that contribute to naturally-caused fires include lightning, warm temperatures, low humidity, and stronger winds. These conditions can be tracked and warnings can be issued. Reliable National Weather Service lightning warnings are available on average 24 to 48 hours before a significant electrical storm and the National Weather Service can issue a red flag warning when conditions are ideal for wildfires. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 22 Figure 8 Wildland-Urban Interface Areas Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 23 Figure 9 Snohomish County Wildfire Hazard Map Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 24 Humanmade Hazards As seen in Figure 7, humanmade hazards include aircraft accidents, dam failure, and epidemics. The greatest humanmade hazards facing Arlington are epidemics. Epidemic According to the Snohomish County HMP, an epidemic is “an increase, often sudden, in the number of cases of a disease above what is normally expected in that population in that area”.27 An epidemic that has spread to several countries or continents and affects many people is known as a pandemic, such as COVID-19. Outbreaks can occur periodically (e.g. influenza), rarely but have a severe impact (e.g. meningococcal meningitis), occur after a disaster (e.g. cholera), or due to an intentional release (e.g. bioterrorism). Outbreaks can be caused by viruses, bacteria, parasites, fungi, or toxins. Outbreaks can be spread by people, contaminated food or water, medical procedures, animals, insects, or the environment itself. Epidemics are becoming more frequent and are spreading faster and further. Anti-vaccination movements are increasing the community’s vulnerability to new and reemerging diseases.28 Technological Hazards As seen in Figure 7, technological hazards include cybersecurity incidents and hazardous material accidents. Hazardous material accidents are the biggest technological hazard threat to Arlington. Hazardous materials Hazardous materials are substances or materials that pose an unreasonable risk to health, safety, and property, and include hazardous substances, hazardous wastes, marine pollutants, elevated temperature materials, and other substances. These products are shipped daily on highways, railroads, waterways, and pipelines. Major transportation routes in Arlington that have the potential for a spill include I-5, SR-9, SR- 530, and SR-531. There is also a natural gas pipe that runs along the eastern boundary of Arlington City limits and a refined petroleum pipeline that runs through the City, along the western edge of the airport.29 A hazardous material may cause damage to people, property, or the environment when released to soil, water, or air. Environmental damage from such releases depends on the material and the extent of contamination. Hazardous materials can seep through the soil and into groundwater, making it unsafe to drink. Vapors can create a fire, an explosion, and toxic inhalation hazards. Public health impacts of a release can vary from temporary skin irritation to death. Emergency Management Approach Arlington Community Wide Emergency Management provides emergency management program leadership, continuity, and direction to enable the City of Arlington, Arlington School District, Cascade 27 Snohomish County. (2020). Snohomish County Hazard Mitigation Plan, Volume 1. P. 78. 28 Snohomish County. (2020). Snohomish County Hazard Mitigation Plan, Volume 1. P. 78. 29 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/8274/Reference-Map-with-Natural-Gas-and- Petroleum-Pipleines-58x36?bidId= Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 25 Hospital, and their partners to respond to, recover from, and mitigate the impacts of disasters. The City addresses emergency management in the phases outlined below. Mitigation Mitigation activities are those which eliminate or reduce the probability of disaster. Snohomish County’s Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) is informed by the Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment which identifies the hazards, their potential, and their estimated consequences in the County. The HMP details a coordinated plan with action items and mitigation strategies. This plan is reviewed annually to assess the action items.30 Preparedness Preparedness activities are those which governments, organizations, and individuals develop to save lives and minimize damage. According to the County’s CEMP, the County “seeks to increase preparedness through a variety of programs and avenues including outreach and education, increasing response readiness, training, exercises, and planning”.31 These efforts include various entities including the public, other government agencies, the private sector, and the non-profit sector. Public emergency alert and warning systems allow officials to warn the public about potential or current threats and emergencies. Snohomish County and Snohomish County 911 can send alerts using Emergency Telephone Notification (ETN) and FEMA’s Integrated Public Alert and Warning System (IPAWS). The DEM can provide information through social media, including Nextdoor, Twitter, and Facebook. Additionally, sirens, message and reader boards, NOAA weather radios, loud speakers/door-to-door notifications, captioned EAS messages on television, and TTY on reverse telephonic notification systems can be used to disseminate alerts and warnings throughout Snohomish County. The National Weather Service, other state entities, and other federal entities are also able to send mass communication alerts. Response Response activities are those which minimize loss of life and property damage and provide emergency assistance. According to the County’s CEMP, the following organizations maintain disaster response capabilities and regularly train, exercise, and evaluate those capabilities:32  Fire departments and emergency medical services  Law enforcement  Mass care and sheltering organizations  Snohomish County Health District  Local and County Public Works departments  Snohomish County Department of Emergency Management 30 Snohomish County. (December 2019). Snohomish County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP). 31 P. 7 of CEMP 32 Snohomish County. (December 2019). Snohomish County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP). Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 7: Public Safety Supporting Analysis —September 2024 26 If the situation arises, for example a long-term or catastrophic incident, additional resources may be necessary and requested. There are existing mutual aid agreements and statewide mobilization plans that may be relied on. Interstate resources may be requested under the Emergency Management Assistance Compact, facilitated through the Washington Emergency Management Division. Federal and other external assistance may also aid in response efforts. Recovery According to the County’s CEMP “recovery activities are actions taken to begin the process of returning to pre-disaster conditions or new conditions dictated by the disaster.”33 The transition from response to recovery is a gradual process. The circumstances will dictate the pace and timing of recovery efforts. Initial recovery efforts will be activated by the County’s Emergency Coordination Center, working through the Snohomish County Recovery Framework. The framework outlines guidelines for recovery efforts including processes and key stakeholders.34 A long-term or catastrophic incident may require external or federal assistance. Disaster Assistance may be available through the Stafford Act if a disaster meets the criteria. 33 Snohomish County. (December 2019). Snohomish County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP). Page 9. 34 Snohomish County. (December 2019). Snohomish County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP). Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 1 BOOK 8:CAPITAL FACILITIES & UTILITIES Introduction The Capital Facilities & Utilities book addresses both publicly owned and privately owned collection, transmission, distribution, and processing facilities that serve Arlington. This includes transportation, water, sewer, stormwater, parks systems, the Arlington Municipal Airport, community buildings such as police stations and libraries, as well as solid waste, natural gas, electricity, cable, and telecommunication services. The book aims to support long-range plans maintained by service providers, including the City’s Water System Comprehensive Plan, Wastewater Comprehensive Plan, Stormwater Comprehensive Plan, and Airport Master Plan. The primary objective of the Capital Facilities & Utilities book is to demonstrate that all capital facilities and utilities serving Arlington support the current and forecasted population and economy. The goals and policies established in this book are related to meeting or exceeding standards, concurrency, demand management and conservation, affordability and equitable access and distribution of public services, increasing resiliency by preparing for disasters and other impacts, promoting renewable energy, mitigating environmental and public safety impacts, and coordinating with other organizations. Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 2 Goals and Policies CFU-1 Promote affordability of and equitable access to public services for all residents, especially the historically underserved. Prioritize investments to address disparities. CFU-1.1 Support planning for the provision of telecommunication infrastructure to improve and facilitate access for all residences and businesses, especially those in underserved areas. CFU-1.2 Partner with service providers to promote financial assistance and discounted billing programs for income qualified residents to ensure that the most vulnerable are not disproportionately impacted by the State’s clean energy transition. CFU-2 Strive for equitable distribution of infrastructure in Arlington neighborhoods. CFU-2.1 Adequately budget funds for periodic maintenance of existing infrastructure in residential neighborhoods throughout the city. CFU-2.2 Develop a long-term plan for bringing neighborhoods that lack adequate infrastructure up to the City’s current design and streetscape standards, including trails for pedestrian connectivity. CFU-2.3 Promote the conservation of housing through investment in infrastructure serving residential areas (street lighting, street paving, recreation facilities, utilities, and storm drainage). More information about neighborhood capital needs can be found in Appendix A. Transportation Benefit District area Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 3 CFU-3 Ensure capital facilities and utilities are provided consistent with Growth Management Act provisions and the concurrency management system provides public facilities through public and private development activities in a manner that is compatible with the fiscal resources of the City. CFU-3.1 Condition development permits on facilities being in place as the impacts of the development occur, or within six years (or sooner, depending on the facility), whichever is to the greatest benefit to the City. A development permit includes any official City action that effects the permitting of land and the City is not obligated to approve per City regulations. The City should take into account the variation in the different types of development permits and be flexible in adherence. CFU-3.2 Any infrastructure improvements needed to serve a proposed development should be installed prior to the issuance of the related building permit. CFU-3.3 The City of Arlington should not issue any development permits that result in a reduction of the transportation level-of-service standards for the public facilities identified in the Capital Facilities Book without mitigation. CFU-3.4 Require that new developments mitigate traffic impacts through at least two of the following methods as deemed acceptable by the City or as many as are deemed necessary through the permitting process and supporting traffic analysis: dedication of right-of-way, frontage improvements, or traffic mitigation fees. CFU-3.5 Plan for growth and development to be consistent with the City’s most recently adopted Capital Facilities Plan for providing public facilities including streets, sidewalks, lighting systems, traffic signals, water, storm and sanitary sewer, and parks and recreational facilities. A development permit includes any official City action that effects the permitting of land and which the City is not obligated to approve per City regulations. See policy CFU- 12.5 for provision of school facilities. Arlington High School (PC: Sadie Collins) Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 4 CFU-3.6 Plan so that infrastructure capacity remains concurrent with development. Where concurrency cannot be assured, the capital facility plans should be reassessed and potentially amended accordingly. CFU-3.7 Time and phase services and facilities to guide growth and development in a manner that supports the Regional Growth Strategy. CFU-3.8 Determine the appropriate methods for providing urban services/ public services in incorporated areas (and future annexation areas upon annexation) through City-provided services and/or interlocal agreements. CFU-3.9 Coordinate on the data, analysis, and methodologies relating to capital facilities plans and level-of-service standards for all public facilities and services that are required by the Growth Management Act within the Urban Growth Area. The City is responsible for monitoring its own level-of-service standards in accordance with its adopted comprehensive plan. CFU-3.10 Do not preclude siting of essential public facilities and site them in a manner consistent with RCW 36.70A.200 and Countywide Planning Policies while enforcing the comprehensive plan and development regulations to provide reasonable compatibility with other land uses. CFU-3.11 Arlington shall continue to follow its adopted process for the siting of essential public facilities consistent with RCW 36.70A.200, the Countywide Planning Policies, and the Snohomish County Tomorrow Common siting process. CFU-3.12 Any costs associated with water extensions or system requirements necessary to provide that water, shall be borne by the person(s) requesting such service. See LU-8 for more annexation policies. See E-6.3 and LU-5.5 for additional policies related to essential public facilities. Arlington Wastewater Treatment Plant (PC: Will Austin Photography) Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 5 CFU-3.13 Seek grants, loans, and other funding opportunities for capital improvement projects on an ongoing basis. CFU-3.14 Explore new and existing sources of funding for public services and infrastructure, recognizing that such funding is vital if local governments are to achieve the regional vision. CFU-3.15 Pursue public-private partnerships to seek funding sources to accelerate clean energy projects. CFU-3.16 Work with the Arlington Municipal Airport to implement the most recently adopted Airport Master Plan. CFU-3.17 Regularly assess the City’s Capital Improvement Plan ensure capital budget decisions are in conformity with the comprehensive plan. CFU-4 Support efforts to increase the resilience of public services, utilities, and infrastructure by preparing for disasters and other impacts and developing a coordinated planning for system recovery. CFU-4.1 Consider climate change, as well as economic and health impacts, when siting and building essential public services and facilities. CFU-4.2 Consider the potential impacts of climate change and fisheries protection on the City’s long-term water supply, including impacts that may be exacerbated by seasonal or cyclical conditions. CFU-4.3 Support wildfire mitigation efforts including land use planning, electric system upgrades, year-round vegetation management, and fire weather operational procedures with special consideration for the wildlife/urban interface. Work closely with utilities and North County Regional Fire Authority to lessen the risk and impact of wildfires. North County Fire Station #48 located near the Arlington Airport Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 6 CFU-5 Promote demand management and the conservation of natural resources, services, and facilities prior to developing new facilities. CFU-5.1 Strive to reduce the per capita rate of water consumption through conservation, efficiency, reclamation, reuse, and education. Provide water conservation kits to Arlington residents. CFU-5.2 Strive to reduce the rate of energy consumption and increase energy efficiency through conservation and alternative energy forms to extend the life of new and existing facilities and infrastructure. CFU-5.3 Develop conservation measures to reduce solid waste and increase recycling. CFU-5.4 Partner with Snohomish County Public Utilities District No. 1 (PUD) to promote and support programs designed to decrease load on the power grid during times of peak use. CFU-6 Promote the use of renewable energy resources to meet Arlington’s energy needs. CFU-6.1 Support the necessary investments in utility infrastructure to facilitate moving to low-carbon energy sources. CFU-6.2 Promote the use and investment in renewable and alternative energy sources to meet energy needs. CFU-6.3 Support electric vehicle charging infrastructure to help reduce carbon emissions of the transportation sector. CFU-6.4 Partner with service providers to promote energy efficiency programs and initiatives. See T-5 and T-7 for additional policies related to energy sources and usage in the transportation system. Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 7 CFU-6.5 Support permitting processes related to energy efficiency upgrades. CFU-6.6 Partner with service providers to promote local investments and customer enrollment in clean energy projects and programs. CFU-6.7 Partner with Snohomish County Public Utilities District No. 1 (PUD) to effectively meet rapidly increasing electrical demand by adopting codes that support siting existing and new technologies and maintain grid capacity and reliability. CFU-6.8 Promote and support the growth of distributed energy resources operated by property owners. CFU-6.9 Support service providers as they evaluate for the potential for renewable, recoverable natural gas in existing systems. CFU-7 Manage stormwater pursuant to the Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington as adopted by Arlington, preserving and supplementing, as necessary, the natural drainage ways and other natural hydrologic systems to minimize runoff impacts from development. CFU-7.1 Maintain an up-to-date Stormwater Comprehensive Plan. CFU-7.2 Follow existing and implement new stormwater monitoring requirements and treatment techniques and conduct studies for compliance with Total Maximum Daily Load, In-stream Flow Rule, and other State and federal regulations. See the Environment, Transportation, and Public Safety Books for more policies related to stormwater. Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 8 CFU-7.3 Develop and maintain a stormwater management strategy that reduces the negative impacts to natural drainages and aquatic habitats that can occur during the early stages of a development. CFU-7.4 Include Best Available Science/Best Management Practices in the City’s stormwater strategy and work to ensure stormwater standards and specifications reflect current industry standards and meet regulatory requirements. CFU-7.5 Utilize Low Impact Development standards that provide stormwater benefits and support naturally occurring functions simultaneously. CFU-7.6 Work to increase residential and business awareness of harmful discharges to the stormwater system and the resulting damages to infrastructure and natural resources by implementing programs to educate the public about illicit discharge detection and elimination, controlling stormwater runoff, pollution prevention, and operation and maintenance requirements. CFU-7.7 Enforce stormwater utility regulations. CFU-7.8 Work to increase the frequency of maintenance for the City’s stormwater collection, conveyance, and treatment systems. CFU-7.9 Follow a strategy for groundwater management facilities that protects groundwater resources from development and uses. CFU-7.10 Perform GIS and stormwater modeling activities to provide an accurate analysis of our stormwater collection, conveyance and treatment system as well as related facilities. Arlington Airport Office Building Solar Project Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 9 CFU-8 Provide solid waste and recycling services to all Arlington residents and businesses. CFU-8.1 Work closely with Snohomish County and local haulers to expand the type of recyclable materials that can be collected from homes and businesses. CFU-8.2 Continue the City’s outreach and public education program to improve solid waste and recycling practices at businesses by teaching them about best management practices and providing technical support and resources. CFU-8.3 The City should provide recycling opportunities at public events such as the Fly-In, Street Fair, and others. CFU-8.4 Provide recycling opportunities in City-owned buildings. CFU-8.5 Partner with other municipalities and government agencies to combine resources that benefit the solid-waste customers of Arlington. CFU-8.6 Work with Snohomish County and solid waste providers on the siting of potential organic materials management facilities, in the event such a facility is needed within the City.North County Transfer Station in Arlington Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 10 CFU-9 Coordinate services and facility provisions with other jurisdictions while working to mitigate long-term environmental and public safety impacts. CFU-9.1 Work with the City of Marysville to adjust water and sewer service area boundaries so that all properties within Arlington are served by Arlington water and sewer. CFU-9.2 Provide urban services and public services and coordinate planning efforts with other service providers to provide efficient services and to support consolidations that would improve service to the public. CFU-9.3 Promote coordination with local and tribal governments and water providers and suppliers to meet long-term water needs in the region in a manner that supports the Regional Growth Strategy. CFU-9.4 Support the planned development of jobs and housing through strategic investment decisions and coordination of public services and facilities. CFU-9.5 Provide ongoing vegetation management adjacent to infrastructure to maintain system reliability. CFU-9.6 Continue to coordinate with the Cascade Valley Hospital and Clinics to provide medical services to Arlington residents. CFU-9.7 Continue to coordinate with the Sno-Isle Libraries to provide library services and programs to Arlington residents. CFU-9.8 Work with Snohomish County and the developer(s) of the East Hill (Brekhus/ Beach) area to jointly plan, fund, and construct 172nd Street from 91st Avenue NE to McElroy Road. See the Public Safety Book for more information about police and fire services. The Land Use Book provides more information for accommodating jobs and housing. Cascade Valley Hospital in Arlington Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 11 CFU-10 Meet or exceed sewer service standards in providing ongoing services to customers. CFU-10.1 City sewer service should not be provided to any property outside city limits except where City Council grants an exception to prevent or remedy significant environmental impacts. CFU-10.2 Serve new development within the urban growth area with a no protest agreement to annexation with sanitary sewer systems or fit it with dry sewers in anticipation of connection to the sewer system. Alternative technology to sewers should only be considered when it can be shown to produce treatment at standards that are equal to or better than the sewer system and where a long-term maintenance plan is in place. CFU-10.3 Continue the wastewater pretreatment program to assist in the reduction of plant upsets, collection system troubles, and NPDES permit violations. CFU-10.4 Promote connections to the sanitary sewer systems for residents and businesses within urban growth area as the preferred alternative to resolving failing septic systems. Encourage replacement of failing septic systems with sanitary sewers or alternative technology that is comparable or better. CFU-10.5 Permit new development in urban areas only when sanitary sewers are available. CFU-10.6 Meet or exceed the minimum levels of service for water system maintenance as identified in the most recently adopted Water Comprehensive Plan. CFU-10.7 Implement new monitoring requirements and treatment techniques and conduct studies required by the Safe Drinking Water Act. See also LU-8.1. Wastewater Treatment Plant in Arlington Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 12 CFU-10.8 Cross Connection Control Program site surveys should be completed annually as required by the Department of Health. Demonstrate program progress in the annual cross connection control report that the City is required to submit to the Department of Health. CFU-10.9 Provide households and businesses in the water service area with access to high quality drinking water that meets or is better than federal and state requirements. CFU-10.10 Protect water sources to meet the needs of human consumption and for environmental balance. Stormwater Wetland Park Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 13 CFU-11 Protect and enhance the environment and public health and safety when providing services and facilities. Locate public facilities and utilities to: a) achieve a high level of public accessibility b) maximize the efficiency of services provided c) minimize costs to the public; and d) minimize impacts to the natural environment. CFU-11.1 Allow a variety of uses for public facilities or develop a centrally located community center that could be used for day care, youth facilities, senior activities, meetings, and other functions. CFU-11.2 Avoid placing utilities within critical areas and critical areas buffers except when absolutely necessary. And then, they should only be allowed to cross perpendicular to the critical areas in a manner requiring the least lineal impact to the resources. Utilities should never run parallel with the critical area unless outside of critical areas buffers. Low impact development (LID) facilities, however, are permissible in critical area buffers per the land use code. CFU-11.3 Locate community facilities and health and human services in centers and near transit facilities to facilitate convenient access. CFU-11.4 Work cooperatively with the Arlington and Lakewood School Districts to plan for school facilities to meet the existing and future community needs consistent with adopted comprehensive plans and growth forecasts, including siting and designing schools to support safe, walkable access. Lakewood High School Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 14 204th St Ne 179thPl Ne tS htroN 153r Pl Ne 23 rd Ave N e 151st Pl Ne E 3rd St Osp r Rd 4t h wN evA N BAve 185th Pl Ne ht08 eN evA 79 t h Ave N e Her Ct 193rd St Ne 200th St Ne 180th St Ne ht91 eN evA ht85 eN evA 38 t h Dr N e 3rdDr N e Abbey Pl 89t h Av 35 t h Ave N e 172nd St Nw 189th Pl Ne 59 t h Ave N e 170th Pl Ne 84t hAv 77 t h Ave N e 189th Pl Ne 194th Ave Ne Joann Ln E 4th St 25 t h Ave N e 72 n d Dr N e 92nd Av 10 1 s t Ave N e 164th St Ne 27 t h Ave N e 63 rd Ave N e 5t h Ave N e 44 t h Dr N e 156th St Ne 27 t h Ave N e ht61 eN rD 228th St Ne 233r Pl Ne 188th St Ne 165th Pl Ne 19 t h D r N e E Haller Ave 89 t h Av 162nd St Ne Nob l e Dr 65 t h Dr N e S C o b b Ave Balm o rDr 99 t h Ave N e 64 t h Dr N e 178th Pl Ne 196th St Ne ts17 eN evA 190th Pl Ne 62 n d Dr N e 183rd Pl Ne 178th St Ne 151st St Ne 6t h Ave N w 169th Ave Ne 164th St Ne 206thSt Ne 32 n d Ave N e 175th Pl Ne 39 t h Ave 200th St Nw 59 t h Ave N e 192nd St Ne 66 t h Ave N e Ox ford Dr Arl Heights R d 95 t h Ave N e 3rAv 156thSt Ne 40 t h Ave N e 47 t h Ave N e eN evA ts19 42 n d Dr N e 43 rd Ave N e 180th St Ne 89 t h Ave N e 197th St Ne W Jensen St eN evA ht91 MorRd 171st Pl N e 88 t h Dr N e 11 t h Ave N e 2n d D r N w 176th Pl Ne 192nd Pl Ne E 2nd St 89 t h Ave N e 162ndSt Ne Upla n d Dr 182n d P l N e 162n dPl N e 73 rd Ave N e 19t h Dr N e Ch a m p i o n s Dr 15 t h Ave N e 23 rd Ave N e 158th St Ne 196th Pl Ne 199th St Ne 80 t h Dr N e 220th St Ne 11 t h Ave N e New p o r t Dr 27 t h Ave N e 160th St Ne Hig hClovBlvd N e 67 t h Ave N e 79 t h Dr N e Vis t aDr 35 t h Ave N e 3rd Ave N w 99 t h Dr N e Ol y m p i c Pl Smok Point Dr 31 s t Ave N e 37 t h Ave N e ht59 eN evA 182nd St Ne High l a n d View D r 194th St Nw E Gilman Ave 152nd St Ne Wood l a n d s Wa 45 t h D r N e ht51 eN evA Knuts o n R d 226 t h P l N e Mcpherso n Rd Spr i n g Lan e Av Schlom a n R d 25 t h Ave N e 6t h Ave N w eN evA dr36 43 rd Ave N e 6th Av 40 t h Dr N e 164th St Ne 23 rd Ave N e Eaglefie l d D r Old Burn R d Mcrae Rd Nw CrRidg eBlvd 234th St Ne Jo rHevly Rd Twi n L a k 188th St Ne Dik 200th St Ne 236th St Ne W Burke Ave N French Ave E Highland Dr 186th St Ne N Manhattan Ave S West Ave 172nd St Ne 74th Ave Ne 169th St Ne 191st Pl Ne 188th St Ne Tveit Rd Cemetery Rd S Stillaguamish AveS French Ave 59th Ave Ne E 1st St Burn Rd 51st Ave Ne Arlington Valley Road 47th Ave Ne Mcelroy Rd 211th Pl Ne 204th St Ne 207th St Ne E Burke Ave S Ol y m p i c Ave N O l y m p i c Ave Forty Fi v 212th St Nw 188th St Ne 172nd St Ne Burn Sm o key Poi n t Blv d eN evA ht76 eN evA ht95 Sil eN evA dr3 Pioneer Hwy E E Division St Airpo r t B 48th Dr 49th Dr 50th Ne Ave Ne 62nd 188th Pl Ne 51st Ave Ave Ne 62nd 192nd St Ne 195th St 180th St Ne eN rD ht95 I-5 S R 5 30 S R 9 S R 5 3 1 47TH AVE N E 47TH AVE N E 59 T H AVE N E 59 T H AVE N E 2 04TH ST N E204TH ST N E E H i gh l an d D RE H i gh l an d D R S t i l l a g u a m i s h A V E S t i l l a g u a m i s h A V E E 5th STE 5th ST Burn RD Burn RD Burn RD Burn RD Burn RD 1 72N D ST N E172ND ST N E Airport BLVD Airport BLVD Sti lla gu a m ish R i ve r 67TH AVE N E 67TH AVE N E 51 S T AVE N E 51 S T AVE N E 1 88T H S T N E188TH S T N E 200T H S T N E200TH S T N E Dike RDDike RD Smokey Point BLVD Smokey Point BLVD 1 9 TH AVE N E 1 9 TH AVE N E Legend Coordinated Water System Area City of Marysville City Limits Urban Growth Area Trails Buildings Railroad State Highway State Route Airport Road Arterial Collector Street ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN 0.5 0 0.50.25 Miles Coordinated Water System Plan and Water Service Area Figure CFU-01. Coordinated Water System Plan and Service Water Area Map Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 15 Figure CFU-02. Libraries, Schools, and School District Boundaries Map Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities 16 204th St Ne 179thPl Ne tS htroN 153r Pl Ne 23 rd Ave N e 151st Pl Ne E 3rd St Osp r Rd 4t h wN evA N BAve 185th Pl Ne ht08 eN evA 79 t h Ave N e Her Ct 193rd St Ne 200th St Ne 180th St Ne ht91 eN evA ht85 eN evA 38 t h Dr N e 3rdDr N e Abbey Pl 89t h Av 35 t h Ave N e 172nd St Nw 189th Pl Ne 59 t h Ave N e 170th Pl Ne 84t hAv 77 t h Ave N e 189th Pl Ne 194th Ave Ne Joann Ln E 4th St 25 t h Ave N e 72 n d Dr N e 92nd Av 10 1 s t Ave N e 164th St Ne 27 t h Ave N e 63 rd Ave N e 5t h Ave N e 44 t h Dr N e 156th St Ne 27 t h Ave N e ht61 eN rD 228th St Ne 233r Pl Ne 188th St Ne 165th Pl Ne 19 t h D r N e E Haller Ave 89 t h Av 162nd St Ne Nob l e Dr 65 t h Dr N e S C o b b Ave Balm o rDr 99 t h Ave N e 64 t h Dr N e 178th Pl Ne 196th St Ne ts17 eN evA 190th Pl Ne 62 n d Dr N e 183rd Pl Ne 178th St Ne 151st St Ne 6t h Ave N w 169th Ave Ne 164th St Ne 206thSt Ne 32 n d Ave N e 175th Pl Ne 39 t h Ave 200th St Nw 59 t h Ave N e 192nd St Ne 66 t h Ave N e Ox ford Dr Arl Heights R d 95 t h Ave N e 3rAv 156thSt Ne 40 t h Ave N e 47 t h Ave N e eN evA ts19 42 n d Dr N e 43 rd Ave N e 180th St Ne 89 t h Ave N e 197th St Ne W Jensen St eN evA ht91 MorRd 171st Pl N e 88 t h Dr N e 11 t h Ave N e 2n d D r N w 176th Pl Ne 192nd Pl Ne E 2nd St 89 t h Ave N e 162ndSt Ne Upla n d Dr 182n d P l N e 162n dPl N e 73 rd Ave N e 19t h Dr N e Ch a m p i o n s Dr 15 t h Ave N e 23 rd Ave N e 158th St Ne 196th Pl Ne 199th St Ne 80 t h Dr N e 220th St Ne 11 t h Ave N e New p o r t Dr 27 t h Ave N e 160th St Ne Hig hClovBlvd N e 67 t h Ave N e 79 t h Dr N e Vis t aDr 35 t h Ave N e 3rd Ave N w 99 t h Dr N e Ol y m p i c Pl Smok Point Dr 31 s t Ave N e 37 t h Ave N e ht59 eN evA 182nd St Ne High l a n d View D r 194th St Nw E Gilman Ave 152nd St Ne Wood l a n d s Wa 45 t h D r N e ht51 eN evA Knuts o n R d 226 t h P l N e Mcpherso n Rd Spr i n g Lan e Av Schlom a n R d 25 t h Ave N e 6t h Ave N w eN evA dr36 43 rd Ave N e 6th Av 40 t h Dr N e 164th St Ne 23 rd Ave N e Eaglefie l d D r Old Burn R d Mcrae Rd Nw CrRidg eBlvd 234th St Ne Jo rHevly Rd Twi n L a k 188th St Ne Dik 200th St Ne 236th St Ne I-5 W Burke Ave N French Ave E Highland Dr 186th St Ne N Manhattan Ave S West Ave 172nd St Ne 74th Ave Ne 169th St Ne 191st Pl Ne 188th St Ne Tveit Rd Cemetery Rd S Stillaguamish AveS French Ave 59th Ave Ne E 1st St Burn Rd 51st Ave Ne Arlington Valley Road 47th Ave Ne Mcelroy Rd 211th Pl Ne 204th St Ne 207th St Ne E Burke Ave S Ol y m p i c Ave N O l y m p i c Ave Forty Fi v 212th St Nw 188th St Ne 172nd St Ne Burn Sm o key Poi n t Blv d eN evA ht76 eN evA ht95 Sil eN evA dr3 Pioneer Hwy E E Division St Airpo r t B 48th Dr 49th Dr 50th Ne Ave Ne 62nd 188th Pl Ne 51st Ave Ave Ne 62nd 192nd St Ne 195th St 180th St Ne eN rD ht95 S R 5 30 S R 9 S R 5 3 1 47TH AVE N E 47TH AVE N E 59 T H AVE N E 59 T H AVE N E 2 04TH ST N E204TH ST N E E H i gh l an d D RE H i gh l an d D R S t i l l a g u a m i s h A V E S t i l l a g u a m i s h A V E E 5th STE 5th ST Burn RD Burn RD Burn RD Burn RD Burn RD 1 72N D ST N E172ND ST N E Airport BLVD Airport BLVD Sti lla gu a m ish R i ve r 67TH AVE N E 67TH AVE N E 51 S T AVE N E 51 S T AVE N E 1 88T H S T N E188TH S T N E 200T H S T N E200TH S T N E Dike RDDike RD Smokey Point BLVD Smokey Point BLVD 1 9 TH AVE N E 1 9 TH AVE N E Legend Service Area City of Marysville City Limits Urban Growth Area Trails Buildings Railroad State Highway State Route Airport Road Arterial Collector Street ARLINGTONCOMPREHENSIVEPLAN 0.5 0 0.50.25 Miles Sewer Service Area Figure CFU-03. Sewer Service Area Map Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities Supporting Analysis — November 2024 1 Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities Supporting Analysis Introduction The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) requires cities to prepare a Capital Facilities Element & Utilities (Book) consisting of:  An inventory of current capital facilities owned by public entities showing the location and capacities of those public facilities;  A forecast of the future needs for such capital facilities;  The proposed capacities of expanded or new capital facilities;  At least a six-year plan that will finance capital facilities within the projected funding capacities and clearly identify sources of public or developer monies for such purposes; and  A requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use element, capital facilities element, and finance plan within the capital facilities plan element are coordinated and consistent. In addition, the GMA requires cities to prepare a Utilities Element consisting of the general location, proposed location, and capacity of all existing and proposed utilities including, but not limited to, electrical, telecommunications, and natural gas systems. This Book has been developed in accordance with Section 36.70A.070 of the Growth Management Act to address the provision of local government services and capital facilities. The City has prepared and maintained individual sewer, water, transportation, parks, and other plans. These are incorporated by reference and are summarized in this Comprehensive Plan. They represent the community's policy plan for provision of such services and facilities through 2044. The Capital Facilities & Utilities Book describes how the goals in the other plan book will be implemented through policies and regulations, and is an important book in implementing the comprehensive plan. The Capital Facilities & Utilities Goals and Policies will guide decision-making to achieve the community goals as articulated in the Vision and Foundational Principles. The Capital Facilities & Utilities Book has also been developed in accordance with the Countywide Planning Policies and VISION 2050 Multicounty Planning Policies to ensure both internal and external plan consistency. For the purposes of this plan, a capital facility is defined as a structure or equipment that generally costs $10,000 or more or has a useful life of ten years or more. Capital facilities investments include major rehabilitation or maintenance projects on capital assets; construction of new buildings, streets, and other facilities; acquisition of land for parks and other public purposes. Equipment purchases exceeding $10,000 are not included in this CIP. They are technically considered capital facilities, but not within the context of a community plan. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 2 The Capital Facilities & Utilities Book is required to address all public facilities, except transportation which are addressed separately under the Transportation Book and parks which are addressed separately under the Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Book. However, the discussion of finance for both capital facilities, transportation, and parks has been combined in one location under this Chapter. Urban services, which are public services and public facilities provided by cities, include sanitary sewers, water, police protection, fire protection, parks, open space, recreation, and streets. The City provides these services, with the exception of fire protection provided by North County Regional Fire Authority, to all properties within the city limits of Arlington. The Public Works Department provides water services outside the city limits within the water service area boundary, which includes properties in the Urban Growth Area (UGA) and in Unincorporated Snohomish County. The City recognizes that planning for utilities is the primary responsibility of both City and non-city providers (electrical, gas, etc.). The City will incorporate plans prepared by other providers into its Comprehensive Plan to coordinate their development and to identify ways of improving the quality and delivery of services provided in the City and UGA. Existing Conditions Municipal Services The City of Arlington has a Mayor/Council form of government with seven Councilmembers, an elected Mayor, and a City Administrator who reports directly to the Mayor. The City's organizational structure has Directors heading up the following departments: Administration, Communications, Finance, Human Resources, Information Technology, Police, Community & Economic Development, Parks & Recreation, Airport, Public Works, and Maintenance & Operations. In addition, there are contract employees providing legal, hearing examiner, and other administrative services as needed. The City provides the majority of municipal services either through its own staff or by contract with other jurisdictions or private contractors. These services include: governance, administration, planning and community development, land development permitting, building permits, public works, engineering, sewer and water service, solid waste and recycling services, financing, budgeting and accounting, grant development and management, parks planning and maintenance, street maintenance, storm water management, environmental services and natural resource management, airport management and maintenance, fire prevention and inspection, emergency medical services, legal, police services, judicial, jail, and recreation programming. Services provided directly by special purpose districts include health, school, power, judicial, and library services. The Maintenance & Operations division provides maintenance services for many elements of the City’s infrastructure, including:  Airport  Equipment (except for police and fire)  City Facilities (except for water, wastewater, and stormwater ponds) Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 3  Parks, athletic fields, and public spaces  Streets and sidewalks The buildings associated with the maintenance functions of the City include a Maintenance Shop and an Equipment Storage Buildings. City-owned properties are depicted on the Critical Facilities Map in the Public Safety Book. The City-owned facilities are also listed in the table below. Table 1. Inventory of City-owned facilities. City Owned Facility Address Square Feet Current Use Airport – Lot 23 Building 18008 59th Drive NE 25,746 1943 Airport – Lot 26 18204 59th Avenue NE 10,350 Airport and Community & Economic Development Administration Offices Airport – Lot 27 Building 18218 59th Drive NE 2,388 Rented to Ellie’s at the Airport Airport – Lot 28 Building 18228 59th Drive NE 4,080 1965 Airport – Lot 29 18300 59th Avenue NE 112 1959 Airport – Lot 44 18810 59th Avenue NE 19,200 1986 th Airport – Lot 105 Building 6111 188th Place NE 3,832 Office 18,700 Storage 1971 Stillaguamish Genealogical Society and Maintenance & Operations Department Open Sided Storage Building for Vehicles and Airport - Lot 106 Buildings 6205 188th Street NE Maintenance Shop 4,375, 1,350, and 2,500 Storage 1943 Maintenance & Operations Department Offices and Maintenance Shop and three equipment and storage buildings, two enclosed and one open sided. Airport – Lot 107 Building 19118 63rd Avenue NE 1,377 2007 Airport – Lot 109 6231 188th Street NE 3,772 1984 Information Technology Department Administration Office, includes Bay from Airport – Lot 111 19503 63rd Avenue NE 19,280 2005 Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 4 City Owned Facility Address Square Feet Current Use Airport – Hangar C 17910 59th th th th Arlington Boys & Girls Club Building 18513 59th Avenue NE 28,286 1993 Addition 2016 Club Offices, Gyms, Game Rooms, Meeting Room, 18501 59th Avenue NE 450 1979 Park Restroom Facility Cemetery Maintenance Shop 20310 67th Avenue NE 2,700 2000 Renovation 2011 Office and Maintenance Shop, with Vehicle and Cemetery Storage Building 20310 67th Avenue NE 792 1952 Room, and Ground City Hall 238 N. Olympic Avenue 7,753 1924 Information Technology and Communications Fire Station #46 137 N. MacLeod 5,165 1961 Addition 2011 North County Regional Fire Fire Station #48 4228 Airport Boulevard 11.406 2021 North County Regional Fire 17932 Oxford Drive 500 1993 Water Pump House Gleneagle 342 Reservoir 17932 Oxford Drive 8,164 1975 1100 West Avenue 646 2018 Haller Well #2 1100 West Avenue 513 2001 Water Well for City Water Haller Well #3 1100 West Avenue 169 2001 Haller Well #4 1100 West Avenue ~170 Pending 2025 Innovation Center 404 N. Olympic Avenue 1,212 Small Business Incubator Space J. Rudy York Memorial Park Garage 3209 180th Street NE 720 1952 Maintenance & Operations Restrooms & Visitors 114 N. Olympic Avenue 895 2012 Visitor Information Center and Restroom Building Legion Park Gazebo 650 2007 Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 5 City Owned Facility Address Square Feet Current Use Legion Park Stage 114 N. Olympic Avenue 550 2018 Performances and Special Lift Station #1 E. Haller Avenue N/A N/A Lift Station #2 7116 204th Street NE 200 Wastewater Pump House th Lift Station #5 nd 140 1990 Wastewater Pump House Lift Station #6 140 1992 Wastewater Pump House Lift Station #7 th 140 1995 Wastewater Pump House Lift Station #8 th 168 1996 Wastewater Pump House Lift Station #11 State Route 530 N/A N/A Lift Station #13 215th Street and 87th Avenue NE N/A N/A Lift Station #15 172nd Street NE 24 2020 Lift Station #16 168th Street NE 278 2022 Located at the Outpost Police Department and Council Chambers 110 E. 3rd Street 19,404 2005 Administration Offices, and 154 Cox Avenue 7,485 2011 Public Works Sewer Collections Building 108 W. Haller Avenue 2,542 2010 Office and Equipment Public Works Solids Handling Building 108 W. Haller Avenue 3,765 1998 Renovation 2010 Vehicle Storage, Equipment Storage, and SCADA Public Works Water Distribution Office 108 W. Haller Avenue 3,000 1979 Renovation 1991 Crew Room, Shop, Equipment Storage and Public Works Water Reclamation Facility 108 W. Haller Avenue 2,000 2011 Locker Room, Crew Room, 108 W. Haller Avenue 4,980 2001 Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 6 City Owned Facility Address Square Feet Current Use and SCADA Process Control and Monitoring Public Works 520 Reservoir 17003 91st Avenue NE 13,327 1993 17003 91st Avenue NE 572 1993 Water Valve House Siren / Antenna Building 90 Unknown Fire Siren & Antenna 504 2024 Park Restroom Smokey Point Park Stage 17903 Smokey Point Boulevard 558 2024 Performances and Special 529 2024 Covered Picnic Area 809 E. 5th Street 350 1975 Park Restrooms 18813 59th Avenue NE 500 1979 Police The Arlington Police Department provides police services 24 hours a day. For the Department to be effective in community policing, the officers must have time for positive interactions, unrelated to criminal activity, with residents on the street. In addition to having time to build positive relationships, the Department must also utilize data to be proactive in policing by determining where crimes area occurring and having the time and resources to dedicate officers to those areas. This type of directed patrol based on sound data analysis and coupled with strong community relationships is known to reduce crimes, such as motor vehicle prowls and stolen vehicles. Additional patrol officer capacity is required if the Department wants to become less reactive and create time for community-focused preventative policing. Increasing patrol staffing is only one way to increase capacity. Patrol operations may also benefit from process improvements and increased use of non- commissioned personnel where appropriate. To meet the demands of the increase in patrol operations our records department will need additional staff to process the work generated. The addition of the Body Worn Camera has also increased the number of records that need to be processed. Staffing Recommendations In addition, to the above service goals, the department suggests the addition of staff as outlined below: • Increase staffing for the 4 patrol crews by 1 position each for a total of 4 officers. This will bring the 4 patrol crews to a staffing level of 1 Sargent and 5 Patrol Officers. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 7 • Open and staff a swing shift schedule to allow for more coverage during the peak activity hours. It will also reduce the response times by having more officers available. Overtime reduction is also a benefit of this shift as officers will be on-duty during day-grave shift change. • Expand Support Staff for Records and Evidence. With the addition of the patrol staff and specialty units the demand on the records staff will need to be addressed. • Fund the Deputy Chief position. With the addition of new staff, professional standards software, and additional patrol staff to oversee, the workload of the administration continues to expand. Funding of this position will allow for a standard that aligns with the best practices for police agencies. • Fund two additional School Resource Officer (SRO) positions. The need for additional SROs often arises from a variety of factors related to maintaining a safe and secure learning environment. SROs are trained to deal with a variety of issues and will work in collaboration with school staff to provide resources for all students in need. The presence of SROs contributes to proactive security presence and a visible deterrent to potential threats. The focus of the SRO is to create a safe and supportive learning environment for students and staff. See the Public Safety Book for more information about this department. Water Water supply to the City of Arlington is provided by: one treatment plant that receives water from two groundwater wells within the Haller Wellfield, which are under the direct influence of surface water; a groundwater well within the Airport Wellfield; and wholesale water purchased from the Snohomish County PUD No. 1 (PUD). Water storage is provided by two reservoirs that have a total capacity of 4.0 million gallons (MG). In addition, the City’s water system has four primary pressure zones with nine pressure reducing valves, one booster pump station and approximately 114.1 miles of water mains. The City’s water utility is staffed by nine treatment and distribution staff serving under the Utilities Manager. In 2024, the City provided service to more than 5,900 customer connections, or about 9,200 equivalent residential units (ERUs), within the City’s retail water service area (WSA) seen in Figure 1, which extends beyond the City limits as defined in the North Snohomish County Coordinated Water System Plan (updated 2024). The City limits comprise an area of approximately 9.7 square miles, whereas the existing retail WSA is approximately 25.3 square miles. The 2023 population within the City limits was 21,740, while water service was provided to approximately 18,739 people throughout the WSA. Total water production for residential, commercial, and industrial uses was 634.724 MG, or an overall demand of 93 gallons per person served. At one time much of the water distribution system in the downtown area and near the airport consisted of asbestos cement water mains that were was constructed from the 1950s through the 1970s. The typical life expectancy of the older AC water mains is generally 50 years. However, corrosion within water mains has been greatly reduced through the development of cement mortar lined ductile iron pipe, which has a life expectancy in excess of 75 years. A large portion of these older water mains have been replaced Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 8 within the last 30-40 years. The City is implementing its plan to replace the remaining 2.7 miles of older AC water mains within the next 5 years. Future system needs have been evaluated in the updated City Comprehensive Plan and Water Systems Plan (WSP). For the purposes of long-term water supply only, the Water Systems Plan assumes continued growth within the City of 1.35 percent through 2065 to obtain a water service population of more than 35,000. The adopted City and UGA population target for 2044 is 35,506. The 50-year water service area population projection (2064) is 71,500. The chart shows how water is used in Arlington. This information assists in projecting quantity and facility needs based on the 2035 land use plan. The Water Plan assumes a consumption rate of 80 gallons per day per resident. For business and industry an Equivalent Residential Unit (ERU) measurement is used, ranging from 165-180 gallons per day, per equivalent household. These were used to forecast the amount and location of water supplies consistent with anticipated growth. The City’s Water Department maintains a Water System Plan (WSP) reviewed and approved by the Department of Health to assure provision of safe and ample water supplies for public health and fire protection. Since the 2015 WSP, the City has implemented the projects identified in Table 1. Numerous capital improvements will be required to accommodate the growth projections expected for the City and to increase the resilience of the City’s water sources. Projects targeted in the 2024 WSP for the 20-year horizon (2044) are identified in Table 2. Descriptions for each project are provided in WSP. Table 2. Water Utility Capital Improvement Projects, 2015-2024 2015 CIP No. Project Description Year WM1 AC Water Main Replacement (59th Ave) 2023 PZ1 Conversion of 710 Zone to 560 Zone (107th Ave NE) 2015 PZ1 89th Avenue NE Pressure Zone Conversion (PZ1) Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 9 F2 Source of Supply Study 2019 F8 520 Reservoir Site Improvements (except fence) 2023 M3 Comprehensive WSP Update and Amendments 2017, 2019 Projects in Process PZ2 Conversion of 710 Zone to 615 Zone--included in 2024 640 Booster Pump Station 2024 F4 New Supply Well No.1 (Haller Wellfield Well 4) 2024 DF2 12" Water Main Replacement in 211th Pl NE 2024 DF12 710 and 615 Zone Booster Pump Station and Water Main 2024 Haller North Wellfield 2030 Table 3. Water Utility Capital Improvement Projects, 2025-2044 2024 CIP No. Project Description1 (5 years Funding2 Cost WM1 Annual Water Main Replacement Program Annual City WM2 New Water Source 12" Transmission Main 2030 City WM3 WTP Influent 16" Transmission Main 2030 City WM4 High Service BPS Discharge Piping 2025 City WM5 12" North Island Crossing Water Main 2028 City/DF WM6 Island Crossing Utility Local Improvement District 2028 City/DF PZ1 Burn Road PRV 2025 City PZ2 Conversion of 710 Zone to 615 Zone 2025 City PZ3 Conversion of 540 Zone to 615 and 520 Zone 2025 City F1 WTP Expansion and Upgrade 2025 City F2 SE (640) Pressure Zone BPS 2025 City F3 SE (640) Pressure Zone Reservoir 2035 City F4 Haller Wellfield Geotech Study and Improvements 2025 City Miscellaneous Improvements Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 10 DF1 12" Water Main Loop from 59th Ave NE to 66th Ave NE TBD DF DF2 12" Water Main Replacement in 211th Pl NE TBD DF DF3 Jensen Farm High Density Residential 12" Water Main TBD DF DF4 59th Ave and Cemetery Road Industrial Improvements TBD DF DF5 12" Water Main in 196th St NE from Burn Road to Crown Ridge Blvd TBD DF DF6 Northwest Airport 12" Water Main Loop TBD DF DF7 North Island Crossing Commercial 12" Water Main Loop TBD DF DF8 Kraetz Rd Water Main TBD DF DF11 12" Water Main in 172nd St NE from 67th Ave NE to 71st Ave NE TBD DF DF12 12" Water Main in Troon Ct from Troon Ct Cul-TBD DF Notes: 1 See WSP for individual project descriptions 2 City (100%); Developer Funded, DF (100%); or shared cost Capital projects identified in 2024 address several needs and fall into several categories: water main improvements, pressure zone improvements, facility improvements, developer-funded improvements, and miscellaneous improvements. New water mains will be installed and several existing water mains will be replaced and upgraded to accommodate projected needs and meet level of service standards. The WSP is planning to address growth in the Island Crossing area where demand is increasing more quickly than previously anticipated. With respect to pressure zone improvements several improvements are identified in the WSP. Numerous facility improvements will be needed to meet projections during the planning period. The WSP plans to upgrade the water treatment plant to meet demand projections. Reservoirs will improve the City’s projected system-wide storage and improve level of service standards. Some fire flow deficiencies have been identified as an issue needing attention in future growth planning. Several capital projects will address these deficiencies. Additionally, the City is looking to develop and increase reliance on alternative water sources and reduce reliance on its Haller and Airport wellfields. Property acquisition and capital projects, including new wells and a transmission line from a source north of the Stillaguamish River, are planned in the WSP. As a result, the City is at maximum capacity and is immediately planning to increase the production capacity of the water treatment plant to accommodate anticipated demand projections. Miscellaneous projects serve several functions including labor savings and a source water protection program. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 11 Developer-funded improvements will ensure level of service standards are met with new development and redevelopment projects. The Water System Plan includes design standards and operational policies. These represent the overall Level of Service standard and are adopted by reference in this Plan. Based on the foregoing analysis, the 2024 Water System Plan is consistent with the assumptions of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan. Figure 1: Coordinated Water System Plan and Water Service Area Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 12 Sewer Arlington owns and operates its sewer utility under a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit. It is managed by the Wastewater Department under the City’s Public Works’ Utilities Division. The City’s wastewater utility consists of 10 treatment and collections staff serving under the Utilities Manager. The sewer utility service area includes the city limits and UGA with the exception of a portion of the Smokey Point neighborhood that is served by the City of Marysville (Figure 2). The total sewer service area is approximately 9.59 square miles with a population of approximately 16,159. In 2024, there are 4,652 residential customer connections and 487 connections serving commercial, industrial, and institutional customers. The City’s sewer system is comprised of a 4.0 MGD Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) that is currently permitted to treat 2.67 MGD. Membrane filtration, biological nutrient removal, and ultraviolet disinfection processes produce effluent of Class A or B reclaimed water quality. Collections staff maintain 2,034 manholes, 71.5 miles of gravity collection mains, and 15 pump stations which feed 8.75 miles of pressurized force mains. Biosolids are off-hauled and land applied in Eastern Washington. Most of the City is served by sewer. Some existing older homes throughout the city (mainly areas within the Smokey Point Subarea and West Bluff Subarea) are still connected to septic. These homes have sewer readily available with extensions and are required to connect to sewer when the septic tank fails or when redevelopment of the property is proposed. Within the city limits there are two areas where sewer service is only available with major extensions and improvements. These areas include the neighborhood of Boyden and the East Hill Subarea. The property owners within the Boyden tracts are required to extend and provide sewer prior to allowing for higher density development. The property owners within the East Hill Subarea are required to provide a subarea plan meeting the requirements of Chapter 20.44.032 and required to extend and provide sewer prior to development. The City’s current expansion plans do include capacity for the future connection of the East Hill Subarea properties when a subarea plan is developed by private developers. The City’s Wastewater Department maintains a General Sewer Plan (GSP) that is reviewed and approved by the Department of Ecology to assure treatment effectiveness is met for the health and protection of communities and the aquatic environment. Since the 2015 GSP, the City has implemented the projects identified in Table 3. Numerous wastewater capital improvements will be required to accommodate the growth projections expected for the City. Projects targeted in the 2024 GSP for the 20-year horizon (2044) are identified in Table 4. Descriptions for each project are provided in the GSP. Table 4. Wastewater Utility Capital Improvement Projects, 2015-2024 2015 CIP No. Project Description Year P3 Flow Monitoring Studies 2019 P9 MIC area collections infrastructure, including force main to LS 12 2022 F1 Lift Station 2 Rehabilitation 2017 F10 WRF Membrane Upgrades 2022 Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 13 2015 CIP No. Project Description Year F11 Lift Station 15 Construction 2020 F12 Lift Station 16 Construction (MIC area) 2022 WRF Equalization Basin—convert membrane basin for dosing Class A effluent via UV Projects in Process Sewer Modeling & Calibration 2024 640 Booster Pump Station project 2025 Table 5. Wastewater Utility Capital Improvement Projects, 2025-2044 2024 CIP No. Project Description1 Funding2 Cost SM1- SM30 Gravity sewer pipe replacement or rehabilitation required for 2044 targets; estimated 34,600 lf Annually City/DF SM27 Primary Interceptor (67th Avenue Trunkline) Improvements (Phase 1 & 2) 2025 City FM1 Cemetery Rd (LS7) Force Main Replacement 2025 City/DF FM2 204th Street to 69th Ave (LS2) Force Main Replacement 2030 City/DF FM3 North of Tviet Rd (LS13) Force Main Replacement 2035 City PP1 New East Hill Lift Station (LS2 alternative) 2027 City/DF PP2 LS 6 Pump Improvements 2030 City PP3 LS 11 Improvements (replacement & expansion) 2025 City/DF PP4 LS 12 Improvements (increase capacity) 2030 City/DF Treatment Facility Improvements F1 WRF UV Disinfection System Replacement 2025 City F3 WRF Capacity Increase 2040 City Miscellaneous Improvements Comprehensive Wastewater Plan Update 2030 City Notes: 1 See GSP for individual project descriptions 2 City (100%); Developer Funded, DF (100%); or shared cost Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 14 Figure 2: Sewer Service Area Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 15 Stormwater The City of Arlington owns and operates its stormwater Utility to maintain the City’s stormwater drainage system, protect its water resources and assure full implementation of the City’s NPDES Phase II stormwater permit, as issued by the Department of Ecology. The Stormwater Utility has two full time technical stormwater staff who report to the Utilities Manager. Supporting services are provided by Maintenance and Operations Department (street sweeping and shared maintenance of storm infrastructure) and the Wastewater Department (maintenance of storm infrastructure). The Stormwater Utility has prepared, and the City of Arlington has adopted, a Comprehensive Stormwater Plan (SCP) which is incorporated into this Plan by reference. The City of Arlington sits within two surface water basins, the Stillaguamish River basin to the north and the Snohomish River basin to the south. Stormwater collected in the City’s drainage structures is either discharged to surface waters or infiltrated into the ground. Stormwater infrastructure includes: 83.7 miles of City streets; 4,563 catch basins and stormwater manholes; 52.9 miles of stormwater conveyance pipes; 18.9 miles of ditches and swales; 3.0 miles of culverts; 206 detention basins; more than 34 rain gardens and bioswales; 71 outfalls to surface waters, and three stormwater wetlands. The inventory of these features is included in the SCP and also incorporated in the City’s GIS asset management database. The City’s SCP regularly evaluate stormwater programming to assure capital funding for community care and environmental protection. Since the 2010 SCP, the City has implemented the projects identified in Table 5. Numerous capital improvements will be required to accommodate the growth projections expected for the City. Projects targeted in the 2024 SCP for the 20-year horizon (2044) are identified in Table 6. Descriptions for each project are provided in SCP. Table 6. Stormwater Utility Capital Improvement Projects, 2010-2024 2010 CIP No. Project Description Year 1a Old Town Storm Drain Improvements 2012-2020 2 Haller (Butler) Trunk Line Improvements 2011 4 Hammer-Butler Stormwater Wetland Completion 2011 Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 16 2010 CIP No. Project Description Year 34 Prairie Cr Jensen Business Pk Riparian Improvements 2014 35 Prairie Creek 74st Ave Culvert Replacement 2013 62 Edgecomb Cr. Relocation--Crown Distributing Site 2010 Projects in Process Table 7. Stormwater Utility Capital Improvement Projects, 2025-2044 2024 CIP No. Project Description1 (5 years Funding2 Cost 22 Prairie Creek 71st Ave Culvert Headwall Repair 2027 City 29 Kruger Cr Stillaguamish Culvert Replacement Detention and Treatment Facilities Storm Wetland Outfall Improvements Riparian Improvements and Sediment Stabilization Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 17 2024 CIP No. Project Description1 (5 years Funding2 Cost 23 Prairie Cr Jensen Business Pk Riparian Improvements 2025 City 24 W. Fork Prairie Cr Stream Channel Stabilization 2030 City 33 Kruger Creek Bank Stabilization 2025 City 36 Country Charm Park Riparian Improvements 2030 City 47 Beaver Relocation Program Annual City/Partner 7 Haller Parking Lot Drainage Improvements 2025 City 39 East Hill Critical Areas Stormwater Evaluation & Design 2025 City/DF 42 Edgecomb Cr. Gleneagle Branch Reconstruction (WA Trucking) 2030 City/DF Notes: 1 See SCP for individual project descriptions 2 City (100%); Developer Funded, DF (100%); or shared cost Airport The Arlington Municipal Airport is part of the National Plan of Integrated Systems (NPIAS), as well as of the transportation infrastructure serving the City of Arlington, Snohomish County, and the northern portion of the Seattle-Tacoma Metropolitan Area. The Airport is located north of the Seattle-Tacoma Metropolitan Area, approximately three miles southwest of the Arlington Old Town Business District, approximately one-third of a mile from the Highway Commercial District, and twelve miles north of the City of Everett. It is owned and operated by the City of Arlington and is contained within the corporate boundaries of the City. The airport is 1,200 acres and includes industrial, commercial, and public land uses, in addition to the aviation operations. The majority of the existing general aviation facilities are located along the east side of Runway 16/34, between 59th Avenue NE and Taxiway “A”. This part of the airport is developed with aircraft storage facilities, including over 400 T-hangars and apron area to accommodate over eighty tie- down spaces. The City of Arlington owns 108 of the existing T-hangars. There is also a Fixed Base Operator (FBO), and several maintenance, and individually owned aircraft storage hangars throughout this area. Additional general aviation facilities are developed along the southwest side of Runway 11/29. These facilities include tie-down apron space for aircrafts and complexes of several new business-related aircraft storage hangars. The existing ultra-light hangar complex is in the northwest quadrant of the airport and has storage for approximately 62 aircraft. There are approximately 600 aircraft based at the airport (including 12 helicopters, 20 gliders, and 23 ultra- lights). The airport’s hangar occupancy rate is 100 percent currently. There is significant demand for the additional aircraft storage facilities (approximately 40 aircraft owners are on file requesting space). The Airport is home to one of the largest “Fly-Ins” in the Northwest -- The Arlington Fly-In. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 18 The Airport has sufficient area to accommodate both aviation and non-aviation development in the Cascade Industrial Center which includes the airport. There are over 200 businesses on airport property that lease land and/or facilities from the City. Approximately 25% of these businesses involve aviation or aviation-related uses associated with the airport the remaining businesses are non-aviation. The GMA recognizes airports in two ways. Airports are considered essential public facilities under the GMA and cities are required to plan accordingly to protect them. In addition, GMA recognizes the potential conflict between airports and surrounding uses and directs that every county, city, and town to discourage siting of incompatible uses next to airports. Arlington’s Municipal Code permits airports and aviation-related uses in the Aviation Flightline zoning district, thereby addressing the requirements for Essential Public Facilities. To address the potential conflict between the airport and other land uses, the City has an airport overlay that defines separation between aviation and other land uses. Snohomish County also has ordinances that protect these areas from encroachment. Information Services The Information Technology Department provides the entire network and telephone communication services for the City’s 128 full-time employees. The Department currently has five full time employee positions and two vehicles. The Departments offices are located within City Hall located at 238 N. Olympic Avenue, however in the future, the Department may occupy the old fire department building, known as Station 47. This is an Arlington Municipal Airport owned building on Lot 109 and located at 6231 188th Street NE. The Department is responsible for the following disciplines: • Windows Endpoint Administration – 125 Desktops and Laptops • Window Server Administration – 42 Windows Servers and 17TB of Data • Network Administration – 27 network switches, fiber to all city facilities • Cyber Security – Firewalls, Endpoint Management, Manage/Detect Response (MDR) systems, Phishing Simulation, Network Access Control • Access Control – Access Control / Alarms and Intercoms • Enterprise Backup Systems – Offloaded to Air gapped Cloud storage • AV Systems – Teams Conference Rooms / AV in Council Chambers / Livestream Meetings • Fiber Infrastructure – Over 5 miles of fiber to all City facilities • Telephony – Unified Messaging System using Teams with Ring Central • Contracts – For services such as Copy Machines / Wide Format Printers Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 19 • Wireless – Both internal and public Wi-Fi for citizens • Cameras – 73 Cameras located throughout the City • Critical Infrastructure – Providing equipment and security SCADA Network for Public Drinking Water and Sanitary Sewer Transportation Please refer to the Transportation Book for a description of these facilities. Contracted Services Fire and Emergency Medical Services North County Fire Authority provides fire prevention and inspection and emergency medical services for Arlington. Please refer to the Public Safety Book for a description of this service provider. Library Sno-Isle Libraries owns and operates two libraries in Arlington (Figure 4). One library branch, the Arlington Library, is located at 135 N Washington Avenue. The other library branch, called the Lakewood/Smokey Point Library, is located at 3411 169th Place NE. Sno-Isle Libraries offer free access to books, e-books, DVDs, printers, subscription databases, Internet on computers, and provides wireless Internet connectivity. The libraries offers a variety of programs for children, teens, and adults. Some of these programs include: baby, toddler and preschool story times, reading programs, and a book discussion group. The Arlington Library is being remodeled and is in the design phase at the time of writing. The project will include an extension to the south side of the building to add approximately 4,500 square feet, and the existing building will be remodeled inside and out. The new space will be fully accessible, include an HVAC system, improved energy efficiency and sustainability, and provide more usable space for the community to enjoy. Solid Waste Waste Management Northwest, Inc., provides solid waste and recycling services within the City through a contract. Other Utilities Natural Gas Natural gas service to Arlington is supplied by two companies: Puget Sound Energy (PSE), which serves areas south of SR-531 (172nd Street NE), and Cascade Natural Gas Company, serving all areas north of SR- 531. Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 20 Cascade Natural Gas Company’s 2023 Integrated Resource Plan forecasts demand growth over a 28-year period, through 2050. This planning effort analyzes the most reliable and cost-effective means of meeting customer’s gas service needs. PSE’s 2021 Integrated Resource Plan 1 included a demand forecast through 2041 to determine the volume of natural gas that PSE is responsible for securing and delivering to its customers. This demand forecast considered three demand scenarios, temperature assumptions with consideration for warming trends, conservation, and renewable natural gas, among other considerations. The natural gas resource plan calls for increased investment in conservation to meet needs. As seen below in Figure 3 cost-effective, reliable conservation plays an important role. Figure 3. Peak Day usage in Winter months (2022-2024), from Puget Sound Energy Natural Gas Sales Resource Plan Electricity The City of Arlington is served by the Snohomish County Public Utilities District No. 1 (PUD). The PUD serves all of Snohomish County and Camano Island, including the communities of Everett, Granite Falls, Lake Stevens, Lynnwood, Marysville, Mill Creek, Edmonds, Monroe, Snohomish, Stanwood, and Woodway. PUD’s 2021 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) considers demand and supply for the 2022 to 2045 horizon. Through the IRP the PUD expects to maintain a surplus average annual energy position until 2043. The PUD has a diversified power portfolio although in 2020 the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) provided over 74% of the PUD’s power needs. PUD’s 20-year contract with the BPA expires in 2028 and the PUD is actively engaged with BPA as it considers the resource portfolio post-2028. 1 https://www.pse.com/en/IRP/Past-IRPs/2021-IRP Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 21 One PUD-owned generating resource is the Arlington Microgrid Solar Array located east of the Arlington Municipal Airport. This facility “is a demonstration testbed for several interconnected distributed energy technologies that are constructed to be self-sustaining if disconnected from the electrical grid at large”.2 This new local PUD office will serve northern Snohomish County and act as a staging area for recovery in the event of a large-scale disruption. PUD has partnered with 3rd Party Provider to install and operate a Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) within the Cascade Industrial Center, east of the Arlington Municipal Airport, at the PUD Arlington Campus. The BESS facility is proposed to be constructed in 2025/2026. The BESS will allow for PUD to buy or store power at low rates on off-peak times and distribute to customers during high peak demand, while keeping costs relatively the same for customers. Puget Sound Energy (PSE) owns and maintains a transmission corridor in the City of Arlington that transports electricity across the City. This corridor, which extends in a north-south direction on the east side of Arlington, contains two transmissions lines: the “Beverly – Beaver Lake” 115 kV line and the “Sedro Woolley – SCL Bothell” 230 kV line. These transmission lines serve the energy needs of areas to the north and south of Snohomish County. Under certain conditions, PSE's transmission line could support the local distribution grid by providing emergency back up to Snohomish PUD's system. Telecommunications Internet services are provided by the following providers in the City of Arlington: Xfinity, Ziply (Frontier), Hughes Net, Viasat, and Astound Broadband powered by Wave. In the South Cascade Industrial Center utility services, including the installation of fiber infrastructure, are being updated and extended south of 172nd Ave, including Fiberlines proposed along 168th St, 51st Ave, and 59th Ave. In summer 2022 the City of Arlington released a request for proposal to study the feasibility for a broadband fiber-to-the-premises network throughout the City, stating that “the City considers a modern digital infrastructure to be a critical component of a competitive city of the future and wishes to ensure that it is well-positioned to meet the current and future needs of its residents, businesses, and anchor institutions”. Public Schools Two school districts serve the Arlington UGA, the Arlington School District and the Lakewood School District. Both are described below and can be seen in Figure 4. Arlington School District The Arlington School District (ASD) extends far beyond the City of Arlington city limits (Figure 4) and had nearly 5,500 students enrolled in the 2020-2021 school year. In its jurisdiction there are four elementary schools (Presidents, Eagle Creek, Kent Prairie and Pioneer), two middle schools (Post and Haller), two 2 https://www.snopud.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Final_2021_IRP.pdf Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 22 high schools (Arlington) and (Weston), the ECEAP/APPLE Preschool, and the Stillaguamish Valley Learning Center. The Stillaguamish Valley Learning Center is a public school offering alternative learning programs. Although the District does not regard relocatable classrooms (portables) as a permanent solution for housing students, the District currently uses 17 of these classrooms at various school sites.3 Funding for capital improvements comes from a number of sources, including bonds, State funds, and impact fees. The 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan 4 projects capital facilities needs based on a six year forecast period. The planned improvements to accommodate projected student populations in 2029 include expansion of Post Middle School or constructing a new middle school to replace Post Middle School. Lakewood School District The Lakewood School District (LSD) covers approximately 23 square miles. As of 2023, the District provided service to 2,614 students.5 Only a small portion of the LSD is within the Arlington UGA, near Smokey Point (Figure 4). In its jurisdiction there are three elementary schools (Lakewood, English Crossing, and Cougar Creek), one middle school (Lakewood), and one high school (Lakewood). The 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan projects the student population to grow to 3,517 by 2044 and between 8 and 9% over the planning period (2024-2029).6 To address future capacity needs LSD is planning to add potable capacity to address short term needs and did not plan for permanent capacity improvements in the 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan. School Impact Fees The City of Arlington has adopted school impact fee ordinances for Arlington and Lakewood School Districts. Arlington and Lakewood School Districts provide the City of Arlington and Snohomish County biennial updates to their School District Capital Facilities Plans (CFP) to be adopted by City Council with the City’s biennial budget and with County Council. The school districts may collect impact fees per the Snohomish County operated school impact fee program authorized by RCW 82.02.040 and the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) under Chapter 36.70A RCW. The school districts are required to adopt their plans at both the City and County level because the school district boundaries of each district are located under both the City and County jurisdiction. These fees are calculated based on projected capital needs (land, facilities, and buses), and are updated every two years, based on the districts’ revised 6-Year Capital Facilities Plans. The City causes most new residential development to pay their proportionate fair share toward these capital needs. 3 https://www.snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/124160/Arlington-SD---2nd-Draft-June- 2024?bidId= 4 https://www.snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/124160/Arlington-SD---2nd-Draft-June- 2024?bidId= 5 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/122006/Lakewood-SD-first-draft-CFP-April-Draft 6 https://snohomishcountywa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/122006/Lakewood-SD-first-draft-CFP-April-Draft Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 23 Hospital Skagit Regional Health (SRH) operates in Skagit, Island, and north Snohomish Counties and operates 3 urgent care facilities, 2 emergency care locations, 2 hospitals, and 25 clinic care facilities. SRH operates several medical facilities in Arlington in Old Town and Smokey Point. Cascade Valley Hospital operates a 48-bed Acute Care Hospital and several other facilities including a surgery center at the corner of E Highland Dr and Stillaguamish Ave in Old Town/Kent Prairie. SRH also has an urgent care center and specialty service clinic at 3823 172nd Street NE. As of 2024 SRH is in the process of developing a multi-year strategic plan to determine the direction of the organization and the associated priorities.7 Figure 4. Libraries, Schools, and School District Boundaries 7 https://www.skagitregionalhealth.org/healthquest/blog/blog/2024/05/09/progress-and-momentum Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 24 Capital Facilities Plan Table 8 below summarizes the City’s 6-Year Capital Improvement Plan, representing the City’s list of identified capital needs to support this Plan, and funding mechanisms to pay for them. This table summarizes the projects identified in the sections above that are projected to occur within 6-years of the adoption of this plan (2024-2030). Table 8. Arlington’s 6-Year Capital Improvement Plan 2024 CIP No. Project Description1 (5 years Funding2 Cost WM1 Annual Water Main Replacement Program Annual City WM2 New Water Source 12" Transmission Main 2030 City WM3 WTP Influent 16" Transmission Main 2030 City WM4 High Service BPS Discharge Piping 2025 City WM5 12" North Island Crossing Water Main 2028 City/DF WM6 Island Crossing Utility Local Improvement District 2028 City/DF PZ1 Burn Road PRV 2025 City PZ2 Conversion of 710 Zone to 615 Zone 2025 City PZ3 Conversion of 540 Zone to 615 and 520 Zone 2025 City F1 WTP Expansion and Upgrade 2025 City F2 SE (640) Pressure Zone BPS 2025 City F5 Abandon Airport Well 2030 City F6 New Mid-term Additional Supply Well 2030 City F7 New Water Source Property Acquisition 2030 City M1 Drive-by to Radio Metering Conversion 2030 City M2 Source Water Protection Program 2030 City M3 Comprehensive Water System Plan Update 2030 City SM1- SM30 rehabilitation required for 2044 targets; Lift Station Improvements Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities—September 2024 25 PP3 LS 11 Improvements (replacement & expansion) 2025 City/DF PP4 LS 12 Improvements (increase capacity) 2030 City/DF PP5 LS 3 Rehabilitation 2030 City/DF Treatment Facility Improvements Miscellaneous Improvements Stormwater Stream Crossing Improvements Kruger Cr Stillaguamish Culvert Replacement Detention and Treatment Facilities 3 Storm Wetland Outfall Improvements 2030 City 6 Stormwater Wetland Maintenance & Annual City Riparian Improvements and Sediment Stabilization Drainage The City of Arlington’s Capital Projects Prioritization Matrix for Neighborhoods and City Owned Facilities, located in Appendix A, outlines the City’s methodology to prioritize funding and implementation of projects for both City-owned facilities and for capital improvement projects identified in each of the City’s neighborhoods (also identified in Appendix A). Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Section V: Implementation Action & Monitoring —November 2024 1 Arlington Implementation Actions Notes: • Short-Term: 0-5 years • Medium-Term: 5-10 years • Long-Term: 10 or more years Short-Term Establish a greenhouse gas inventory development process utilizing the US EPA standards to establish a base year, conduct data collection and quantification, develop a management plan, set target reduction, Community and Economic Development Department; Snohomish County; Puget Sound the City and increase the resiliency of Arlington in the face of climate Community and Economic Development efficient. This includes incremental regulatory changes to advance Community and Economic Development Book 2: Land Use Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Section V: Implementation Action & Monitoring —September 2024 2 Timeline Primary Implementation Strategies Lead City Departments and Key Partner Agencies Medium-Term Propose an expansion of the Arlington Urban Growth Area in Department; Snohomish County; Puget Sound cohesive development patterns within the City's industrial zones, Community and Economic Development Book 3: Housing portfolio of housing grant and loan programs, with focus on Community and Economic Development inspections to ensure compliance with existing plans and ordinances, as well as programs that will help identify and remediate health Community and Economic Development supporting the development of a diversity of housing types, sizes, levels of affordability, and locations through public and private Community and Economic Development Continue to refine policies, programs, and regulations to develop mixed-income housing throughout Arlington for ownership and rental housing. The City will continue to expand partnerships with local organizations and agencies to implement the Comprehensive Plan Community and Economic Development Department; Housing Authority of Snohomish Book 4: Economic Development strategies linked to Economic Development goals to increase the Community and Economic Development Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Section V: Implementation Action & Monitoring —September 2024 3 Timeline Primary Implementation Strategies Lead City Departments and Key Partner Agencies Short-Term Continue to use and expand the portfolio of tools and programs linked to economic competitiveness goals such as grants for Community and Economic Development Build strong, mutually beneficial partnerships with community organizations, public agencies, and institutions to meet economic development goals, with a focus on communities that have Department; Downtown Arlington Business Association; Stilly Valley Chamber of Commerce; Local agencies, Snohomish County, Puget Sound Regional Council, and State agencies; Arlington and Lakewood School Districts and other education and public infrastructure in geographic areas most in need of Department; Public Works Department; Housing Expand the Cascade Industrial Center to accommodate anticipated Department; Snohomish County; Puget Sound Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Space consistent with both the city’s Comprehensive Plan and the Parks and Department; Arlington and Lakewood School parks system. The City will continue to improve equitable access to new and existing parks and programs through projects that are consistent with Comprehensive Plan and the Parks and Recreation Community and Economic Development Book 6: Transportation Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Section V: Implementation Action & Monitoring —September 2024 4 Timeline Primary Implementation Strategies Lead City Departments and Key Partner Agencies system as an important component of the overall transportation system. Short-Term Pursue Safe Routes to School grants. Community and Economic Development Department; Public Works Department Short-Term Adopt the Downtown Sidewalk program. Community and Economic Development Department; Public Works Department Short-Term Continue to fund and complete projects that align with the Comprehensive Plan and Transportation Master Plan. This includes improvements and maintenance to traffic operations, streets, bridges, City-owned facilities, and bicycle and pedestrian Community and Economic Development Department; Snohomish County; Puget Sound and maintenance. Continue to review, prioritize, and fund capital projects that are consistent with and implement the Comprehensive Plan. This includes adhering to the City’s Complete Streets policy, investments in bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, coordinating investments with partnering agencies to support and develop a multimodal transportation network, and providing equal access to Public Works Department; Snohomish County; Continue to work to ensure the City has an active role in ongoing Economic Development Department; Puget Sound Book 7: Public Safety Book 8: Capital Facilities & Utilities Continue to fund and implement programs per the management plans to maintain and improve water, sanitary sewer, and stormwater Continue to review, prioritize, and fund capital projects that are consistent with and implement the Comprehensive Plan, including Economic Development Department; Police Department; North County Fire Department; Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Section V: Implementation Action & Monitoring —September 2024 5 Timeline Primary Implementation Strategies Lead City Departments and Key Partner Agencies Short-Term Continue to provide high-quality, equitable City services to the community, including but not limited to public safety, water, Economic Development Department; Police Department; Fire Department; Arlington Municipal Continue to fund and complete projects with a goal of improving the current level of service for City-maintained infrastructure, including Economic Development Department; Police Department; Fire Department; Arlington Municipal Build partnerships with local, County, and State agencies and service providers to ensure implementation of Comprehensive Plan policies Public Works Department, Community and Economic Development Department; Police Department; Fire Department; Arlington Municipal Airport; Snohomish County; Arlington, Lakewood, and Marysville School Districts; Puget Sound Arlington Comprehensive Plan Update Draft Content— Section IV: Appendix —November 2024 1 Section IV: Appendix Appendix A: Neighborhoods Appendix B: Racially Disparate Impact Analysis Appendix C: Land Use Forecasts Appendix D: HB1220 Analysis Appendix E: Emergency Housing Template Appendix F: Forecast Methodology and Discussion Appendix G: Parks and Recreation Master Plan Appendix H: Draft Transportation Master Plan Appendix I: 2024 Arlington Public Schools Capital Facilities Plan Appendix J: 2024 Lakewood School District Capital Facilities Plan Appendix K: DRAFT Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Appendix L: Department of Commerce Periodic Update Checklist for Fully-Planning Cities To be added in final draft: Appendix M: Environmental Review – EIS Appendix N: Consistency with Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies Appendix O: Response to PSRC Appendix P: Response to Department of Commerce Appendix Q: Adopting Ordinance 1 Appendix A: Subarea Neighborhoods 2 Table of Contents Appendix A: Subarea Neighborhoods Arlington Terrace ....................................................................................................................................... 3 Cascade Industrial Center ......................................................................................................................... 6 Crown Ridge ............................................................................................................................................ 20 East Hill .................................................................................................................................................... 24 Edgecomb ................................................................................................................................................ 27 Gateway .................................................................................................................................................. 32 Gleneagle ................................................................................................................................................ 40 Haller City ................................................................................................................................................ 50 Hilltop ...................................................................................................................................................... 55 Island Crossing ........................................................................................................................................ 61 Kent Prairie .............................................................................................................................................. 65 Old Town ................................................................................................................................................. 85 Smokey Point ......................................................................................................................................... 103 West Bluff .............................................................................................................................................. 129 3 4 Arlington Terrace Existing Conditions Arlington Terrace is located on the eastern side of the City. The subarea is triangle-shaped with each side measuring approximately three quarters of a mile. This small subarea is only 0.28 square miles. Highway 9 creates the eastern border with Crown Ridge just beyond the highway to the east. Arlington Terrace is connected to the rest of the City via 188th St NE. As 188th St NE enters Arlington Terrace, the road becomes a private road, 71st Dr NE then 190th Pl NE. 190th Pl NE splits into two private dead-end roads, 192nd Pl NE which runs north and east and 190th Pl NE which runs southeast. Arlington Terrace is entirely residential. The majority of the area is classified as Residential Ultra-Low Capacity, with one parcel of Residential Low Capacity and one parcel of Residential High Capacity in the northern part of the subarea. Parcels in Arlington Terrace are large, densely covered with trees, and dotted with single family homes. The subarea is not connected to the City’s sewer or water system. Residences are served by onsite septic system and community water system. There are moderate to severe slopes throughout the subarea. The significant slopes are more heavily concentrated on the western and eastern sides of the subarea. There is one notable stream, Prairie Creek, running through Arlington Terrace that flows towards the north. The west fork runs along the western boundary of the subarea. The east fork runs along Highway 9 and meets the west fork at the north border of the subarea. There is also one small wetland in the north portion of the subarea. This subarea has no public transportation, street trees, sidewalks, bike paths, or defined trails. There are also no parks, public art, or heritage trees in Arlington Terrace. Vision In 2044 Arlington Terrace remains a quiet, residential neighborhood with significant tree canopy. The subarea’s needed utility improvements such as connection to the City’s sewer and water systems make it a subarea ready for moderate increased housing density. This subarea’s higher housing density allows for a multitude of family sizes. Neighborhoods The neighborhoods in Arlington Terrace: BRJR Association 5 Existing Conditions: Public access from 188th Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood consisting of rural, 2.5 acre and 5 acre lots connected to Community Well/Private Onsite septic system and platted in 1978. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: This neighborhood provides many large, healthy trees. Deficiencies: Private roadways without curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips for street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Additionally, this neighborhood currently has a gravel road. Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 6 7 Cascade Industrial Center Existing Conditions Cascade Industrial Center is in the center of Arlington and is the City’s largest subarea, covering 3.5 square miles. The Arlington Municipal Airport is in the center of Cascade Industrial Center. The main roads in Cascade Industrial Center include 67th Ave NE and 59th Ave NE which both run north to south and Highway 531 (172nd St NE) which runs east to west south of the airport. 188th St NE connects Cascade Industrial Center to the eastern side of Arlington. The local bus runs on 188th St NE, north on 47th Ave NE, and on Cemetery Road (which turns into 198th St NE) along the northern borders of the subarea. There are bike lanes and sidewalks located along Airport Blvd. There are also sidewalks along 67th Ave NE and 59th Ave NE but few other sidewalks throughout the subarea. Cascade Industrial Center has a mix of zoning including a large section of Aviation Flightline in the center of the subarea. The eastern half of Cascade Industrial Center is zoned General Industrial with a few small areas of Public/Semi-Public throughout and a small section of General Commercial in the northeast corner. There are also sizable sections of Light Industrial and Business Park on the eastern side of the subarea. Small sections of Highway Commercial and General Commercial can also be found on the southern border of the subarea. There are several trails throughout Cascade Industrial Center. Airport Trail is a loop trail located in the center of the subarea and the Centennial Trail follows the eastern boundary of Cascade Industrial Center. Additional trails include the Secondary Airport Trail, multiple Airport Connector Trails, 168th Trail in the southwestern part of the subarea, and the 180th Path in the east. There is also a paved path on Arlington Valley Road in the northeast. There are two parks located next to each other in the subarea, Bill Quake Memorial Park, and W.E. Evans Park. A skatepark and athletic fields are located within the parks. An array of public art is located around the perimeter of the subarea. Edgecomb Creek, Edgecomb Tributary, and Hayo Creek, a Quilceda Tributary, all have a section located in the subarea. A few small wetlands are present in the southern part of the subarea. There are street trees but no heritage trees in Cascade Industrial Center. There are also small amounts of moderate and severe slopes in the northern section of the subarea. Vision In 2044 the Cascade Industrial Center subarea is a large hub of industrial development. This subarea is a major employer with upwards of 20,000 jobs including a job training center and the Airport. The Cascade Industrial Center is home to a satellite campus for an accredited college which attracts students to the area. The Cascade Industrial Center is a subarea with rich employment opportunities, opportunity for professional and academic growth, and a hub for further industrial development. Employees and visitors alike enjoy the trail network, food truck court, festivals, and other activities hosted throughout the year. 8 Neighborhoods The neighborhoods in Cascade Industrial Center are the following:  59th Dr Corp Hangers  Airport 37  Airways Mobile Home Park  Arlington Advanced Manufacturing Park  Arlington Airport Condo  AVR Business Park  BHB Condo 37  Cascade Business Park  Five Acre Turkey Farms  Fliteline Condo  Gateway Business Park  Hidden Glen Mobile Home Park  Mobile Estates  North End Aviation Homeport Condo  Pleasant Home Mobile Home Park  P.U.D. No. 1 of Snohomish County  Shoultes Green Acres  Smartcap Air North Arlington Industrial Park  Smartcap Arlington Industrial Park  Southwind Hangar Condo  The Outpost  Willett  Williams Investment Commercial Park Subarea: Cascade Industrial Center Neighborhood: 59th Dr Corp Hangers Owners Assn Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 59th Avenue NE. Airport hangers located on Arlington Municipal Airport connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2007. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Occupants are within close proximity to Airport Trail, Bill Quake Memorial Field, and Waldo E. Evans Memorial Field. Deficiencies: Airport owned property with limited improvements. Property does not have sidewalks, curbs, gutters, or planting strips for street trees. Identified CIP Projects: Located on Airport Property: Airport Master Plan identifies improvement projects. 9 Subarea: Cascade Industrial Center Neighborhood: Airport 37 Existing Conditions: Public access from of 199th Street NE and 60th Avenue NE. Industrial neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and was planted in 1986. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Bill Quake Memorial Field and Waldo E. Evans Memorial Field. Deficiencies: Streetlights are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Additionally, this neighborhood has insufficient parking. Identified CIP Projects: Streetlights along 60th Ave NE and 199th St NE Neighborhood: Airways Mobile Home Park Existing Conditions: Public access from 188th Street NE. Mobile home park consisting of legal non-conforming mobile homes connected to Arlington water/sewer and established in 1982. Attributes: This neighborhood provides affordable housing. Residents are within close proximity to the Centennial Trail, Airport Trail, Bill Quake Memorial Field, and Waldo E. Evans Memorial Field. Deficiencies: Private roadways with no sidewalks, curbs, gutters, or planting strips. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed within the development area. 188th Street improvements along the frontage, including sidewalks, curbs, gutter, planting strip for street trees. 10 Subarea: Cascade Industrial Center Neighborhood: Arlington Advanced Manufacturing Park Existing Conditions: Public access from 59th Avenue NE, 63rd Avenue NE, and 180th Street NE. Industrial Park neighborhood, platted in 2011 with interior private drives. Attributes: No public infrastructure attributes. Deficiencies: Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, planter strips for street trees, and streetlights are not provided within the neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, planter strips for street trees, and streetlights along 59th Avenue, 63rd Avenue NE, and 180th Street NE. Neighborhood: Arlington Airport Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 59th Avenue NE. Airport hangers located on Arlington Municipal Airport connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1991. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and an Owners Association. Attributes: Occupants are within close proximity to Airport Trail, Bill Quake Memorial Field, and Waldo E. Evans Memorial Field. Airport owned property with limited improvements. Property does not have sidewalks, curbs, gutters, or planting strips for street trees. Identified CIP Projects: Located on Airport Property: Airport Master Plan identifies improvement projects. 11 Subarea: Cascade Industrial Center Neighborhood: AVR Business Park Existing Conditions: Public access from Arlington Valley Road (74th Avenue NE). Industrial neighborhood to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2021. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to 74th Ave Trail. Deficiencies: This development was constructed under current regulations and thus does not have any identified deficiencies at this time. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: BHB Condo 37 Existing Conditions: Public access from of 199th Street NE. Industrial neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2009. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Bill Quake Memorial Field and Waldo E. Evans Memorial Field. Deficiencies: Streetlights are not provided within this neighborhood. Property is not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: Streetlights along 199th St NE. 12 Subarea: Cascade Industrial Center Neighborhood: Cascade Business Park Existing Conditions: Future public access from 172nd Street NE and 59th Avenue NE. This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land that was platted in 2022. Attributes: This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land. The property was part of the Edgecomb Creek re- alignment and will have a trail that follows the steam buffer. Close to Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land. Identified CIP Projects: 172nd St improvements. Neighborhood: Five Acre Turkey Farms Existing Conditions: Public access from 59th Avenue NE and Airport Boulevard. Arlington Municipal Airport connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1939. Attributes: Occupants are within close proximity to Airport Trail, Bill Quake Memorial Field, and Waldo E. Evans Memorial Field. Deficiencies: Airport owned property with limited improvements. Property does not have sidewalks, curbs, gutters, or planting strips for street trees. Identified CIP Projects: Located on Airport Property: Airport Master Plan identifies improvement projects. 13 Subarea: Cascade Industrial Center Neighborhood: Fliteline Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 59th Avenue NE. Airport hangers located on Arlington Municipal Airport connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1992. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions. Attributes: Occupants are within close proximity to Airport Trail, Bill Quake Memorial Field, and Waldo E. Evans Memorial Field. Deficiencies: Airport owned property with limited improvements. Property does not have sidewalks, curbs, gutters, or planting strips for street trees. Identified CIP Projects: Located on Airport Property: Airport Master Plan identifies improvement projects. Existing Conditions: Public access from 67th Avenue and 197th Street NE from Arlington Valley Road. Industrial neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2020. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Occupants are within close proximity to Centennial Trail on the west and 74th Ave Trail on the east. Deficiencies: This development was constructed under current regulations and thus does not have any identified deficiencies at this time, except for the completion of a new public roadway (197th St) connecting 67th Ave NE to Arlington Valley Road. Identified CIP Projects: 197th St NE improvements, including pavement, sidewalks, curbs, gutter, planting strip for street trees, streetlights, and roadway stormwater drainage. 14 Subarea: Cascade Industrial Center Neighborhood: Hidden Glen Mobile Home Park Existing Conditions: Public access from 67th Avenue NE. Mobile home park consisting of legal non-conforming mobile homes connected to Arlington water/sewer and established in the 1975, with interior private drives. Attributes: This neighborhood provides affordable housing. Residents are within close proximity to the Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Private roadways with no sidewalks, curbs, gutters, or planting strips. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from 67th Avenue NE. Mobile home park consisting of legal non-conforming mobile homes connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in approximately 1999, with interior private drives. Attributes: This neighborhood provides affordable housing. Residents are within close proximity to the Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Private roadways with no sidewalks, curbs, gutters, or planting strips. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 15 Subarea: Cascade Industrial Center Neighborhood: North End Aviation Homeport Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 59th Avenue NE. Airport hangers located on Arlington Municipal Airport connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1991. Attributes: Occupants are within close proximity to Airport Trail, Bill Quake Memorial Field, and Waldo E. Evans Memorial Field. Deficiencies: Airport owned property with limited improvements. Property does not have sidewalks, curbs, gutters, or planting strips for street trees. Identified CIP Projects: Located on Airport Property: Airport Master Plan identifies improvement projects. Neighborhood: Pleasant Home Mobile Home Park Existing Conditions: Public access from 59th Avenue NE, 63rd Avenue NE, and 180th Street NE. Industrial Park neighborhood, platted in 2001, with interior private drives. Attributes: This neighborhood provides affordable housing. Residents are within close proximity to the Centennial Trail and Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Private roadways with no sidewalks, curbs, gutters, or planting strips. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 16 Subarea: Cascade Industrial Center Neighborhood: P.U.D. No. 1 of Snohomish County Existing Conditions: Public access from 59th Avenue and 63rd Avenue from 180th Street NE. Industrial neighborhood consisting of Public Utility connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2022. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Employees are within close proximity to Airport Trail. Deficiencies: This development was constructed under current regulations and thus does not have any identified deficiencies at this time. Identified CIP Projects: 63rd Ave NE improvements to complete the connection from 180th St NE to 172nd St NE and includes roadway, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, planting strips for street trees, and roadway stormwater drainage. Neighborhood: Shoultes Green Acres Existing Conditions: Public access from 51st Avenue. Single Family Residential neighborhood consisting of legal non- conforming lots connected to well/onsite septic system and platted in 1968. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions. Attributes: Neighborhood provides affordable housing within close proximity to businesses within the Cascade Industrial Park. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Additionally, this neighborhood needs connection to Arlington water/sewer and has poor roadway conditions. Identified CIP Projects: 170th Pl NE and 52nd Ave NE improvements, including pavement, sidewalks, curbs, gutter, planting strip for street trees, streetlights, and roadway stormwater drainage. 17 Subarea: Cascade Industrial Center Neighborhood: Smartcap Air North Arlington Industrial Park Existing Conditions: Future public access from Airport Boulevard and 174th Street NE. Future industrial neighborhood, platted in 2023. This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land. Attributes: This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land. Deficiencies: This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Smartcap Arlington Industrial Park Existing Conditions: Public access from Airport Boulevard (51st Avenue NE) and 174th Street NE. Industrial neighborhood consisting of Public Utility connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2022. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Employees are within close proximity to Airport Trail. Deficiencies: This development was constructed under current regulations and thus does not have any identified deficiencies at this time. Identified CIP Projects: New Development: No public improvement projects are proposed. 18 Subarea: Cascade Industrial Center Neighborhood: Southwind Hangar Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from Airport Boulevard. Airport hangers located on Arlington Municipal Airport connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2005. The development has Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions and Owners Association, Attributes: Occupants are within close proximity to the Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Airport owned property with limited improvements. Property does not have sidewalks, curbs, gutters, or planting strips for street trees. Identified CIP Projects: Located on Airport Property: Airport Master Plan identifies improvement projects. Subarea: Cascade Industrial Center Neighborhood: The Outpost Existing Conditions: Public access from 168th Street NE, 51st Avenue NE, and 47th Avenue NE. Urban Village Mixed-Use neighborhood with multi-family commercial and retails uses throughout for a walkable community. Connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2020. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents have private parks. Deficiencies: This development was constructed under current regulations and thus does not have any identified deficiencies at this time. Identified CIP Projects: New Development: No public improvement projects are proposed. 19 Existing Conditions: Public access from 67th Avenue NE. Single Family and Duplex Residential neighborhood consisting of legal non-conforming lots connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1991. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, and streetlights provided to the entrance of the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure deficiencies. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Subarea: Cascade Industrial Center Neighborhood: Williams Investment Commercial Park Existing Conditions: Future public access from 168th Street NE and 47th Avenue NE. Future commercial / industrial neighborhood. This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land platted in 2024. Attributes: This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land. Deficiencies: This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 20 21 Crown Ridge Existing Conditions Crown Ridge is a small subarea covering 0.28 square miles located on the eastern side of the City. Arlington’s city limit creates the eastern border of the subarea. Highway 9 creates the western border with Arlington Terrace and Gleneagle subareas just beyond the highway to the west. Kent Prairie lies to the north. Crown Ridge is connected to the Kent Prairie subarea via a small section of the Zimmerman Hill Climb Trail that comes down from the north into the subarea. Arlington High School is in the southern part of Crown Ridge and the associated land is classified as Public/Semi-Public in the City’s zoning. The rest of the subarea is residential made up of mostly Residential Low Capacity with two parcels of Residential Moderate Capacity south of the high school. The northern portion of Crown Ridge is made up of single-family homes organized within Crown Ridge Estates. Large trees along the perimeter surround the subdivision and high school. Crown Ridge Blvd is the primary road in the subarea. It runs north to south connecting to Highway 9 at the southern end of the subarea. Four smaller roads break off from Crown Ridge Blvd to form internal circulation within Crown Ridge Estates north of the high school. All roads in Crown Ridge have sidewalks and there are many street trees throughout the subarea. Portage Creek flows towards the northwest and runs through the southeast and northeast corners of Crown Ridge. Prairie Creek enters Crown Ridge from the south and runs along the subarea’s western border along Highway 9. A wetland that is mostly located in unincorporated Snohomish County is in the southern part of Crown Ridge along Prairie Creek, south of the high school. Severe slopes run generally north-south in two places in the Crown Ridge. One runs on the western side of the subarea along Highway 9. The other severe slope makes up much of the northeastern section of Crown Ridge and runs along the eastern border of the subarea. Moderate slopes are dispersed throughout Crown Ridge. This subarea has no public transportation or bike paths. There is no public art or heritage trees in Crown Ridge. Vision In 2044 the Crown Ridge subarea is better connected to the rest of Arlington due to the recent extension of 186th St NE to McElroy Rd in Snohomish County. The recent expansion of this subarea through an annexation invites more families into Crown Ridge. Crown Ridge is a residential subarea that is also home to Arlington High School. Neighborhoods The neighborhoods in Crown Ridge are the following:  Bridgemont  Crown Ridge Estates Division 1  Crown Ridge Estates Division 2  Crown Ridge Estates Division 3 22 Subarea: Crown Ridge Neighborhood: Bridgemont Existing Conditions: Public access from 186th Street NE and 86th Avenue NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2022. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a small private park. Deficiencies: This neighborhood has only one way in/out over a covered bridge. Additionally, this neighborhood is not near public art. Identified CIP Projects: Connection of Crown Ridge Blvd to Burn Rd through the opening and extension of 186th St NE Neighborhood: Crown Ridge Division 1 Existing Conditions: Public access from Highway 9, Crown Ridge Boulevard, Vista Drive, and Knoll Drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1999. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks and Zimmerman Trail. Additionally, this neighborhood provides a community garden. Deficiencies: This neighborhood has only one way in/out over a covered bridge. Additionally, this neighborhood is not near public art. Identified CIP Projects: Connection of Crown Ridge Blvd to Burn Rd through the opening and extension of 186th St NE 23 Subarea: Crown Ridge Neighborhood: Crown Ridge Division 2 Existing Conditions: Public access from Highway 9, Crown Ridge Boulevard, Vista Drive, and Peak Place. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2000. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a small private park and Zimmerman Trail. Deficiencies: This neighborhood has only one way in/out over a covered bridge. Additionally, this neighborhood is not near public art. Identified CIP Projects: Connection of Crown Ridge Blvd to Burn Rd through the opening and extension of 186th St NE Neighborhood: Crown Ridge Division 3 Existing Conditions: Public access from Highway 9, Crown Ridge Boulevard, and Valley View Drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2000. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks and Zimmerman Trail. Deficiencies: This neighborhood has only one way in/out over a covered bridge. Additionally, this neighborhood is not near public art. Identified CIP Projects: Connection of Crown Ridge Blvd to Burn Rd through the opening and extension of 186th St NE 24 25 East Hill Existing Conditions The East Hill subarea is located on the eastern side of Arlington along a bluff above the South Fork of the Stillaguamish River. The subarea is 0.5 square miles and is bordered to the north, east, and south by unincorporated Snohomish County. Burn Rd and Kent Prairie subarea form the western border of the East Hill subarea. There are only two major roads in the subarea: 95th Ave NE and Tveit Rd. The majority of the subarea is currently zoned Residential Ultra Low Capacity while the southeast corner of East Hill is zoned Residential Low Capacity. There are steep slopes throughout the subarea which a significant concentration in the northern portion of the subarea. Eagle Creek and several tributaries run along the base of these slopes, all flowing to the north. Just north of the subarea Eagle Creek flows through a wetland that extends slightly into the northern portion of East Hill. There are currently no parks, sidewalks, trails, bike lanes, public transit routes, heritage trees, or public art in the East Hill subarea. Vision In 2044, East Hill boasts diverse housing options such as middle housing and small lot single family homes making the East Hill subarea a residential hub. East Hill is well-connected to the rerouted Burn Road and the rest of Arlington via the comprehensive trail network. Neighborhoods There is one neighborhood in Arlington Terrace: Quail Ridge. Subarea: East Hill Neighborhood: Quail Ridge Existing Conditions: Public access from 95th Avenue NE and 196th Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water with onsite septic system and platted in 2006. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: There are currently no public attributes. Deficiencies: The development was platted as a rural cluster under Snohomish County regulations and street standards. Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips for street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Additionally, this neighborhood needs connection to Arlington sewer. Identified CIP Projects: 196th Pl NE improvements to include, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, planting strips for street trees, and roadway stormwater drainage. 26 27 Edgecomb Existing Conditions Edgecomb is a small subarea on the southern boundary of the City that covers 0.18 square miles. Its western boundary runs along 67th Ave NE, its southern boundary runs along 172nd St NE, and its eastern boundary runs along Gleneagle’s western boundary. The majority of Edgecomb is zoned as Residential Low Capacity while the southwestern corner of Edgecomb is zoned as Neighborhood Commercial. All streets within Edgecomb’s boundaries have active sidewalks. The Centennial Trail runs along the western boundary from north to south of Edgecomb and there are three displays of public art in the form of three banners within the southwest corner of Edgecomb’s boundary. Edgecomb’s critical areas are comprised of moderate slopes from the northwest boundary stretching diagonally to the southeast boundary. There are no bike lanes, public transportation, or heritage trees. There are several wetlands and Edgecomb Creek runs along the southern boundary of the subareas. Vision In 2044 Edgecomb subarea remains a residential area of Arlington. Edgecomb’s residents enjoy the connectivity of the subarea to the rest of the City thanks to the recent expansion of 172nd St as well as the addition of a roundabout. The subarea allows residents to enjoy the Centennial Trail as Edgecomb is home to the south entrance of the trail. Edgecomb is well-connected to neighboring subareas, the Cascade Industrial Center, and Smokey Point Subareas, and is conveniently located adjacent to 67th Ave NE and 172nd St NE. Neighborhoods The neighborhoods in Edgecomb are the following:  Bovee Acres  Centennial Park  Crossing at Edgecomb Creek  Highland View Estates  Woodway Heights 28 Subarea: Edgecomb Neighborhood: Bovee Acres Existing Conditions: Public access from 67th Avenue NE and Bovee Lane. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2001. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Centennial Trail and a sport court on top of a storm drainage vault. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any community parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Centennial Park Existing Conditions: Public access from 67th Avenue NE. Multi-family neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2020. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents have private parks. Directly adjacent to Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: This development was constructed under current regulations and thus does not have any identified deficiencies at this time. Identified CIP Projects: 172nd St improvements that include roadway widening, sidewalk or trail, curb, gutter, and planting strip for street trees. 29 Subarea: Edgecomb Neighborhood: Crossing at Edgecomb Creek Existing Conditions: Public access from 172nd Street NE, 73rd Avenue NE, 176th Place NE, 73rd Drive NE, and 72nd Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2005. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. A formal sport court is developed on top of the stormwater vault for the subdivision and residents are within close proximity of Woodway and Wedgewood Parks. Deficiencies: This neighborhood has only one way in/out. Additionally, this neighborhood is within close proximity to Centennial Trail with no path or trail to access and no public art. Identified CIP Projects: 172nd St improvements that include roadway widening, sidewalk or trail, curb, gutter, and planting strip for street trees. Neighborhood: Highland View Estates Existing Conditions: Public access from 67th Avenue NE, Highland View Drive, Upland Drive, Hillside Court, and Topper Court. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1997. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Centennial Trail and a neighborhood park on Upland Dr. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any community parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 30 Subarea: Edgecomb Neighborhood: Woodway Heights Existing Conditions: Public access from 172nd Street NE, 73rd Avenue NE, 176th Place NE, and 74th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2007. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Woodway Park and Wedgewood Park. Deficiencies: This neighborhood has only one way in/out. Additionally, this neighborhood is within close proximity to Centennial Trail with no path or trail to access and no public art. Identified CIP Projects: 172nd St improvements that include roadway widening, sidewalk or trail, curb, gutter, and planting strip for street trees. 31 32 Gateway Existing Conditions Gateway is a small subarea covering 0.18 square miles, located in the northwest corner of Arlington. State Route 530 runs along the northern boundary of the subareas, 67th Ave NE creates the eastern boundary, and 59th Avenue NE is situated in the western portion of the subarea. Most sidewalks present in the subarea are categorized as active sidewalks. There are three zoning designations across Gateway. The northwest area of Gateway is zoned General Commercial, the central area, making up the majority of Gateway, is zoned Residential Low Capacity, and the eastern side of Gateway is zoned as Neighborhood Commercial. Moderate and severe slopes run diagonally through the center of Gateway as well as along the northeast boundary of this subarea. Along the northeast edge of Gateway there is also a small piece of wetland in this region. There are no trails, bike paths, public art, heritage trees, or public transit in the subarea. Vision In 2044 rightly named the Gateway subarea is the entry way into not only Kent Prairie, but also Old Town Arlington. With River View Park in this subarea, mixed-use development, and retail opportunities, Gateway provides Arlington with a vibrant environment with diverse entertainment and housing. Neighborhoods The neighborhoods in Gateway are the following:  Arlington Ridgeview Estates  Campbell & Roach Addition  Elite Estates  Highland Bluff  Highland Bluff Condo  Peterson  Pioneer Meadows Division 1  Pioneer Meadows Division 2  Pioneer Meadows Division 3  Ronning Road  Willard Condo 33 Subarea: Gateway Neighborhood: Arlington Ridgeview Estates Existing Conditions: Public access from 59th Avenue NE, 207th Street NE, 61st Avenue NE, and 209th Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2007. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Campbell & Roach Addition Existing Conditions: Public access from 211th Place NE, 66th Avenue, and 208th Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1980. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, and sidewalks are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park and Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Additionally, the roads within this neighborhood are in poor condition and in need of repair. Identified CIP Projects: 211th Place improvements, including pavement, sidewalk/trail, curb, gutter, planting strip for street trees, and streetlights. Pavement along 66th Avenue NE and 208th Street NE. 34 Subarea: Gateway Neighborhood: Elite Estates Existing Conditions: Public access from 211th Place NE, 66th Avenue, and 208th Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1999. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: 211th Place improvements, including pavement, sidewalk/trail, curb, gutter, planting strip for street trees, and streetlights. Pavement along 66th Avenue NE. Existing Conditions: Public access from 59th Avenue NE, 207th Street NE, 61st Avenue NE, and 209th Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2002. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Residents are in close proximity to a private park. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 35 Subarea: Gateway Neighborhood: Highland Bluff Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 59th Avenue NE, 207th Street NE, 61st Avenue NE, and 209th Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood consisting of duplex lots connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2002. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Peterson Existing Conditions: Public access from 66th Avenue NE Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2008. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to the Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Planting strips and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: 211th Place improvements, including pavement, sidewalk/trail, curb, gutter, planting strip for street trees, and streetlights. Street trees along 66th Ave NE. 36 Subarea: Gateway Neighborhood: Pioneer Meadows Division 1 Existing Conditions: Public access from 211th Place NE and 67th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1992. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to the Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: 211th Place improvements, including pavement, sidewalk/trail, curb, gutter, planting strip for street trees, and streetlights. Street trees along 67th Drive NE. Neighborhood: Pioneer Meadows Division 2 Existing Conditions: Public access from 211th Place NE and 67th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1992. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to the Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: 211th Place improvements, including pavement, sidewalk/trail, curb, gutter, planting strip for street trees, and streetlights. Street trees along 67th Drive NE. 37 Subarea: Gateway Neighborhood: Pioneer Meadows Division 3 Existing Conditions: Public access from 211th Place NE and 67th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1992. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to the Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: 211th Place improvements, including pavement, sidewalk/trail, curb, gutter, planting strip for street trees, and streetlights. Street trees along 67th Drive NE. Existing Conditions: Public access from 66th Avenue NE and 210th Street NE. Duplex Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2008. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to the Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: 211th Place improvements, including pavement, sidewalk/trail, curb, gutter, planting strip for street trees, and streetlights. Street trees along 66th Avenue NE and 210th Street NE. 38 Existing Conditions: Public access from 211th Place NE and 67th Drive NE. Duplex style neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2007. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to the Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: 211th Place improvements, including pavement, sidewalk/trail, curb, gutter, planting strip for street trees, and streetlights. Street trees along 67th Drive NE. 39 40 Gleneagle Existing Conditions Gleneagle is a golf course community located in the southeastern part of the City. The subarea covers 0.7 square miles. Gleneagle spans from 188th St NE in the north to 172nd St NE in the south. Highway 9 creates the eastern border and 67th Ave NE creates the western border. The are several locations of interest in Gleneagle. Pioneer Elementary School is in the northeastern corner and there is one public art piece near the northwest corner, a sculpture titled “Eagles Come Home.” Gleneagle Golf Course can be found in the center of the subarea and there are two parks, Wedgewood Park in the south and Forest Trail Park runs alongside the golf course. There are several main roads that allow access to Gleneagle and create connections to the rest of the City. Eaglefield Dr goes west to east across the subarea and connects to Highway 9, near Pioneer Elementary. On the west side, Eaglefield Dr turns into W Country Club Dr and then E Country Club Dr creating a loop in the center of the subarea. Gleneagle Blvd links Gleneagle to the surrounding subareas by connecting to 172nd St NE at the southern border and Woodlands Way creates a connection between W Country Club Dr and 67th Ave NE. Nearly all roads in Gleneagle have sidewalks except for some residential streets in the northwest. A large majority of Gleneagle is zoned Residential Low Capacity. The exceptions are three Public/Semi-Public zoned areas and one small section zoned Neighborhood Commercial in the northwest corner of the subarea. Both the Edgecomb Tributary and the left fork of Prairie Creek are parallel to one another and flow north through the subarea. There are moderate slopes in a majority of the subarea and there are severe slopes found in the northwest corner. There are no trails, no bike paths, no heritage trees, and no public transportation in the subarea. Vision In 2044 Gleneagle boasts beautiful open space and educational resources. Home to Forest Trail Park, Wedgewood Park, a golf course, and Pioneer Elementary School, the Gleneagle subarea is an asset to the City of Arlington. The northwestern mixed-use development with its retail opportunities further diversifies all that Gleneagle has to offer. Neighborhoods The neighborhoods in Gleneagle are the following:  Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 1: The Woodlands  Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 2A  Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 3A  Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 3B  Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 4B  Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 4C  Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 4D  Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 4E  Gleneagle Division 2 Sector B PH 1  Gleneagle Division 2 Sector B PH 2  Gleneagle Division 2 Sector B PH 3  Legends at Gleneagle  Woodland Greens Condo  Woodland Ponds 1 Condo  Woodland Ponds 2 Condo 41 Subarea: Gleneagle Neighborhood: Gleneage Division 1 Sector 1: The Woodlands Existing Conditions: Public access from Woodlands Way, Woodbine Drive, Silverleaf Place, Sprucewood Place, Vineway Place, N Cedarbough Loop, Noble Drive, S Cedarbough Loop, Oakwood Place, and Shady Grove Place. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1985. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curb on one side, gutters, sidewalks on one side and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks. Additionally, this neighborhood provides a public golf course. Deficiencies: Rolled curb on one site, sidewalk on one side, and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects proposed. Neighborhood: Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 2A Existing Conditions: Public access from Whitehawk Drive, Heron Court, and Falcon Court. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1992. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and a mix of public and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks. Additionally, this neighborhood provides a public golf course. Deficiencies: Street trees and trails are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects proposed. 42 Subarea: Gleneagle Neighborhood: Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 3A Existing Conditions: Public access from Eaglefield Drive, E Country Club Drive, Inverness Drive, Ballantrae Drive, Balmoral Drive, Castle Court, Greenock Court, Turnberry Place, Teeside Lane, and Greywalls Drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1997. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and a mix of public and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks. Additionally, this neighborhood provides a public golf course. Deficiencies: Street trees and trails are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from Teeside Lane, Greywalls Drive, Carlisle Place, Abbey Place, and Hunter Place. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1997. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and a mix of public and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street trees and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks. Additionally, this neighborhood provides a public golf course. Deficiencies: Trails are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects proposed. 43 Subarea: Gleneagle Neighborhood: Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 4A Existing Conditions: Public access from Eaglefield Drive, E Country Club Drive, Woodbine Drive, and Ambleside Court. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1997. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and a mix of public and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks and Forest Park. Additionally, this neighborhood provides a public golf course. Deficiencies: Trails are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from Hawksview Drive and Harrow Place. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1999. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and a mix of public and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks. Additionally, this neighborhood provides a public golf course. Deficiencies: Street trees and trails are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects proposed. 44 Subarea: Gleneagle Neighborhood: Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 4C Existing Conditions: Public access from Newport Drive, Sterling Place, and Haven Place. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1996. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and a mix of public and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks. Additionally, this neighborhood provides a public golf course. Deficiencies: Street trees and trails are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects proposed. Neighborhood: Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 4D Existing Conditions: Public access from Cambridge Drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1997. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and a mix of public and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks. Additionally, this neighborhood provides a public golf course. Deficiencies: Street trees and trails are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects proposed. 45 Subarea: Gleneagle Neighborhood: Gleneagle Division 1 Sector 4E Existing Conditions: Public access from Oxford Drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1999. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and a mix of public and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks and Forest Park. Additionally, this neighborhood provides a public golf course. Deficiencies: Street trees and trails are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects proposed. Neighborhood: Gleneagle Division 2 Sector B Phase 1 Existing Conditions: Public access from Gleneagle Boulevard, W Country Club Drive, Muirfield Court, Saint Andrews Court, Harrier Drive, Redhawk Drive, Perregrine Place, Osprey Road, and Kestrel Court. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1992. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association, and a mix of public and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks and Woodway Park. Additionally, this neighborhood provides a public golf course. Deficiencies: Street trees and trails are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects proposed. 46 Subarea: Gleneagle Neighborhood: Gleneagle Division 2 Sector B Phase 2 Existing Conditions: Public access from Gleneagle Boulevard, Redhawk Drive, Osprey Road, Boreal Court, and Condor Drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1993. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association, and a mix of public and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curb on one side, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks. Additionally, this neighborhood provides a public golf course. Deficiencies: Street trees, curb, gutter, sidewalks on one side are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects proposed. Neighborhood: Gleneagle Division 2 Sector B Phase 3 Existing Conditions: Public access from W Country Club Drive and Troon Court. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1993. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association, and a mix of public and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks. Additionally, this neighborhood provides a public golf course. Deficiencies: Street trees and trails are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects proposed. 47 Subarea: Gleneagle Neighborhood: Legends at Gleneagle Existing Conditions: Public access from Champions Drive, Masters Court, Putters Court, and Gallery Lane. Duplex neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1997. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and a mix of public and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks. Additionally, this neighborhood provides a public golf course. Deficiencies: Street trees and trails are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from Woodlands Way. Multifamily neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1985. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 48 Subarea: Gleneagle Neighborhood: Woodland Ponds 1 Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from Iris Court. Multifamily neighborhood consisting of duplex lots connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2001. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and street some streetlighting are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Woodland Ponds 2 Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 188th Street NE and Iris Court. Multifamily neighborhood consisting of duplex lots connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2001. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and street some streetlighting are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 49 50 Haller City Existing Conditions Haller City is a small subarea on the northeastern side of Arlington covering 0.06 square miles located. Haller City is nestled between Arlington’s Old Town to the south and the Stillaguamish River to the north. Division Street creates the southern boundary of this subarea and Highway 9 NE runs just west of Haller City’s western border and Alcazar Avenue on the eastern border. Centennial Trail runs along Haller City’s western side, running from north to south. Haller Park is situated in the northern portion of Haller City and contains the city’s popular splash park. There is also a created stormwater treatment wetland that treats the majority of the Old Town stormwater and has a walking trail throughout the facility. The majority of Haller City is zoned Old Town Business District-3, with some Residential High Density, and the western section and area along the Stillaguamish River zoned Public/Semi- Public. The Cascade District Courthouse is located along the northeast boundary of Haller City. Haller City’s western side houses many public utilities such as the Wastewater Treatment Plant and the Sewer Treatment Facility. There are six public art installations in Haller City, concentrated on the western side of the subarea. The subarea does have active sidewalks throughout its boundaries and there is one bus stop near the southeast boundary of Haller City. In Haller City, the south fork of the Stillaguamish River runs from Haller City’s southeast point and runs diagonally to its northern point where it meets the north fork. As for critical areas, there are moderate and severe slopes running from the northwestern corner diagonally to the southeastern corner of Haller City. There are no bike paths or heritage trees in the subarea. Vision In 2044, the Haller City subarea is the northern gateway to the City of Arlington and is located adjacent to the confluence of the north and south forks of the Stillaguamish River. Haller City provides Arlington with public services by being the site for the City’s Water Treatment Plant and Wastewater Treatment Plant. Haller City is also home to Haller Park, which is a treasured community asset. This subarea has the main trail head connection for the Centennial Trail and has a vibrant river walk along the Stillaguamish River. Neighborhoods The neighborhoods in Haller City are the following:  Coast Condo  Gilman Avenue Condo  Haller City  Riverside Mobile Home Park  Stilly Cottages Condo 51 Subarea: Haller City Neighborhood: Coast Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from E Division Street. Multifamily neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2009. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, and sidewalks are located around the development. Residents are within close proximity to Centennial Trail, Haller Park, and Centennial Park. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from W Gilman Avenue. Multifamily neighborhood consisting of duplex lots connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2007. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Haller Park and the Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Streetlights are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Streetlights along W Gilman Avenue. 52 Subarea: Haller City Neighborhood: Haller City Existing Conditions: Public access from W and E Division Street, E Gilman Avenue, Burke Avenue, E Haller Avenue, W Cox Avenue, N West Avenue, Broadway Street, Newberry Street, Manhattan Street, Talcott Street, and Alcazar Street. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1890. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, and sidewalks are located intermediately throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Centennial Trail, Haller Park, Country Charm Park, Terrace Park, and Twin Rivers Park. Deficiencies: Streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. The availability of sidewalks and road conditions vary. E Gilman Ave and E Division St specifically is in need repair and updating. Identified CIP Projects: Roadway improvements to E Gilman Ave and E Division St, along with repairs throughout the entire neighborhood. Improvements are to include sidewalks, curb, gutter, planter strip for street trees, and pavement where needed. Trail along Gilman Avenue to connect the neighborhood to Country Charm Park. Neighborhood: Riverside Mobile Home Park Existing Conditions: Mobile Home Park connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1962. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Residents are within close proximity to Centennial Trail, Haller Park and Centennial Park. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 53 Subarea: Haller City Neighborhood: Stilly Cottages Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from Broadway Street and E Haller Avenue. Multifamily neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2006. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters and sidewalks are located around the development. Residents are within close proximity to Centennial Trail, Haller Park and Centennial Park. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 54 55 Hilltop Existing Conditions Hilltop, located in the southeast corner of Arlington, is a 0.56 square mile subarea. Hilltop’s north and northwestern boundaries are bordered with the subarea of Gleneagle. Its northeastern and eastern boundaries run along the city limits. Hilltop’s land is classified under a variety of zones. North Hilltop is zoned as Residential Low Capacity, the southwestern region is zoned as Residential Ultra Low Capacity, the eastern side of Hilltop is zoned General Commercial as well as Residential High Capacity, and the far east of Hilltop is zoned as Public/Semi-Public. Hilltop has two primary roads that intersect within the subarea. 172nd St NE runs through the center of Hilltop from west to east and Highway 9 NE runs though the northeastern boundary to the south of the Hilltop boundary. Most streets within this subarea have active sidewalks and street trees. There is a singular public art display in the roundabout at the intersection of State Route 9 and State Route 531 (172nd St NE). Prairie Creek runs through Hilltop in the center of the subarea, and the headwaters of Edgecomb Creek are located in this subarea. Moderate slopes are located within the northern region of this subarea and severe slopes are located within the southwest boundary. There are no bike paths, trails, heritage trees, or public transportation in the subarea. Vision In 2044 Hilltop has a diversity of housing types allowing all types of families to call this subarea home. Hilltop is home to many residents of Arlington and has entertainment and retail opportunities for the community. Neighborhoods The neighborhoods in Hilltop are the following:  Dogwood Meadows  Eagle Heights  Eagle Heights Division 2  Eagle Heights Division 2, Lot 1 Replat  Gregory Park  Magnolia Meadows Division 1 Phase 1  Magnolia Meadows Division 1 Phase 2  Magnolia Meadows Division 2  Magnolia Estates  Zahradnik 56 Subarea: Hilltop Neighborhood: Dogwood Meadows Existing Conditions: Public access from 81st Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2005. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: 172nd St improvements that include roadway widening, sidewalk or trail, curb, gutter, and planting strip for street trees. 81st Dr NE street trees. Neighborhood: Eagle Heights Existing Conditions: Public access from 85th Avenue NE, 175th Street NE, 176th Street NE, 176th Place NE, 177th Street, NE, 84th Avenue NE, 83rd Drive NE, 178th Place NE, and 179th Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2004. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: 172nd St improvements that include roadway widening, sidewalk or trail, curb, gutter, and planting strip for street trees. 57 Subarea: Hilltop Neighborhood: Eagle Heights Division 2 Existing Conditions: Public access from 84th Avenue NE and 172nd Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2007. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: 172nd St improvements that include roadway widening, sidewalk or trail, curb, gutter, and planting strip for street trees. Existing Conditions: Public access from 85th Avenue NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2009. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: 172nd St improvements that include roadway widening, sidewalk or trail, curb, gutter, and planting strip for street trees. 58 Subarea: Hilltop Neighborhood: Gregory Park Existing Conditions: Public access from 171st Street NE, 170th Street NE, 169th Street NE, 168th Street NE, 89th Avenue NE, and 91st Drive NE, Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2017. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from 80th Drive NE, 172nd Place NE, 174th Place NE, 79th Drive NE, and 175th Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2004. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks and trails. Deficiencies: A pedestrian trail connection along 172nd St is needed to provide connection to Centennial Trail to the west. Identified CIP Projects: 172nd St improvements that include roadway widening, sidewalk or trail, curb, gutter, and planting strip for street trees. 59 Subarea: Hilltop Neighborhood: Magnolia Meadows Division 1 Phase 1 Existing Conditions: Public access from 80th Drive NE, 79th Drive NE, and 177th Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2006. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks and a trail. Deficiencies: A pedestrian trail connection along 172nd St is needed to provide connection to Centennial Trail to the west. Identified CIP Projects: 172nd St improvements that include roadway widening, sidewalk or trail, curb, gutter, and planting strip for street trees. Existing Conditions: Public access from 177th Street NE, 178th Place NE, 82nd Drive NE, 81st Drive NE and 179th Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2007. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks and a trail. Deficiencies: A pedestrian trail connection along 172nd St is needed to provide connection to Centennial Trail to the west. Identified CIP Projects: 172nd St improvements that include roadway widening, sidewalk or trail, curb, gutter, and planting strip for street trees. 60 Subarea: Hilltop Neighborhood: Magnolia Meadows Division 2 Existing Conditions: Public access from 79th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2007. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks and a trail. Deficiencies: A pedestrian trail connection along 172nd St is needed to provide connection to Centennial Trail to the west. Identified CIP Projects: 172nd St improvements that include roadway widening, sidewalk or trail, curb, gutter, and planting strip for street trees. Existing Conditions: Public access from 172nd Street NE and 85th Avenue NE. Area is zoned General Commercial with Mixed-Use Overlay, platted in 2023. Currently approved for a mixed-use development with commercial, medical, townhouse, and apartments. Attributes: This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land. Deficiencies: A pedestrian trail connection along 172nd St is needed to provide connection to Centennial Trail to the west. Identified CIP Projects: 172nd St improvements that include roadway widening, sidewalk or trail, curb, gutter, and planting strip for street trees. 61 62 Island Crossing Existing Conditions Island Crossing is located in the northwest corner of the City at the junction of I-5 and State Route 530. I-5 runs along the west boundary of Island Crossing and State Route 530 runs east- west in the northern portion of the subarea. Bus route 227 runs along Smokey Point Boulevard which creates the eastern boundary of the subarea. The subarea is generally triangle-shaped measuring approximately 0.20 square miles. Each boundary of Island Crossing is also the city limits, surrounded by unincorporated county. There is an entryway sign along State Route 530 welcoming visitors to Arlington. The vast majority of Island Crossing is zoned Highway Commercial. Along Smokey Point Boulevard at the southern tip of the subarea it is zoned Commercial Corridor District. Most of the Island Crossing subarea lies within the 100-year floodplain. A sliver of the subarea falls within the 500-year floodplain. Lower Portage Creek runs through the southern portion of Island Crossing and South Slough runs through the center of the subarea. There are also a few steep slopes sprinkled around the subarea. There are no parks, sidewalks, bike lanes, trails, or heritage trees in Island Crossing. Vision In 2044, Island Crossing is the initial gateway into Arlington, but also serves as the southern gateway to the North Cascades from I-5. It is an attractive, functional, and commercially viable entryway into the City from I-5 with an iconic panoramic view of agricultural lands and the Cascade foothills. Island Crossing serves as a commercial, retail, and accommodation hub that serves not only the greater Arlington community but those travelling along I-5 as well. Neighborhoods There are no specific neighborhoods in Island Crossing. 63 Existing Conditions: The Island Crossing Subarea is approximately 87 acres, bound by I-5 to the west, the Stillaguamish River to the north, unincorporated Snohomish County to the east and the Portage Creek crossing to the south. Existing businesses are highway oriented, consisting mainly of gas stations/mini-marts and espresso stands, most of which are outdated. Newer construction includes a “Pilot” Travel Center, Attributes: Close proximity to I-5 (exit 208), SR 530 bifurcates the area proving dual street frontage. SR 530 is a Deficiencies: Island crossing lacks access control of existing land uses. No pedestrian walkways or bike lanes th Identified CIP Projects: SR 530 channelization/access control, Pedestrian/bicycle infrastructure, flood control improvement, construction of up to four roundabouts for intersection, on/off ramps, and circulation control. 64 65 Kent Prairie Existing Conditions Kent Prairie is a subarea in the northeastern part of the City. It is 0.7 square miles large and has a unique shape creating shared boundaries with many other subareas. Kent Prairie’s main east to west connections are E Highland Dr which becomes 212th St NE along the northern boundary of the subarea and 204th St NE becomes 207th St NE in central Kent Prairie. Highway 9 NE bisects the western side of Kent Prairie running north to south. S Stillaguamish Ave turns into Burn Rd and bisects the eastern side of the subarea also running north to south. Kent Prairie contains many zoning designations. There is a relatively equal distribution of both Residential Low Capacity and Residential High Capacity. There are several Public/Semi-Public spaces including Jensen Park and Kent Prairie Elementary School. There is a large amount of Commercial Corridor and General Commercial on the western side of the subarea and a small portion of Medical Services, part of Cascade Valley Hospital, in the northeast. Portage Creek has two forks that flow north in Kent Prairie. There are also wetlands in the subarea. Five of the wetlands are alongside Portage Creek. The other two wetlands appear in the eastern half of Kent Prairie. There are severe and moderate slopes present in the southeastern and central eastern parts of the subarea. There are also severe slopes in the northwest corner and across the northern section of Kent Prairie. There is one park, Jensen Park, located in central Kent Prairie. There are several trails in Kent Prairie including the Zimmerman Hill Climb Trail, Portage/Kruger Creek Trail, Portage Creek Wildlife Trail, and the 204th Trail. The Zimmerman Hill Climb Trail connects Kent Prairie to Crown Ridge. The Portage/Kruger Creek Trail connects Kent Prairie to Old Town. Sidewalks are present on certain roads in the subarea including S Stillaguamish Ave, Portage St, 207th St NE which turns into 204th St NE, Olympic Place NE, and 77th Ave NE. The local bus runs on 204th St NE/207th St NE and then turns north on S Stillaguamish Ave, connecting Kent Prairie to Old Town. Bus stops are located along the route approximately every ¼ mile. A variety of public art is present in Kent Prairie. There are many banners along 67th Ave NE, four banners at the Highway 9 and 204th St NE intersection, a mural and a metal salmon art piece on 204th St NE, painted cows’ installation in Jensen Park, and public art in the 204th St NE and 77th Ave NE roundabout. There are no bike paths and no heritage trees in the subarea. Vision In 2044 Kent Prairie is a lively subarea with easy access to other areas of Arlington. This Subarea is particularly well-connected to Old Town. Businesses in this area are varied and plentiful along both spines of the subarea, Highway 9 and 204th St NE. Mixed-use buildings line 204th St NE, providing diverse housing and job opportunities in this walkable neighborhood. Single family housing, which still dominates the edges of the subarea, Kent Prairie Elementary School, and neighboring Jensen Park attract families to Kent Prairie. 66 Neighborhoods The neighborhoods in Kent Prairie are the following:  Alexander/Wriglesworth  Arlington Retail  Armstrongs Suburban Acre Tract Replat  Autumn Park  Cedar Village Estates  Cobbs First Addition to Arlington (West of SR 9 Only)  Crystal Creek Estate  Eliason  Farmstead Estate  Highland Haven Condo  Jay Three Two  Jensen Business Park Phase 1  Jensen Business Park Phase 2  Jensen Farm Division 1  Jensen Farm Division 2  Jensen Farm Division 3  Kent Prairie 9 & 10 Condo  Kent Prairie 17, 18, 20 Condo  Kent Prairie Condo  Kent Prairie Estates Phase 1  Kent Prairie Estates Phase 2  Kona Crest  Mason  Maudlin  McPherson Heights  Peterson  Portage Creek Estates  Portage Green Mobile Park  Reserve at Arlington  Rose Armstrongs Suburban Acre Tract  Southbrook Condo Phase 1  Stewart  The Colony Division 1  The Farmstead Estate Condo  Wesley Street Condo  Whitehorse Medical Center Condo  Wisemark Commons Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Alexander / Wriglesworth Existing Conditions: Public access from E Highland Drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1997. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: No public infrastructure improvements. Deficiencies: Sidewalk, curbs, gutters, and planting strips for street trees are not provided in this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Improvements to E Highland Dr to include sidewalk, curbs, gutters, and planting strips for street trees. 67 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Arlington Retail Existing Conditions: Public access from 204th Street and 74th Avenue NE. Commercial neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2001. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to the 74th Avenue Trail. Deficiencies: New development was constructed within this area under current regulations and thus does not have any identified deficiencies at this time. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from W Jensen Street. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1956. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks through a majority, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Some areas of this neighborhood do not have sidewalks. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: W Jensen Street sidewalks, curbs, gutter, planting strip for street trees, streetlights, and roadway stormwater drainage. 68 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Autumn Park Existing Conditions: Public access from 79th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1994. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity of Jensen Park, Zimmerman Trail, and Kruger-Portage Creek Trail Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from W Marion Street to private drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Water/Sewer and platted in 1975. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs and gutters are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Sidewalk, curb, gutter, streetlights, and planting strip for street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 69 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Cobbs Addition to Arlington (West of SR 9 Only) Existing Conditions: Public access from State Route 9 to a private street of Fir Lane. This neighborhood is the west portion of the plat that was completed in 1890 and consists of four underdeveloped single-family residences on large lots on well/septic. Attributes: No public improvement attributes. Deficiencies: Private Property with no public improvements. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Crystal Creek Estates Existing Conditions: Public access from Portage Street to two private roads of 79th Drive NE and 210th Place NE. Single Family and Duplex neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1992. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs and gutters are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Jensen Park and Portage Creek Trail. Deficiencies: Sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 70 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Eliason Existing Conditions: Public access from E Highland Drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1999. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: No public infrastructure improvements. Deficiencies: Sidewalk, curbs, gutters, and planting strips for street trees are not provided in this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Improvements to E Highland Dr to include sidewalk, curbs, gutters, and planting strips for street trees. Neighborhood: Farmstead Estates Existing Conditions: Public access from Keith Lane and 81st Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1994. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Portage Creek Trail and Jensen Park. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 71 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Highland Haven Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from E Highland Drive. Duplex connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2006. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Private Property: No direct public attributes. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed within the development. E Highland Dr improvements to include sidewalks, curb, gutter, sidewalk, planting strip for street trees, pavement widening where required, and roadway stormwater drainage. Existing Conditions: Public access from 77th Avenue NE. Multifamily neighborhood platted in 1994 and connected to Arlington water/sewer with construction in 2017. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are provided to the entrance of the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park, Kruger-Portage Creek Trail, and Zimmerman Trail. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 72 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Jensen Business Park Phase I Existing Conditions: Public access from 71st Avenue NE, 74th Avenue NE, 201st Street NE, and 204th Street NE. Industrial and Commercial Corridor neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1989. The mixed-use neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and was constructed in 2021. The development has and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks, 74th Avenue Trail and has multiple onsite amenities for tenants. Deficiencies: This development was constructed under current regulations and thus does not have any identified deficiencies at this time. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Jensen Business Park Phase 2 Existing Conditions: Public access from 71st Avenue NE, 74th Avenue NE, and 201st Street NE. Industrial neighborhood within the Commercial Corridor connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1989. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Occupants are within close proximity of 74th Avenue Trail and Airport Boulevard Trail. Deficiencies: Occupants are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 73 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Jensen Farm Div 1 Existing Conditions: Public access from 204th Street NE and Olympic Place NE. Commercial and mixed-use neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1995. The development was constructed in 2023 and has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions with both public and private storm drainage. Attributes: Round-about at 204th Street NE and 77th Avenue NE, with new pavement, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Occupants are within close proximity to Jensen Park, Kruger-Portage Creek Trail, Portage Creek Trail, and Zimmerman Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within some areas of the neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Jensen Farm Div 2 Existing Conditions: Public access from Jensen Farm Lane and Louis Lane. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1997. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Jensen Park, Kruger-Portage Creek Trail, Portage Creek Trail, and Zimmerman Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Street trees along Jensen Farm Lane and Lois Lane. 74 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Jensen Farm Div 3 Existing Conditions: Public access from Olympic Place NE, Jensen Farm Lane, Anna Lane, and Portage Street. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1999. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Jensen Park, Kruger-Portage Creek Trail, Portage Creek Trail, and Zimmerman Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Street trees along Olympic Place NE, Jensen Farm Lane, and Anna Lane. Neighborhood: Kent Prairie 9 & 10 Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from Portage Street. Duplexes connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2003. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks and streetlights are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Jensen Park and Portage Creek Trail. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 75 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Kent Prairie 17, 18, 20 Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from Portage Street. Duplexes connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2003. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Jensen Park and Portage Creek Trail. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Kent Prairie Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 77th Avenue NE to private road 200th Street NE. Multifamily neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2007. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks and streetlights are provided leading up to the private neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to the Zimmerman Trail and Kruger-Portage Creek Trail. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 76 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Kent Prairie Estates Phase 1 Existing Conditions: Public access from Stillaguamish Avenue, Portage Street, and 81st Avenue NE. Single Family and Multi- Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1989. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Jensen Park and Portage Creek Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Street trees along Stillaguamish Avenue, Portage Street, and 81st Avenue NE. Neighborhood: Kent Prairie Estates Phase 2 Existing Conditions: Public access from Portage Street. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1992. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Jensen Park and Portage Creek Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Street trees along Portage Street. 77 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Kona Crest Existing Conditions: Public access from Kona Drive and Joann Lane. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1986. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Sidewalks on one side of Joann Lane. Deficiencies: Sidewalk, curb, gutter on one side of Joann Lane. No streetlights on Joann Lane and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Joann Lane improvement for sidewalks, curb, gutter, and streetlights. Neighborhood: Mason Existing Conditions: Public access from E Highland Drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1990. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: No public infrastructure improvements. Deficiencies: Sidewalk, curbs, gutters, and planting strips for street trees are not provided in this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Improvements to E Highland Dr to include sidewalk, curbs, gutters, and planting strips for street trees. 78 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Maudlin Existing Conditions: Public access from E Highland Drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2005. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: No public infrastructure improvements. Deficiencies: Sidewalk, curbs, gutters, and planting strips for street trees are not provided in this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Improvements to E Highland Dr to include sidewalk, curbs, gutters, and planting strips for street trees. Neighborhood: McPherson Heights Existing Conditions: Public access from W Jensen Street. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1978. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: No public improvements. Deficiencies: Sidewalk, curb, gutter, streetlights, and planting strip for street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: W Jensen Street sidewalks, curbs, gutter, planting strip for street trees, streetlights, and roadway stormwater drainage. 79 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Peterson Existing Conditions: Public access from E Highland Drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2002. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: No public infrastructure improvements. Deficiencies: Sidewalk, curbs, gutters, and planting strips for street trees are not provided in this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Improvements to E Highland Dr to include sidewalk, curbs, gutters, and planting strips for street trees. Neighborhood: Portage Creek Estates Existing Conditions: Public access from 207th Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2019. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters and sidewalks are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 80 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Portage Green Mobile Home Park Existing Conditions: Public access from 80th Avenue NE. Mobile home park established in 1995 and consists of legal non- conforming mobile homes. Connected to Arlington water/sewer in 2019. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters and sidewalks are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from 204th Street NE, with access from 74th Street in the future with neighboring property development. This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land that was platted in 2021. Commercial lots along the frontage and a multi-family neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer is expected to be constructed in 2025 – 2026. The development will have Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land. Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street trees and streetlights are proposed throughout the neighborhood. The residents will have a private park as well as other amenities on site. Deficiencies: This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land. However, this development will be constructed under current regulations and not have any identified deficiencies. Identified CIP Projects: 74th Street Intersection and traffic lights. 81 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Rose Armstrongs Suburban Acre Existing Conditions: Public access from Marion Street to private driveways. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2004. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and street trees are provided leading up to the neighborhood from the east. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Southbrook Condo Phase 1 Existing Conditions: Public access from Jensen Farm Lane. Duplex neighborhood consisting of connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2005. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees on one side are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Jensen Park and Portage Creek Trail. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 82 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Stewart Existing Conditions: Public access from E Highland Drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2021. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Sidewalk, curbs, gutters, and planting strips for street trees are provided in this neighborhood. Deficiencies: New development was constructed within this area under current regulations and thus does not have any identified deficiencies at this time. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: The Colony Division 1 Existing Conditions: Public access from Stillaguamish Avenue, Wesley Street, and Tveit Road (212th Street). Multifamily neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1998. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private trail. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 83 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: The Farmstead Estate Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from Anna Lane. Duplex connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2004. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Jensen Park and Portage Creek Trail. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Wesley Street Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from Wesley Street. Multifamily neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1998. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees provided leading up to the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 84 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Whitehorse Medical Center Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from Wesley Street. Commercial neighborhood consisting of medical services connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1992. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, an Owners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters and sidewalks provided leading up to the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from 204th Street NE and 67th Avenue NE. Mixed-Use neighborhood consisting of commercial and residential uses connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2024. The development will have Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land. Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, planting strips for street trees and streetlights are proposed throughout the neighborhood. The residents will have a private park as well as other amenities on site. Deficiencies: This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land. However, this development will be constructed under current regulations and not have any identified deficiencies. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 85 86 Old Town Existing Conditions Old town is the historic downtown of Arlington located in the north part of the city. It is one of the largest subareas, covering one square mile. Old town’s boundaries are defined by Highway 9, or Hazel St, on the western side, E Highland Dr (which turns into 212th St NE) on the southern side and Division St, along with the south fork of the Stillaguamish River on the northern side. Old Town’s eastern boundary is the City’s eastern boundary and the south fork of the Stillaguamish River. Points of interest in Old Town include the County Charm Conservation Area, Stillaguamish Valley School, Post Middle School, Eagle Creek Elementary School, Haller Middle School, Presidents Elementary School, and Cascade Valley Hospital. Centennial Trail is also a main asset of Old Town which runs north-south through the subarea on the west side. There are several parks in Old Town. The parks include Country Charm Park, Terrace Park, Centennial Park, Legion Park, and Lebanon Park. Old Town has a large amount of public art on display including murals, sculptures, a time capsule, a sound garden, and over 75 pieces along Centennial Trail, many being banners. Public art is also located in Terrace Park and the “Leaping Bunnies” sculpture can be seen along East Division St. There are 15 heritage trees in Old Town all located in the western half of the subarea. There are also street trees seen in parts of Old Town. Public transit is present and accessible in Old Town. The local bus route runs along S Stillaguamish Ave south of E 1st St, on E 1st St, on N Olympic Ave, and on a small section on E Division to continue north on N Broadway St and then east on E Burke Ave. There are sidewalks on nearly all roads in Old Town which provide pedestrian access. Bike paths are present on a small stretch of E Division St between West Ave and N Broadway St/N MacLeod Ave. There are three wetlands in the northeastern part of the subarea as well as the south fork of the Stillaguamish River and Eagle Creek. There are moderate and severe slopes throughout Old Town. Two main severe slopes are located in the northeast near Country Charm Park and in central Old Town going towards the southeast. Old Town’s business district is on the western side of the subarea and has three separate zoning designations: Old Town Business District-1, Old Town Business District-2, and Old Town Business District-3. The Old Town Residential District is in the center of the subarea. There are several large Public/Semi Public spaces including County Charm Park in the northeast of the subarea. Medical Services are in the south where Cascade Valley Hospital is located. There is a section of Residential Low Capacity on the eastern side and three sections of Residential High Capacity in the north, central, and southeastern parts of Old Town. A small section of General Commercial is also present in the southwest. This commercial area is mostly located in Gateway to the west of Old Town. Vision In 2044, the Old Town subarea is a bustling section of Arlington that continues to be the central downtown area boasting historic architecture. Home to beautiful heritage trees, County Charm Park, multiple schools, and iconic stores, Old Town captures Arlington’s rich history and vibrant community. 87 Neighborhoods The neighborhoods in Old Town are the following:  Arlington Cemetery  Burgoyne Plat  Cascade Medical Center Condo  Clums First Addition to Arlington  Clums Second Addition to Arlington  Cobbs Addition to Arlington  Eagle Creek Place  French Street South Condo  Giffords First Addition to Arlington  Gilman Walk  Grandview  Grandview Homes  Green-Thom  Kent Ridge  Kunze Acreage Tract  La Verne Heights  Larsen  Les’ Adret Condo  McMahons First Addition to Arlington  Norwood Glen Condo Phase 1, 2, & 3  Palmers Addition  Park Crest East Condo  Park Hill Estates  Patricia  Pied Piper Heights  The Yarmuth Plat  Town of Arlington  Victor Heights Division 1  Wrage Addition to Arlington  Wright  Wrobliski Addition Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: Arlington Cemetery Existing Conditions: Public access from N Gifford Avenue. This is a historic cemetery that is privately maintained. Attributes: Historical cemetery location. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 88 Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: Burgoyne Plat Existing Conditions: Public access from Robinhood Drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1968. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, and some streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are in proximity of Terrace Park. Deficiencies: Sidewalks and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity of trails. Identified CIP Projects: Robinhood Drive improvements to include sidewalks, curb, gutter, and planter strips for street trees. Neighborhood: Cascade Medical Center Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from Medical Center Drive. Commercial neighborhood providing medical services connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1992. The development has public storm drainage on Medical Center Drive. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 89 Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: Clums First Addition to Arlington Existing Conditions: Public access from N French Avenue, N High Street, N Gifford Avenue, E 5th Street, and Division Street. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1903. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters and sidewalks are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Terrace Park. Deficiencies: Streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: Streetlights and street trees along N French Avenue, N High Street, N Gifford Avenue, E 5th Street, and Division Street. Neighborhood: Clums Second Addition to Arlington Existing Conditions: Public access from E 5th Street, N Gifford Avenue, N Washington Ave, N Stillaguamish Avenue, and N Alcazar Avenue. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1906. The development has and public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, and sidewalks are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Terrace Park. Deficiencies: Streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: Streetlights and street trees E 5th Street, N Gifford Avenue, N Washington Ave, N Stillaguamish Avenue, and N Alcazar Avenue. 90 Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: Cobbs Addition to Arlington Existing Conditions: Public access from E Highland Drive, E Jackson Street, E Union Street, E Maple Street, Dunham Avenue, S Macleod Avenue, S Olympic Avenue, S Cobb Avenue, and W Lebanon Street. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1890. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters and sidewalks are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Streetlights and street trees where needed along E Highland Drive, E Jackson Street, E Union Street, E Maple Street, Dunham Avenue, S Macleod Avenue, S Olympic Avenue, S Cobb Avenue, W Lebanon Street. Neighborhood: Eagle Creek Place Existing Conditions: Public access from 87th Avenue NE, 217th Place NE, and 218th Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2002. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 91 Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: French Street South Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from N French Avenue. Duplex connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2010. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters and sidewalks are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Terrace Park and Centennial Park. Deficiencies: Streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: Streetlights and street trees along N French Avenue. Neighborhood: Giffords First Addition to Arlington Existing Conditions: Public access from S French Street, N French Street, N Lenore Avenue, N Gifford Avenue, N Washington Avenue, N Stillaguamish Avenue, E 1st Street, E 2nd Street, and E 3rd Street. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1890. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters and some sidewalks are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Streetlights and street trees along S French Street, N French Street, N Lenore Avenue, N Gifford Avenue, N Washington Avenue, N Stillaguamish Avenue, E 1st Street, E 2nd Street, and E 3rd Street. 92 Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: Gilman Walk Existing Conditions: Public access from E Gilman Avenue and Gilman Way. Multifamily neighborhood consisting of townhouse lots connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2021. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private parks, Country Charm Park and Country Charm Trail. Deficiencies: This development was constructed under current regulations and thus does not have any identified deficiencies at this time. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from S French Avenue to a private drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2009. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and planting strips are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided in this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Street trees along S French Avenue. 93 Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: Grandview Homes Existing Conditions: Public access from E 4th Street. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2020. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: New development was constructed within this area under current regulations and thus does not have any identified deficiencies at this time. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from N Alcazar Avenue. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2008. Attributes: Residents are within close proximity to Terrace Park and Country Charm Park. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and planting strips for street trees are not located throughout the neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and planting strips for street trees along N Alcazar Avenue 94 Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: Larsen Existing Conditions: Public access from S French Avenue to a private drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1999. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and planting strips are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided in this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Street trees along S French Avenue. Neighborhood: Kent Ridge Existing Conditions: Public access from S Stillaguamish Avenue to a private drive and E Maple Street, and S Hamlin Drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2001. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Streetlights are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Streetlights along S Stillaguamish Avenue, E Maple Street, and S Hamlin Drive. Connection of S Hamlin Drive from E 1st Street to E Maple Street. 95 Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: Kunze Acreage Tract Existing Conditions: Public access from 87th Avenue NE for residences within city limits, E 5th Street for Eagle Creek Elementary, and County Roads 215th Place NE and 88th Drive NE for residences in unincorporated Snohomish County. The Single-Family Residential neighborhood portions within city limits are connected to water/sewer. The Single-Family Residential neighborhood portions in the city UGA are in unincorporated Snohomish County and connected with well/onsite septic system and platted in 1914. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are part of the city portion of 87th Avenue NE. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and street trees are not provided where the neighborhood is within unincorporated Snohomish County. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: No proposed projects until the properties in the city UGA (unincorporated Snohomish County) are annexed into the city. Neighborhood: La Verne Heights Existing Conditions: Public access from E Maple Street, S Hamlin Drive, E Union Street, and 87th Avenue NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1958. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs are located throughout most of the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Gutters, sidewalk, streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Sidewalk, curb, gutter, streetlights, and planter strips with street trees on E Maple Street, S Hamlin Drive, E Union Street, and 87th Avenue NE. 96 Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: Les Adret Condo Existing Conditions: Public access on N Dunham Avenue and E 3rd Street. Multifamily neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1994. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters and sidewalks are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Legion Park. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from E 3rd Street, E 4th Street, E 5th Street, E Division Street, N Olympic Avenue, N Macleod Avenue, N Dunham Avenue, and N French Avenue. Commercial/Multifamily/Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1891. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, and sidewalks are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Centennial Park and Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Streetlights and street trees in areas that are deficient along E 3rd Street, E 4th Street, E 5th Street, E Division Street, N Olympic Avenue, N Macleod Avenue, N Dunham Avenue, and N French Avenue. 97 Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: Norwood Glen Condo Phase 1, 2, and 3 Existing Conditions: Public access from Medical Center Drive. Multifamily neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2006. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Palmers Addition Existing Conditions: Public access from E Highland Drive, E Jackson Street, E Union Street, E Maple Street, Dunham Avenue, S French Avenue, and a private drive. Primarily Single-Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1912. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and planting strips are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Streetlights and street trees along E Highland Drive, E Jackson Street, E Union Street, E Maple Street, Dunham Avenue, and S French Avenue. 98 Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: Park Crest East Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from E 5th Street NE. Multifamily neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1981. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Residents are Deficiencies: Identified CIP Projects: Neighborhood: Park Hill Estates Existing Conditions: Public access from N Alcazar Avenue and Park Hill Drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1972. The development has storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks on one side and streetlights are located on one side of the street throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Terrace Park and Country Charm Park. Deficiencies: Curb, gutters, and sidewalks are only located on one side of the street, along with no street trees provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Additionally, this neighborhood’s road conditions are poor. Identified CIP Projects: Pavement, sidewalks, curb, gutter, and planter strip for street trees along Park Hill Drive. 99 Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: Patricia Existing Conditions: Public access from S Stillaguamish Avenue and E 1st Street. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1952. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters and sidewalks are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Streetlights and street trees along S Stillaguamish Avenue and E 1st Street. Neighborhood: Pied Piper Heights Existing Conditions: Public access from E 1st Street. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1953. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: No public infrastructure attributes. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Additionally, the roads are in poor condition. Identified CIP Projects: Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, planter strips for street trees, and streetlights along a portion of E 1st Street and S Hamlin Drive. Connection of S Hamlin Drive from E 1st Street to E Maple Street. 100 Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: The Yarmuth Plat Existing Conditions: Public access from 87th Avenue NE. Single Family Residential and Duplex neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer platted in 1995. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: No public infrastructure attributes. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Sidewalk, curbs, gutters, planter strip for street trees, and street trees along 87th Avenue NE. Neighborhood: Town of Arlington Existing Conditions: Public access from E Maple Street, E 1st Street, E 2nd Street, E 3rd Street, N Olympic Avenue, N Macleod Avenue, N Dunham Avenue, and N French Avenue. Commercial, Mixed-Use, and Single- Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1890. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters and sidewalks are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Lebanon Park and Legion Park. Deficiencies: Streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: Streetlights and street trees where deficient along E Maple Street, E 1st Street, E 2nd Street, E 3rd Street, N Olympic Avenue, N Macleod Avenue, N Dunham Avenue, and N French Avenue. 101 Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: Victor Heights Division 1 Existing Conditions: Public access from E 5th Street and N Alcazar Avenue. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1947. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: No public infrastructure attributes. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, planting strips for street trees and streetlights along E 5th Street and N Alcazar Avenue. Neighborhood: Wrage Addition to Arlington Existing Conditions: Public access from N West Avenue and W 5th Street. Commercial neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1903. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Centennial Park and the Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: The roads within this neighborhood are in poor condition. Identified CIP Projects: Pavement improvements to N West Avenue. 102 Subarea: Old Town Neighborhood: Wright Existing Conditions: Public access from 215th Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1990. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Streetlights are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Streetlights along 215th Street and 87th Avenue NE. Neighborhood: Wrobliski Addition Existing Conditions: Public access from N Clara Street and E 4th Street. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1952. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs and gutters are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Sidewalk, streetlights, and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Sidewalk, curbs, gutters, planter strip for street trees and streetlights along N Clara Street and E 4th Street. 103 104 Smokey Point Existing Conditions Smokey Point covers one square mile of the southwest corner of Arlington. Smokey Point is set between the Cascade Industrial Center to the east and the city limits and I-5 to the west. Smokey Point Blvd, a primary street, runs through the length of the Smokey Point subarea. Smokey Point Blvd is connected to 40th Ave via the 173rd Trail. Currently, this trail is only runs from Smokey Point Blvd to 40th Ave NE but will eventually extend to Airport Blvd, making it an alternate travel route. There are numerous active sidewalks throughout Smokey Point. There is also a bike lane that runs along 172nd St NE. There is a Transit Center along Smokey Point Dr with transit lines that run through the center of Smokey Point from north to south with 19 transit stops along the transit line route. There are street trees and 12 public art displays throughout the Smokey Point subarea. Smokey Point has several zoning designations which include Residential Low Capacity, Residential Medium Capacity, Residential High Capacity, Residential Moderate Capacity, a Commercial Corridor, and a Public/Semi-Public zone. Moderate slopes run within the southeast region of the Smokey Point subarea. There are also streams along the southeast corner of the Smokey Point boundary. There are no heritage trees or wetlands in the subarea. Vision In 2044 Smokey Point is a vibrant, walkable, mixed-use district nestled between I-5 and the Cascade Industrial Center. Smokey Point is a hub of Arlington and is highly connected to the rest of the City and the region. Multimodal transportation options define the subarea’s connectivity. In addition to roads and direct access to I-5, Smokey Point has sidewalks, dedicated and shared bike lanes, local buses, and the Community Transit Swift Gold Line. Smokey Point residents enjoy a variety of housing options, several parks, job opportunities in their neighborhood, and numerous local businesses on the tree-lined Smokey Point Boulevard. Neighborhoods The neighborhoods in Smokey Point are the following:  Affinity at Arlington  Baker-Mor  Brickwood  Carola Addition  Commercial Plat of Tucson  Cougar Point 2 & 3 Condo  Country Manor 1 Condo  Country Manor 2 Condo  Cougar Point Condo  Dubois Plat  English Station East  Fir Acres  Goldstream  Hidden Hamlet  Highway Home Sites  Inverness Addition  Inverness Place  Ivel  Johnson Tract  Justin Estates  Kelly Place Condo  Linborg  Marsand 1, 2, & 3 Condo  Park Central Condo  Pilchuck Plaza Condo, Phase 1 & 2  Point Riley  Pony Estates  Professional Services Center Condo  Sapphire  Smokey Point  Smokey Point 18617 Condo  Smokey Point Estates 3A & 4A Condo  Smokey Point Mobile/RV Park  Smokey Point Meadows  Smokey Point Shopping Center  Smokey Point Townhomes, A Condo  Still Scene Estates 105  Stoneway  Taylor  Timber Park  Timbergrove  Totem Park  Totem Park Division 2  Totem Park Division 3  Totem Park Division 4  Townhouses at The Point Condo  Trellis Court  West Coast  Whispering Breeze Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Affinity at Arlington Existing Conditions: Public access from 169th Street NE and Smokey Point Boulevard. Multifamily neighborhood connected to Marysville water/sewer and platted in 2020. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 106 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Baker-Mor Existing Conditions: Public access from 40th Avenue NE. Mixed-Use neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2018. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park. Deficiencies: This development was constructed under current regulations and thus does not have any identified deficiencies at this time. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Brickwood Existing Conditions: Public access from 182nd Street NE, 181st Street NE, 183rd Street NE, and 31st Avenue NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Water/Sewer and platted in 2001. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to J. Rudy York Memorial Park. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 107 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Carola Addition Existing Conditions: Public access from Smokey Point Boulevard and 34th Drive NE. Multifamily neighborhood connected to Marysville water/sewer and platted in 2003. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Smokey Point Community Park. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: Smokey Point Boulevard improvement project. Neighborhood: Commercial Plat of Tucson Existing Conditions: Public access from 172nd Street NE, 43rd Avenue, 40th Avenue, and 171st Street NE. Commercial neighborhood connected to Marysville water/sewer and platted in 2001. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Occupants are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 108 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Cougar Point II Condo and III Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 34th Drive NE. Duplex neighborhood connected to Marysville water/sewer and platted in 2004. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Smokey Point Boulevard improvement project. Neighborhood: Country Manor 1 Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 168th Street NE and 166th Place NE. The internal roadway system is private. Duplex neighborhood connected to Marysville water/sewer and platted in 1997. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Sidewalks and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood on private streets. Residents are within close proximity to a private trail. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. The neighborhood has rolled curbs, along with no street trees in planting strips. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 109 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Country Manor 2 Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 168th Street NE and 166th Place NE. The internal roadway system is private. Duplex neighborhood connected to Marysville water/sewer and platted in 1997. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Sidewalks and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood on private streets. Residents are within close proximity to a private trail. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. The neighborhood has rolled curbs, along with no street trees in planting strips. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Dubois Plat Existing Conditions: Public access from 173rd Place NE. Commercial neighborhood connected to Marysville water/sewer and platted in 1963. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street trees, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 110 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: English Station East Existing Conditions: Public access from 175th Place NE and 38th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Marysville water/onsite septic system and platted in 1963. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planter strip are located throughout the neighborhood on one side of the street. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood, along with curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and planter strips on one side of the street. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects Installation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, planter strip with street trees, streetlighting and roadway stormwater drainage along 175th Place NE and 38th Drive NE. Smokey Point Boulevard improvement project. Neighborhood: Fir Acres Existing Conditions: Public access from 31st Avenue NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/onsite septic system and platted in 2005. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Residents are within close proximity to J. Rudy York Memorial Park. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, planter strip, streetlighting and roadway stormwater drainage along 31st Avenue NE. 111 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Goldstream Public access from Smokey Point Boulevard and 183rd Place NE. This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land platted in 2022. Mixed-use neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer is expected to be constructed in 2025 – 2026. The development will have Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land. Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street trees and streetlights are proposed throughout the neighborhood. The residents will have a private park, pool as well as other amenities on site. The development will also provide an outdoor plaza for the public. Deficiencies: This area is currently vacant, undeveloped land. However, this development will be constructed under current regulations and not have any identified deficiencies. Identified CIP Projects: Smokey Point Boulevard improvement project. Neighborhood: Hidden Hamlet Existing Conditions: Public access from 175th Place NE and 39th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood to Marysville water/onsite septic system and platted in 1986. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, planter strip, streetlighting and roadway stormwater drainage along 175th Place NE and 39th Drive NE. 112 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Highway Home Sites Existing Conditions: Public access from Smokey Point Boulevard for the Stillaguamish Senior Center, Thrift Store, and Multi- Family residential neighborhood and Public access from 182nd Street NE, 180th Street NE, and Smokey Point Boulevard for the single-family residential neighborhood. A portion of this neighborhood is connected to Arlington water/sewer and a portion is connected to Marysville water with an onsite septic system and platted in 1947. The development has public and private storm drainage. Attributes: A portion of this neighborhood has sidewalks, curbs, gutters, planting strips for street trees, and streetlights. Residents are within close proximity to J. Rudy York Park. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and street trees are not provided within portions of this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, planter strip, streetlighting and roadway stormwater drainage along 180th Street. Smokey Point Boulevard improvement project. Neighborhood: Inverness Addition Existing Conditions: Public access from 174th Place NE and 38th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Marysville water/onsite septic system and platted in 1966. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: No public infrastructure attributes. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, planter strip, streetlighting and roadway stormwater drainage along 174th Place NE and 38th Drive NE. Smokey Point Boulevard improvement project. 113 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Inverness Place Existing Conditions: Public access from 174th Place NE and 38th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Marysville water/onsite septic system and platted in 1966. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: No public infrastructure attributes. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, planter strip, streetlighting and roadway stormwater drainage along 174th Place NE and 38th Drive NE. Smokey Point Boulevard improvement project. Neighborhood: Ivel Existing Conditions: Public access from 188th Street NE. Commercial neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2012. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Sidewalk, curbs, gutters, planting strips with street trees and streetlights. Residents are within close proximity to the Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 114 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Johnson Tract Existing Conditions: Public access from Smokey Point Boulevard, 172nd Street NE, and 169th Place NE. Commercial neighborhood connected to Marysville water / sewer and platted in 1946. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees on one side are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Occupants are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Justin Estates Existing Conditions: Public access from 181st Place NE and 36th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water / onsite septic system and platted in 1983. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk on one side, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Smokey Point Park. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, planter strip, streetlighting and roadway stormwater drainage along 181st Place NE and 36th Drive NE. Smokey Point Boulevard improvement project. 115 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Linborg Existing Conditions: Public access from 35th Avenue NE to a gravel private drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water, with septic and platted in 1981. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, and sidewalks leading up to the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to J. Rudy York Memorial Park. Deficiencies: Streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Kelly Place Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 31st Avenue NE to private drives. Duplex connected to Arlington water / sewer and platted in 2007. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, and sidewalks leading up to the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to J. Rudy York Memorial Park. Deficiencies: Streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 116 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Marsand 1 Condo, 2 Condo, and 3 Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 185th Place NE. Duplex connected to Arlington water / sewer and platted in 2008. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, and public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from 166th Place NE. Commercial neighborhood connected to Arlington water/ sewer and platted in 1995. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 117 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Pilchuck Plaza Condo Phase 1 and Phase 2 Existing Conditions: Public access from 166th Place NE and 168th Street NE. Commercial neighborhood lots connected to Marysville water/sewer and platted in 2007. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and street trees are provided leading up to the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from 184th Place NE. Duplex neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2002. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 118 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Pony Estates Existing Conditions: Public access from Smokey Point Boulevard, 31st Drive NE, 179th Street NE, 33rd Avenue NE, 177th Place NE, 176th Place NE, and 34th Avenue NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Marysville water/sewer and platted in 1968. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Residents are within close proximity to J. Rudy Memorial Park and Smokey Point Park. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any trails. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, planter strip, streetlighting and roadway stormwater drainage along 31st Drive NE, 179th Street NE, 33rd Avenue NE, 177th Place NE, 176th Place NE, and 34th Avenue NE. Smokey Point Boulevard improvement project. Neighborhood: Professional Services Center Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from Smokey Point Boulevard to a private drive. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1984. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: No public infrastructure attributes. Deficiencies: Private roadway without curbs, gutters, sidewalk, and streetlights within the neighborhood. Occupants are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 119 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Sapphire Existing Conditions: Public access from 188th Street NE. Commercial neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2012. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Sidewalk, curbs, gutters, planting strips with street trees and streetlights. Residents are within close proximity to the Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Smokey Point Existing Conditions: Public access from Smokey Point Boulevard to a private drive. Commercial neighborhood connected to Marysville water/sewer and platted in 1975. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: No public infrastructure attributes. Deficiencies: Private roadway without curbs, gutters, sidewalk, and streetlights within the neighborhood. Occupants are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 120 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Smokey Point 18617 Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from Smokey Point Boulevard. Duplex neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2013. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: No public infrastructure attributes. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Smokey Point Boulevard improvement project. Neighborhood: Smokey Point Estates 3A Condo and 4A Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 186th Place NE, 31st Avenue NE, and 32nd Avenue NE. Duplex neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1999. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Street trees along 186th Place NE, 31st Avenue NE, and 32nd Avenue NE. 121 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Smokey Point Mobile Home / RV Park Existing Conditions: Public access from Smokey Point Boulevard. Mobile home park consisting of legal non-conforming mobile homes connected to Arlington water/sewer and built in 1975. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: This neighborhood provides affordable housing. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed in the neighborhood. Smokey Point Boulevard improvement project. Neighborhood: Smokey Point Meadows Existing Conditions: Public access from 176th Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Marysville water/sewer and platted in 2001. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: Install street trees in the existing planting strips along 176th Place NE. 122 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Smokey Point Shopping Center Existing Conditions: Public access from Smokey Point Boulevard, 172nd Street NE, and 169th Place NE. Commercial neighborhood connected to Marysville Water/Sewer and platted in 1993. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees on one side are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Occupants are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Smokey Point Townhomes, A Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 182nd Street NE to private drives. Duplex neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2005. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Streetlights are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 123 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Still Scene Estates Existing Conditions: Public access from 183rd Place NE and 36th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1984. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk on one side and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Sidewalk, curbs, gutters, planting strips for street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, planter strip for street trees, streetlighting, and roadway stormwater drainage along 183rd Place NE and 36th Drive NE. Smokey Point Boulevard improvement project. Neighborhood: Stoneway Existing Conditions: Public access from 175th Place NE, 174th Place NE, and 40th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Marysville water/sewer and platted in 2002. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, planter strip, streetlighting and roadway stormwater drainage along 175th Place NE, 174th Place NE, and 40th Drive NE. 124 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Taylor Existing Conditions: Public access from 35th Avenue NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Marysville water/sewer and platted in 2006. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to the Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from 31st Avenue NE, 184th Place NE, 185th Place NE, 186th Place NE, and 29th Avenue NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood consisting of lots connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1996. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks on one side and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Sidewalks, curbs, gutters, and planting strips for street trees along 31st Avenue NE, 184th Place NE, 185th Place NE, 186th Place NE, and 29th Avenue NE. 125 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Timbergrove Existing Conditions: Public access from 175th Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Marysville water/sewer and platted in 1989. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of street trees along 175th Place NE. Existing Conditions: Public access from 176th Place NE, 177th Place NE, 36th Drive NE, and 38th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Marysville water/onsite septic system and platted in 1967. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: No public improvement attributes. The neighborhood is within close proximity of Smokey Point Park. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips for street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, planter strip, streetlighting, and roadway stormwater drainage along 176th Place NE, 177th Place NE, 36th Drive NE, and 38th Drive NE. 126 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Totem Park Division 2 Existing Conditions: Public access from 177th Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Marysville water/onsite septic system and platted in 1977. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: No public improvement attributes. Residents are in close proximity to the Airport Trail and Smokey Point Park. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips for street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, planter strip, streetlighting, and roadway stormwater drainage along 177th Place NE. Existing Conditions: Public access from 39th Drive NE and Totem Park Lane. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Marysville water/onsite septic system and platted in 1969. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: No public improvement attributes. Residents are in close proximity to the Airport Trail and Smokey Point Park. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips for street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, planter strip, streetlighting, and roadway stormwater drainage along 39th Drive NE and Totem Park Lane. 127 \ Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Totem Park Division 4 Existing Conditions: Public access from 178th Place NE, 37th Drive NE, 179th Place NE, 39th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Marysville water/onsite septic system and platted in approximately 1982. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: No public improvement attributes. Residents are in close proximity to the Airport Trail and Smokey Point Park. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips for street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curb/gutter, sidewalk, planter strip, streetlighting, and roadway stormwater drainage along 178th Place NE, 37th Drive NE, 179th Place NE, 39th Drive NE. Neighborhood: Townhouses at The Point Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 188th Street NE, with private drive. Duplex Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2018. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, and planting strips for street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Street trees on one side of the street. Deficiencies: Streetlights are not provided in this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of streetlights along 188th Street NE. 128 Subarea: Smokey Point Neighborhood: Trellis Court Existing Conditions: Public access from 187th Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2005. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips for street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Street trees on one side of the street. Residents are in close proximity to the Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees not planted on one side of the street. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of street trees on one side of 187th Place NE. Existing Conditions: Public access from 188th Street NE and 35th Avenue NE to private drives. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2002. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: No public improvement attributes. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips for street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. 129 130 West Bluff Existing Conditions The West Bluff subarea is 0.65 square miles. West Bluff is unique from Arlington’s other subareas in that it is split into two by the City’s urban growth area, therefore, there is a section of West Bluff in the northwest region of the city as well as a section just to the east. West Bluff is bordered by the Cascade Industrial Center along its southern and eastern boundaries and follows the city limits to the north. The west side of West Bluff subarea is made up of three zones, largely Commercial Corridor with some Business Park and Residential Medium Capacity zoned areas. The east side of West Bluff subarea is comprised of two zones, Residential Low Capacity and Residential Moderate Capacity. Both parts of West Bluff’s subarea have a main road running through or along their boundaries. The western West Bluff has Smokey Point Blvd running through it and the eastern West Bluff has Cemetery Road running through it. The west side of West Bluff subarea has one bus stop located at its southern side and one transit line running through Smokey Point Blvd. The east side of West Bluff subarea has seven bus stops as well as transit lines running through 46th Ave NE, 47th Ave NE, and Cemetery Road. Western West Bluff has active sidewalks located within the southwest side concentrated nearer to the Residential Medium Capacity zoned area. The east side of West Bluff has active sidewalks along the majority of its residential sidewalks. West Bluff has a city park located in the middle region of and street trees can be found throughout both sections of West Bluff. Portage Creek runs through the eastern West Bluff and travels across the northern boundary of the west side of West Bluff. While there are no wetlands within the West Bluff subarea, there are significant wetlands north of both sections of the subarea. The west side of West Bluff subarea has slopes from the northern most point of West Bluff that are moderate and severe running along the north diagonally to West Bluff’s southwest point. The east side of West Bluff has moderate and severe slopes running throughout the subarea as well. There are no bike paths, trails, public art, or heritage trees in West Bluff. Vision In 2044 the recent annexation of the urban growth area between the western and eastern West Bluff now connects the previously disconnected subarea into a continuous one. West Bluff is primarily a residential subarea with businesses concentrated along its western boundary. The subarea offers diverse housing options with the opportunity for further housing diversification. Neighborhoods The neighborhoods in West Bluff are the following:  6511 206th Pl NE Condo  Arlington Cemetery/Robb Division/Hardwood Cemetery  Brotten  Cedar Village 2  Cedar Village 3  Cemetery Road Condo  Claridge Court 1  Claridge Court 2  Cote  Evergreen Meadows  Grove Estates  Grove Place Condo  Grove Place Townhomes  Heartland  High Clover Park Div 1  High Clover Park Div 2 131  Janisko  McEwen  Peterson  Pioneer Estates  Prairie Creek Condo  Prospect Point  River Crest Estates  Ronning  Sau Turn Division 2  Smith  Sky-Blue Estates  Smokey Point Crest Condo  Smokey Point Warehouse Condo  Sweet Water  Terah/ Marie  The Bluff at Arlington Condo  Town Houses at the Point Condo 2018-188th St  Walnut Ridge 1  Walnut Ridge 2  Wuthering Heights Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: 6511 206th Pl NE Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 206th Place NE. Duplexes neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2016. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips for street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to private park, Portage Creek Trail, and Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any community parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 132 Subarea: Kent Prairie Neighborhood: Arlington Cemetery / Hardwoods Cemetery Existing Conditions: Public access from 67th Avenue NE and Cemetery Road. The Arlington Cemetery was platted in multiple stages in 1902, 1959, 1967, and 1987. The property also includes the Harwood Cemetery platted in 1903. Drive aisles are provided throughout the cemetery but do not have the typical improvements due to the nature of the use on the property. Attributes: Owned and maintained by the City of Arlington. Sidewalk, curb, and gutter are only located along 67th Ave NE Deficiencies: The neighborhood does not have sidewalk, curb, and gutter along Cemetery Road. Identified CIP Projects: Cemetery Road Improvements to include sidewalk, curb, gutter, planting strip for street trees. Neighborhood: Brottch Existing Conditions: Public access from Cemetery Road. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1993. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: No public improvement attributes. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees along Cemetery Road. 133 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: Cedar Village 2 Existing Conditions: Public access from 49th Avenue NE, 196th Place NE, 48th Avenue NE, and 197th Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/onsite septic system and platted in 1978. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Residents are within close proximity to Airport Trail and Highclover Park. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees along 49th Avenue NE, 196th Place NE, and 197th Place NE Neighborhood: Cedar Village 3 Existing Conditions: Public access from 196th Place NE and 50th Avenue NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/onsite septic system and platted in 1978. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Residents are within close proximity to Airport Trail and Highclover Park. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees along 49th Avenue NE, 196th Place NE, and 197th Place NE 134 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: Cemetery Road Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from Cemetery Road. Duplex connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2009. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters and sidewalks, streetlights and street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Airport Trail and Highclover Park. Deficiencies: Private Property with no public improvements. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Claridge Court 1 Existing Conditions: Public access from 42nd Drive NE, 188th Court, and 189th Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2007. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are in close proximity to Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 135 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: Claridge Court 2 Existing Conditions: Public access from 189th Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2007. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are in close proximity to Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from 188th Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in approximately 2006. The development has public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, planting strips with street trees, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 136 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: Evergreen Meadows Existing Conditions: Public access from 45th Drive NE, 195th Street NE, and 195th Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2001. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided consistently within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of street trees where needed along 45th Drive NE, 195th Street NE, and 195th Place NE. Neighborhood: Grove Estates Existing Conditions: Public access from 208th Street NE, Grove Place NE, and 206th Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1998. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park and Portage Creek Wildlife Area Park and Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of street trees along 208th Street NE, Grove Place NE, and 206th Street NE 137 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: Grove Place Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from Grove Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2008. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park and Portage Creek Wildlife Area Park and Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of street trees along Grove Place NE. Neighborhood: Grove Place Townhomes Existing Conditions: Public access from Grove Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2002. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park and Portage Creek Wildlife Area Park and Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of street trees along Grove Place NE. 138 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: Heartland Existing Conditions: Public access from 193rd Place NE, 46th Drive NE, 46th Avenue NE, 45th Drive NE, and 194th Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2001. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from High Clover Boulevard, 199th Street NE, 200th Place NE, 48th Drive NE, 47th Avenue NE, 48th Avenue NE, 202nd Place NE, and 203rd Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1995. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Highclover Park, a private park, and Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Sidewalks are only provided on one side through portions of this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of sidewalk, curb, and gutter on one side of the street. 139 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: High Clover Park Division 2 Existing Conditions: Public access from High Clover Boulevard, 200th Street NE, 45th Drive NE, 44th Drive NE, 46th Avenue NE, and 203rd Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1999. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Highclover Park, a private park, and Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Sidewalks are only provided on one side through portions of this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of sidewalk, curb, and gutter on one side of the street. Existing Conditions: Public access from 188th Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2007. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to the Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 140 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: McEwen Existing Conditions: Public access from 42nd Drive NE and 188th Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/onsite septic system and platted in 2007. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to the Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Peterson Existing Conditions: Public access from 43rd Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2007. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to the Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 141 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: Pioneer Estates Existing Conditions: Public access from Cemetery Road, 64th Drive, 208th Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/onsite septic system and platted in 1969. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Residents are within close proximity to Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, and planting strips with street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, and planter strips with street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. 211th Street improvements will provide access to a trail. Neighborhood: Prairie Creek Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 65th Drive NE. Duplex neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2008. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to trails. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 142 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: Prospect Point Existing Conditions: Public access from Cemetery Road, 54th Drive NE, 53rd Avenue NE, 200th Street NE, and 51st Avenue NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/onsite septic system and platted in 1970. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Residents are within close proximity to Airport Trail and Highclover Park. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planter strips with street trees along Cemetery Road, 54th Drive NE, 53rd Avenue NE, 200th Street NE, and 51st Avenue NE Existing Conditions: Public access from 59th Avenue NE, 59th Drive NE, 207th Street NE, 60th Avenue, 61st Avenue NE, 62nd Avenue NE, 63rd Avenue NE, an d206th Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1997. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions, a Homeowners Association and public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity of private parks and Portage Creek Wildlife Area Park and Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of street trees along 59th Avenue NE, 59th Drive NE, 207th Street NE, 60th Avenue, 61st Avenue NE, 62nd Avenue NE, 63rd Avenue NE, an d206th Street NE. 143 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: Ronning Existing Conditions: Public access from 208th Street NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2002. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity of private parks and Portage Creek Wildlife Area Park and Trail. Deficiencies: New development was constructed within this area under current regulations and thus does not have any identified deficiencies at this time. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from Cemetery Road and 47th Avenue NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1968. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs and sidewalks are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Airport Trail and Highclover Park. Deficiencies: Streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of streetlights and planting strips with street trees along Cemetery Road and 47th Ave NE. 144 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: Sky-Blue Estates Existing Conditions: Public access from 46th Avenue NE, 189th Street NE, 190th Street NE, 191st Street NE, and 191st Place NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2003. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Smith Existing Conditions: Public access from Cemetery Road. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2001. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, and streetlights are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are withing close proximity to Highclover Park. Deficiencies: Planting strip with street trees are no located within the neighborhood. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of planting strip with street trees along Cemetery Road. 145 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: Smokey Point Crest Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from Smokey Point Boulevard. Duplex connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2005. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: No public infrastructure attributes. Deficiencies: Private Property: No public infrastructure exists onsite. Identified CIP Projects: Smokey Point Boulevard improvements. Existing Conditions: Public access from Smokey Point Boulevard and 188th Street NE. Industrial neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2008. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Occupants are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Smokey Point Boulevard improvements. 146 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: Sweet Water Existing Conditions: Public access from 65th Drive NE, 66th Drive NE, 206th Place NE, and 64th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2003. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park/trail and Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from 196th Place NE and 45th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2003. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. 147 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: The Bluff at Arlington Condo Existing Conditions: Public access from 59th Avenue NE to private drive Circle Bluff Drive. Duplex neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2001. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and public storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, and sidewalks are located throughout the neighborhood. Deficiencies: Streetlights and street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Additionally, the roads are in poor condition. Identified CIP Projects: Private Property: No public improvement projects are proposed. Existing Conditions: Public access from 29th Avenue NE. Duplex Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 1998. The development has private storm drainage. Attributes: No public infrastructure attributes. Deficiencies: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips for street trees are not provided throughout the neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks or trails. Identified CIP Projects: Curbs, gutters, sidewalk, streetlights, and planting strips for street trees along 29th Ave NE. 148 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: Walnut Ridge Existing Conditions: Public access from 45th Drive NE and 44th Avenue NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2002.The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: No public improvement projects are proposed. Neighborhood: Walnut Ridge 2 Existing Conditions: Public access from 43rd Drive NE, 189th Place NE, and 45th Drive NE. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/sewer and platted in 2003.The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs, gutters, sidewalks, streetlights, and intermittent planting strips with street trees are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to a private park and the Airport Trail. Deficiencies: Street trees are not provided within this neighborhood Identified CIP Projects: Installation of street trees where needed along 43rd Drive NE, 189th Place NE, and 45th Drive NE. 149 Subarea: West Bluff Neighborhood: Wuthering Heights Existing Conditions: Public access from Lantern Lane. Single Family Residential neighborhood connected to Arlington water/onsite septic system and platted in 1986. The development has Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions and private storm drainage. Attributes: Curbs and sidewalks are located throughout the neighborhood. Residents are within close proximity to Centennial Trail. Deficiencies: Streetlights and planting strips with street trees are not provided within this neighborhood. Residents are not within close proximity to any parks. Identified CIP Projects: Installation of streetlights along Lantern Lane. Appendix B CITY OF ARLINGTON Comprehensive Plan 2024-2044 Racially Disparate Impacts and Displacement Risk Analysis City of Arlington Community and Economic Development Department 18204 59th Avenue NE Arlington, WA 98223 CITY OF ARLINGTON 2 Racially Disparate Impacts Analysis Introduction The Washington State Legislature passed House Bill 1220 (HB 1220) as an amendment to the state Growth Management Act (GMA). HB 1220 requires local governments to plan for housing at all income levels and assess the racially disparate impacts (RDI) of existing housing policies. Conditions that indicate that policies have racially disparate impacts can include segregation, cost burden, displacement, educational opportunities, and health disparities. According to state guidance, there are �ive steps to understanding and addressing racially disparate impacts: • Step 1: Engage the Community • Step 2: Gather & Analyze Data • Step 3: Evaluate Policies • Step 4: Revise Policies • Step 5: Review & Update Regulations This report accounts for both Step 2 and Step 3 – it includes a summary of �indings based on data from the US Census Bureau, US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), US Census Bureau, and other sources. These �indings then inform the comprehensive plan policy evaluations and recommendations found at the end of the report. Key Findings • Between 2015 and 2020, the City of Arlington became slightly more diverse, as the population of White and American Indian and Alaska Native residents decreased and the population of Asian, Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, Other Race or Two or more Races increased. • 21% of owner households are cost burdened. • 43% of renter households are rent burdened. • There is a shortage of housing units in the <30% AMI category and >80% AMI category. • 100% of Pacific Islander households and 69% of Black/African American households make above the median income, while only 44% of White households are above the median income. • The Hispanic/Latino household income was the only decrease from 2015 to 2020. • The largest income increases from 2015 to 2020 was Black/African American households and Other Race households. CITY OF ARLINGTON 3 Study Area The study area is the current city limits of Arlington and Subareas (neighborhoods) as depicted in the below map. Figure 1: City of Arlington City Limits and Subarea Map Local Historical Context Indigenous Peoples and Early Settlement Arlington, Washington is located within the traditional territory of the Stillaguamish people, an indigenous Coast Salish group. The area has been inhabited for thousands of years, with archaeological evidence indicating that the Stillaguamish people utilized the resources of the Stillaguamish River and its tributaries. The arrival of European settlers in the mid-19th century began to alter the demographic landscape signi�icantly. Post-European Settlement American exploration began around 1851, leading to increased settlement after the signing of treaties that opened lands for logging and agriculture. The Stillaguamish tribe faced displacement as settlers established towns like Arlington and Haller City in the late 1800s. This period marked a signi�icant shift in land ownership and control over local resources. CITY OF ARLINGTON 4 20th Century Developments The early 20th century saw Arlington grow economically through timber and agriculture. However, systemic inequities persisted as racial dynamics evolved. While there is limited documentation on speci�ic racial tensions or segregation practices in Arlington compared to other regions, it is essential to recognize that broader national trends regarding race relations in�luenced local policies. During World War II, Arlington’s Municipal Airport was a naval air station, which brought an in�lux of workers but also highlighted disparities in employment opportunities based on race. The post-war era saw suburbanization and population growth; however, these developments often favored white residents while marginalized communities continued to face challenges. Contemporary Issues In recent years, Arlington has made efforts to address historical inequities through community discussions and initiative aimed at promoting racial equity. These efforts re�lect a growing recognition of past injustices and a commitment to fostering inclusivity within the community. Overall, while Arlington’s racial history may not be as extensively documented as other areas in Washington State or across the United States, it is shaped by broader themes of displacement, economic opportunity disparities, and ongoing efforts toward equity. Source: iAsk Question · Describe the Racial History of Arlington, WA Racial Restrictions of Subdivisions Racial Restrictions that were added to properties prior to the 1968 Fair Housing Act, which is a federal law enacted that prohibits discrimination in the purchase, sale, rental, or �inancing of housing based on race, skin color, sex, nationality, or religion. Arlington has two areas of the city that has language that still exists within the subdivision restrictions. Highway Home Sites Figure 2: Highway Homes Site Map Sources: Washington State Racial Restrictive Covenants Project. “The land above described shall not be sold, conveyed, rented nor leased in whole or in part to any person not of the white race, nor shall any person not of the white race be permitted to occupy any portion of said land or any building thereon, except as a domestic servant actually employed by a white occupant of said building.” CITY OF ARLINGTON 5 Address Parcel Number Grantor/ Developer Year nd th th th th th Developer White Only CITY OF ARLINGTON 6 Clum’s Second Addition to Arlington Figure 3: Clum’s Second Addition to Arlington Site Map Sources: Washington State Racial Restrictive Covenants Project. “The above property is restricted for private residence exclusively and the white race only.” Address Parcel Number Restriction Status Restriction Type Grantor/ Developer Year Segregation 1970 There were no speci�ic records, regulations, or restrictions that were found through city of Arlington documents and research of the area that provided additional information than what was found in the two subdivision restrictions. This does not mean that segregation did not occur within the city or the surrounding area, but rather there were no of�icial recorded regulations or restrictions that could be found. Research shows that “Black people were not allowed to live in many towns and suburbs in Washington State during the era before the National Fair Housing Act 1968 and some towns operated with unof�icial sundown rules. African Americans might work in the community but were expected to leave in the evening. Black men would be harassed after dark, either by law enforcement or by white residents, typically young men in cars.” Sources: Washington State Racial Restrictive Covenants Project. Sundown towns – Washington State - Racial Restrictive Covenants Project City of Arlington 1970 Population Sources: Washington State Racial Restrictive Covenants Project. Sundown towns – Washington State - Racial Restrictive Covenants Project Total Population 2,261 White 2,212 Black 1 Asian 6 Indigenous 42 CITY OF ARLINGTON 7 Demographics City demographics were obtained by the U.S. Census Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban Development to analyze impacts to race, ethnicity, cost burdened housing, ownership and rental affordability, income levels, and housing tenure. The following information describes how to interpret the information in the tables and charts used. Racial and Ethnic categories are from a model which relies on estimates published by the U.S. Census Bureau and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). All estimates are based on data collected by the U.S. Census Bureau, which classi�ies people into distinct race and ethnic categories. The following tables and charts use race and ethnicity as described below. Race is a social identity, with history rooted in oppression and exploitation of people not classi�ied as “white”. The Census offers six racial identities for people to choose from. Respondents self-identify. Since the 2000 census, respondents can self-identify as one or more options. The options provided are: • White • Black or African American • American Indian and Alaska Native • Asian • Native Hawaiian and Other Paci�ic Islander, and • Other Ethnicity refers to groups of people who share common ancestry, language, or dialect. There is a wide range of ethnic identities, which may or may not tie to nationality. The Census asks respondents to identify as either Hispanic or Latino or Not Hispanic or Latino. The Of�ice of Management and Budget de�ines “Hispanic or Latino” as a person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American or other Spanish culture or origin regardless of race. The Census uses the following de�initions to gather the best available data into the below charts by using a simpli�ied classi�ication system as described: • Asian includes people who self-identify as Asian and Not Hispanic or Latino • Black or African American includes people who self-identify as Black or African American and Not Hispanic or Latino • Hispanic or Latino (of any race) includes people who identify as Hispanic or Latino regardless of race. • Other Race includes people that self-identify as American Indian and Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian and Other Paci�ic Islander, another race (Other), and Two or More Races and are Not Hispanic or Latino • White includes people who self-identify as White and Not Hispanic or Latino Source: Department of Commerce RDI Data Toolkit: Affordable Housing Planning Resources (wa.gov) Racial Composition 2015 and 2020 Racial Composition Summary Between 2015 and 2020, the City of Arlington became slightly more diverse, as the population of White and American Indian and Alaska Native residents decreased and the population of Asian, Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander, Other Race or Two or more Races increased. The Arlington population went from 84% white to 75% white over the course of five years, with Asian, Hispanic/Latino, and multi-racial residents seeing a 3% growth in population for each race. Over the same period, Snohomish County’s population went from 72% white to 68%, with minimal population gains for Asian residents at a 2% growth rate and Black/African American, Hispanic/Latino, and multi-racial residents at 1% growth. CITY OF ARLINGTON 8 Table 1: Racial composition of Arlington and Snohomish County, 2015 and 2020 Source: US Census Bureau, 2011-2015 and 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates (Table DP05); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Chart 1: Arlington population by race and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity, 2020 Source: US Census Bureau, 2011-2015 and 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates (Table DP05); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Chart 1a: Arlington population by race and Hispanic ethnicity, 2020 Source: US Census Bureau, 2011-2015 and 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates (Table DP05); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Table 2: Racial composition percentage of Arlington and Snohomish County 2015 and 2020 Source: US Census Bureau, 2011-2015 and 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates (Table DP05); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Arlington Snohomish County Race or Ethnic Category 2015 2020 Change 2015 2020 Change American Indian and Alaska Native 289 268 -21 6,403 6,582 179 Asian 373 899 526 70,469 91,482 21,013 Black or African American 114 362 248 18,374 25,918 7,544 Hispanic or Latino (of any race)1,643 2,349 706 71,133 85,321 14,188 Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 17 144 127 3,310 3,811 501 Other Race 9 23 14 756 3,510 2,754 Two or more races 447 961 514 35,006 42,435 7,429 White 15,686 14,941 -745 541,202 552,513 11,311 Total 18,578 19,947 1,369 746,653 811,572 64,919 Race or Ethnic Category 2015 2020 2015 2020 Asian 2% 5% 9% 11% Black or African American 1% 2% 2% 3% Hispanic or Latino (of any race)9% 12% 10% 11% Other Race 4% 7% 6% 7% White 84% 75% 72% 68% Arlington Snohomish County CITY OF ARLINGTON 9 Chart 2: Racial composition of Arlington and Snohomish County, 2020 Source: US Census Bureau, 2011-2015 and 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates (Table DP05); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Chart 2a: Racial composition of Arlington and Snohomish County, 2020 Source: US Census Bureau, 2011-2015 and 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates (Table DP05); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Chart 3: Racial composition of Arlington and Snohomish County, 2015 and 2020 Source: US Census Bureau, 2011-2015 and 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates (Table DP05); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 75%68% 7% 7% 12% 11% 2% 3% 5%11% Arlington Snohomish County Asian Black or African American Hispanic or Latino (of any race) Other Race White CITY OF ARLINGTON 10 Cost Burden Cost Burden Summary Arlington overall is a moderately wealthy community with mid to high housing costs. The city includes 4,605 owner households and 2,735 rental households. Of the owner households, 21% are cost burdened, with 15% spending between 30-50% on housing costs and 6% spending more than 50% on housing costs. American Indian/Alaska Native owner household is the most cost burdened at 56%, then Other Race at 50%, Asian at 38%, Hispanic/Latino and White both at 19%, Black/African American at 10%, and Pacific Islander at 0% Of the renter households, 43% are rent burdened (twice the number of owner households), with 23% spending between 30-50% on rental costs and 20% spending more than 50% on rental costs. This is a significant divide between owner and renter households, which can result in racially disparate impacts when renters are more likely to be people of color. Arlington’s rental market is primarily made up of Hispanic/Latino households at 63%, Other Race households at 37.5%, followed by White households at 37%. This is compared to relatively low rental households of Black/African American households at 12%, Asian households at 26%, American Indian/Alaska Native households at 20%, and Pacific Islander households at 0%. Even though Arlington has a high percentage of White rental households, they are the least cost burdened at 41%, while 100% of Black/African American and American Indian/Alaska Native renters are cost burdened, followed by 52% of Hispanic/Latino renters, 50% of Other Race renters, 44% Asian renters are cost burdened. Table 3: Arlington number of households by housing cost burden, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 9); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Owner Households Not Cost Burdened 3,215 130 80 35 20 50 105 3,635 Total Cost-Burdened 770 15 50 45 0 50 25 955 Cost-Burdened (30-50%)540 15 50 0 0 50 25 680 Severely Cost-Burdened (>50%)230 0 0 45 0 0 0 275 Not Calculated 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 Total 4,000 145 130 80 20 100 130 4,605 Renter Households Not Cost Burdened 1,395 0 25 0 0 30 105 1,555 Total Cost-Burdened 975 20 20 19 0 30 115 1,179 Cost-Burdened (30-50%)525 20 0 15 0 15 55 630 Severely Cost-Burdened (>50%)450 0 20 4 0 15 60 549 Not Calculated 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 2,370 20 45 20 0 60 220 2,735 Total Households 6,370 165 175 100 20 160 350 7,340 American Indian or Alaska Native Pacific Islander Hispanic or Latino (of any race)Total Other RaceWhite Black or African American Asian CITY OF ARLINGTON 11 Chart 4: Arlington total housing cost burden by racial and ethnic group, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 9); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Chart 4a: Arlington total housing cost burden by racial and ethnic group, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 9); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Chart 5: Arlington number of owner households by race and cost burden, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 9); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 CITY OF ARLINGTON 12 Chart 5a: Arlington number of owner households by race and cost burden, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 9); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Chart 6: Arlington renter households by race and cost burden, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 9); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Chart 6: Arlington renter households by race and cost burden, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 9); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 CITY OF ARLINGTON 13 Table 4: Arlington percentage of households by housing cost burden, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 9); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Chart 7: Arlington percentage of all households experiencing housing cost burden, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 9); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Racial Subgroups Total Households Not Cost Burdened 60% 72% 60% 79% 60% 48% Total Cost-Burdened 40% 27% 40% 21% 40% 52% Cost-Burdened (30-50%)25% 17% 29% 21% 23% 29% Severely Cost-Burdened (>50%)15% 11% 11% 0% 17% 23% Not Calculated 0% Owner Not Cost Burdened 69% 80% 62% 90% 81% 53% Total Cost-Burdened 31% 19% 38% 10% 19% 48% Cost-Burdened (30-50%)23% 14% 38% 10% 19% 25% Severely Cost-Burdened (>50%)7% 6% 0% 0% 0% 23% Not Calculated 0% Renter Not Cost Burdened 44% 59% 56% 0% 48% 38% Total Cost-Burdened 56% 41% 44% 100% 52% 61% Cost-Burdened (30-50%)29% 22% 0% 100% 25% 38% Severely Cost-Burdened (>50%)27% 19% 44% 0% 27% 24% Not Calculated WhitePersons of Color Asian Black or African American Other Race Hispanic or Latino (of any race) CITY OF ARLINGTON 14 Chart 7a: Arlington percentage of all households experiencing housing cost burden, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 9); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Chart 8: Arlington percent owner households experiencing housing cost burden, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 9); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Chart 8a: Arlington percent owner households experiencing housing cost burden, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 9); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 CITY OF ARLINGTON 15 Chart 9: Arlington percent renter households experiencing housing cost burden, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 9); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 Chart 9a: Arlington percent renter households experiencing housing cost burden, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 9); Washington Department of Commerce, 2023 CITY OF ARLINGTON 16 Rental Affordability of Housing Units Rental Affordability of Housing Units Summary Arlington has renter household unit shortfalls in the lower- and upper-income categories. There is a shortfall of 320 housing units in <30% AMI category and a shortfall of 740 housing units in >80% AMI category. Arlington has a surplus of a total of 1,130 housing units in the 30-50% AMI and 50-80% AMI, which means the distribution should be more balanced for the income and affordability of the residents currently living in Arlington. This data was gathered in 2019 and many changes have occurred in Arlington. There have been multiple code changes to allow for mixed-use projects, townhouse unit lot subdivisions, single-family small lot subdivisions, and the allowance for multiple middle housing type options throughout the entire city in all residential zones. Several projects for this type of housing have been submitted but have not been completed through build out. There should be a significant change to these numbers in the future, however the city can only allow for a variety of housing options and does not control the market conditions or what a developer wants to construct or the costs for home ownership or rental units. Table 5: Arlington and Snohomish County rental units by affordability and households by income, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 8) & US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 15C) Chart 10: Arlington and Snohomish County renter household income compared to rental unit affordability, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 8) Arlington Arlington Snohomish County Extremely-Low Income (<30% AMI) 830 505 30% 18%25% 12% Very-Low Income (30-50% AMI) 545 1,085 20% 39% 21% 33% Low-Income (50-80% AMI) 445 1,035 16% 37% 17% 39% Moderate-Income (80%-100% AMI) 230 180 8% 6% 12% 16% Greater than 100% of AMI 690 - 25%25% Total 2,740 2,805 Households Rental Units Households Rental UnitsHouseholds Rental Units CITY OF ARLINGTON 17 Chart 11: Arlington renter households by income compared to rental units by affordability, 2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 15C) & US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 14B) Chart 12: Arlington five-year change in renter households by income and rental units by affordability, 2014-2019 Source: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 15C) & US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 14B) & US HUD, 2010-2014 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 15C) & US HUD, 2010-2014 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 14B) CITY OF ARLINGTON 18 Income Income Summary In Arlington, 100% of Pacific Islander households and 69% of Black/African American households make above the median income. This is followed by 44% of White households, 41% of Asian households, 30% of American Indian/Alaska Native households, and 26% of Hispanic/Latino households make above the median income. Extremely Low-Income making less than 30% AMI follow the same trends with 0% in this category for Pacific Islander and Black/African American households. Followed by 4% for American Indian/Alaska Native households, 15% for White households, 22% for Asian households, and 28% for Hispanic/Latino households. Hispanic/Latino households in Arlington have the largest percentage of households (74%) that are at or below 100% AMI. Table 6: Arlington count of households by income and race, 2019 Sources: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 1) & US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 8) Chart 13: Arlington number of households by income category and race, 2019 Sources: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 1) Income Category (% of AMI) Number Extremely Low-Income (≤30% AMI)4 40 - 95 - 935 16 1,090 Very Low-Income (30-50%)10 10 15 95 - 830 25 985 Low-Income (50-80%)55 25 35 30 - 920 25 1,090 Moderate Income (80-100%)- 35 - 35 - 870 - 940 Above Median Income (>100%)30 75 110 89 20 2,815 101 3,240 Total for published estimates 99 185 160 344 20 6,370 167 7,350 Hispanic or Latino (of any race) Black or African AmericanAsian Pacific Islander White All Not Reported* American Indian or Alaska Native CITY OF ARLINGTON 19 Chart 13a: Arlington number of households by income category and race, 2019 Sources: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 1) Chart 14: Arlington distribution of households by income and race or ethnicity, 2019 Sources: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 1) Chart 14a: Arlington distribution of households by income and race or ethnicity, 2019 Sources: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 1) CITY OF ARLINGTON 20 Table 7: Arlington five-year change in households by income and race, 2014 – 2019 Sources: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 1) Table 8: Arlington five-year change in distribution of households by income and race, 2014 – 2019 Sources: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 1) All Households 2015 1,125 835 1,175 820 2,730 6,685 2020 1,090 985 1,090 940 3,240 7,345 Asian 2015 10 55 - 4 40 109 2020 40 10 25 35 75 185 Black or African American 2015 - - 30 10 25 65 2020 - 15 35 - 110 160 Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 2015 160 65 30 79 139 473 2020 95 95 30 35 89 344 Other Race 2015 50 30 65 4 31 180 2020 20 35 80 - 151 286 White 2015 905 690 1,050 720 2,505 5,870 2020 935 830 920 870 2,815 6,370 All Extremely Low-Income (≤30% AMI) Very Low- Income (30-50%) Low- Income (50-80%) Moderate Income (80-100%) Above Median Income (>100%) All Households 2015 17% 12% 18% 12% 41% 2020 15% 13% 15% 13% 44% Asian 2015 9% 50% 0%4% 37% 2020 22% 5% 14% 19% 41% Black or African American 2015 0% 0% 46% 15% 38% 2020 0% 9% 22%0% 69% Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 2015 34% 14% 6% 17% 29% 2020 28% 28% 9% 10% 26% Other Race 2015 28% 17% 36%2% 17% 2020 7% 12% 28%0% 53% White 2015 15% 12% 18% 12% 43% 2020 15% 13% 14% 14% 44% Above Median Income (>100%) Extremely Low-Income (≤30% MFI) Very Low- Income (30-50%) Low- Income (50- 80%) Moderate Income (80- 100%) CITY OF ARLINGTON 21 Chart 15: Arlington percentage of all households by income category and race, (2010 – 2014 vs 2014 – 2019) Sources: US HUD, 2015-2019 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) (Table 1) Between 2015 and 2020, the percentage of households making above the median income increased from 41% in 2015 to 44% in 2020. All but one racial and ethnic groups increased in the above median income category, though some were very slight. The Hispanic/Latino household income was the only decrease from 29% in 2015 to 26% in 2020. The largest increase came from the Black/African American households improving from 38% to 69% and Other Race improving from 17% to 53%. CITY OF ARLINGTON 22 Racial Displacement Analysis Department of Commerce Displacement Risk Map According to the Department of Commerce Displacement Risk Map, Arlington has a relatively low displacement risk, with the east portion of the city listed as moderate displacement risk, as shown in Figure 5. The area shown as low displacement risk (green area) includes most of the city limits of Arlington. The displacement that will happen in this area will be from current property owners who choose to sell their property or homes at their own will. The area shown as moderate displacement risk (tan area) has areas in unincorporated Snohomish County (outside of the city limits of Arlington), 137-acre Country Charm city park, 2.5-acre Haller city park, 3.5-acre Terrace city park, Centennial Trail, 4.5-acre Public Works Administrative, Water Wells, and Wastewater Treatment Plant, approximately 155 acres in the Stillaguamish River �loodplain, Arlington High School campus, Haller Middle School campus, Post Middle School campus, Eagle Creek Elementary campus, Kent Prairie Elementary campus, Presidents Elementary campus, existing major subdivisions (Crown Ridge, Jensen Farm, Gilman Walk, Amber Grove, and all of Arlington’s Old Town Residential), along with many acres of wetlands, Portage Creek and Prairie Creek stream buffers, and steep slopes. This area appears to be large in comparison to the rest of the city, however if the items listed are removed, this area does not have extensive opportunities for development with displacement risks. There is only one area with the potential for development, known as the East Hill Subarea. This area encompasses approximately 320 acres owned by twelve property owners. The property owners are looking to sell their property for development, this will displace the few people that live on the properties. Figure 5: Department of Commerce City of Arlington and Surrounding Area Displacement Risk Map Sources: Department of Commerce Displacement Risk Map CITY OF ARLINGTON 23 Puget Sound Regional Council Displacement Risk Map According to the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) Displacement Risk Map, Arlington has approximately 45% of low displacement risk, 35% of moderate displacement risk, and 20% of high displacement risk, as shown on Figure 6. The high displacement risk (brown area) encompasses the same area as shown on the Department of Commerce Map above and includes some of the same conditions, including unincorporated Snohomish County (outside of the city limits of Arlington), a 137-acre city park, 2.5-acre Haller city park, 3.5-acre Terrace city park, Centennial Trail, 4.5-acre Public Works Administrative, Water Wells, and Wastewater Treatment Plant, approximately 155 acres in the Stillaguamish River �loodplain, Haller Middle School campus, Post Middle School campus, Eagle Creek Elementary campus, Presidents Elementary School campus, and existing major subdivisions (all of Arlington’s Old Town Residential and Gilman Walk). The moderate displacement risk (orange area) shows the Smokey Point area north of State Route 531 (172nd Street NE) and encompasses approximately 25% of the area as residential on the west side bordering Smokey Point Boulevard on both the east and west sides, with some commercial areas abutting 172nd Street. The remaining 75% of the area is within the Cascade Industrial Center where most of the property, 1,189 acres is owned by the Arlington Municipal Airport, including the air�ield itself and industrial owned property that is leased, while the remaining property is privately owned. The largest area for potential displacement risks will occur along Smokey Point Boulevard with the existing residential area. Arlington has been designated as a High-Capacity Transit (HCT) community by Puget Sound Regional Council. The Smokey Point area has the most potential growth opportunities, and the area is currently being studied for transit-oriented mixed-use development in anticipation of the Community Transit SWIFT BRT (Gold Line) expected in 2027. The residential areas have the most displacement risk in Arlington, with future demands for more dense housing occurs. Arlington was designated to provide an increase in population from Snohomish County and the State of Washington, which creates areas that are required to be redeveloped into dense housing instead of single-family homes. Without some displacement within the city, Arlington cannot meet the required population allocations. The low displacement risk (dark pink area) includes the remaining area of the city limits of Arlington. The displacement that will happen in this area will be from current property owners who choose to sell their property or homes at their own will. Figure 6: PSRC Displacement Risk Map for City of Arlington and surrounding unincorporated Snohomish County Sources: Puget Sound Regional Council Displacement Risk Map Tool. CITY OF ARLINGTON 24 Policy Evaluation Based on the guidance provided by the Washington State Department of Commerce, the following policy evaluation was used to evaluate Arlington’s existing Housing Element policies: Criteria Evaluation displacement. policy can help achieve the GMA housing goal but may be insuf�icient or does not address RDI, displacement and exclusion in housing. to RDI, displacement or exclusion. The policy’s bene�its and burdens should be reviewed to improve the equitable distribution of bene�its and burdens. Current 2015 City Housing Element Goals and Policies Existing Goal/Policy Number Existing Goal/Policy Language House Bill 1220 Policy Evaluation Policy Evaluation Explanation Supportive Solid policy. Language could be amended to include how a diverse housing stock creates greater availability for a variety of household incomes. should be encouraged on lands with a residential land-use designation. Language could be more supportive if a variety of housing types is 'required', rather than encouraged. should be permissible in residential zones. policy is supportive of the GMA housing goal, especially as ADU and DADU regulations undergo amendments to meet new requirements of the Housing Element. CITY OF ARLINGTON 25 Existing Goal/Policy Number Existing Goal/Policy Language House Bill 1220 Policy Evaluation Policy Evaluation Explanation parks should be permissible in the city subject to specific site plan requirements. policy is supportive of the GMA housing goal as mobile and manufactured home parks provide natural occurring affordable housing. This policy could be amended to encourage the preservation of existing mobile and manufactured home parks, rather than specific site plan requirements. residents with special housing needs should be provided within the city. Language could be improved by exchanging 'should' with 'provide capacity for'. should be permissible in residential neighborhoods. policy could be amended to allow group homes in mixed-use areas and to streamline the development process for this housing type. GH-2 Ensure the development of new multi-family housing and small single-family units occur within close proximity to commercial areas within the city. Supportive Solid policy. Could amend language to expand on the types of housing and the locations mentioned, such as high-capacity transit areas, employment locations, and services. Could also change the language from 'ensure' to 'allow for'. CITY OF ARLINGTON 26 Existing Goal/Policy Number Existing Goal/Policy Language House Bill 1220 Policy Evaluation Policy Evaluation Explanation located close to commercial and employment centers, transportation facilities, public services, schools, and park and recreation areas. areas of high- capacity transit, schools, services, and other areas redevelop, higher density multi-family housing may be developed. Displacement of existing housing is a risk. This policy should be amended to address this. incentivized in moderate and high- capacity residential areas within the City. Cottage housing helps to achieve the housing goal to ensure housing affordable to all income levels. incentivize housing within close proximity to commercial uses. use housing helps to achieve the housing goal to ensure housing affordable to all income levels. GH-3 Ensure stable residential neighborhoods through public investment in infrastructure and by preserving existing housing stock. Supportive Solid policy. Investments in public infrastructure help to achieve the housing goal to ensure housing affordable to all income levels. budgeted for periodic maintenance of existing infrastructure in residential neighborhoods throughout the City. Investments in public infrastructure help to achieve the housing goal to ensure housing affordable to all income levels. developed for bringing neighborhoods that lack adequate infrastructure up to the City’s current design and streetscape standards, including trails for pedestrian connectivity. Investments in public infrastructure help to achieve the housing goal to ensure housing affordable to all income levels. CITY OF ARLINGTON 27 Existing Goal/Policy Number Existing Goal/Policy Language House Bill 1220 Policy Evaluation Policy Evaluation Explanation GH-4 Encourage the development of special needs housing within the city. Approaching Good policy. More definitive language could be used, such as changing 'encourage' to 'accommodate' or 'provide capacity for'. development of housing for the elderly, handicapped, and other special needs populations through the allowance of mixed-use housing, group housing, and other housing types. be improved by changing language from 'should support' to 'accommodate' or 'provide capacity for' and including language on providing special needs housing available to a variety of income levels close proximity to hospitals, public transportation routes, retail/service centers, and parks. distributed housing supports the GMA housing goal. GH-5 Encourage a quality housing stock within the city. Approaching Good policy. Language could be amended to read 'Encourage a quality and diverse housing stock within the city.' maintain Development Design Guidelines/Standards that address aesthetic and environmental design issues for single-family and multi- family residential development. not directly contribute to the identified housing needs, or result in any racially disparate impacts, displacement, or exclusion. willing neighborhood-based groups and other volunteer organizations to promote housing rehabilitation and community revitalization efforts. not directly contribute to the identified housing needs, or result in any racially disparate impacts, displacement, or exclusion. CITY OF ARLINGTON 28 Existing Goal/Policy Number Existing Goal/Policy Language House Bill 1220 Policy Evaluation Policy Evaluation Explanation conservation of housing through investment in the infrastructure serving residential areas (storm drainage, street paving, and recreation). Investments in public infrastructure help to achieve the housing goal to ensure housing affordable to all income levels. enforcement programs to catch problems early, avoid extensive deterioration of housing units, and to motivate owners to repair and improve maintenance of their structures. not directly contribute to the identified housing needs, or result in any racially disparate impacts, displacement, or exclusion. the City should be protected as a traditional, single-family neighborhood by allowing only single- family, accessory dwellings, and duplexes that are compatible with the neighborhood in terms of use, design, and setback. are ways to ensure a variety of housing types are compatible with the design and architectural character of existing single- family neighborhoods. Certain housing types which may be more affordable should not be excluded in the name of 'neighborhood compatibility'. weatherization of housing units and disseminate information regarding assistance available from the electric and gas utility companies, charitable organizations, and public agencies. not directly contribute to the identified housing needs, or result in any racially disparate impacts, displacement, or exclusion. GH-6 Establish and maintain a streamlined permitting processing to help create predictability for customers. N/A This policy does not directly contribute to the identified housing needs, or result in any racially disparate impacts, displacement, or exclusion. CITY OF ARLINGTON 29 Existing Goal/Policy Number Existing Goal/Policy Language House Bill 1220 Policy Evaluation Policy Evaluation Explanation permit processing procedures, centralized counter services, pre- application conferences, printed information summarizing permit approval requirements, standards and specifications, area-wide environmental assessments, concurrent permit, and approval processing, permit and approval deadlines, and single hearings. an efficient permitting and development process can help to meet the identified housing needs. GH-7 Increase the opportunity for all residents to purchase or rent safe, and sanitary housing through incentives and other programs. Supportive Solid policy. Incentives and other housing programs can play an integral role in ensuring people who are in need receive housing. review State and federal housing programs and make recommendations to City Council regarding future grant applications. can play an integral role in ensuring people who are in need receive housing. willing neighborhood-based groups or other volunteer organizations to promote rehabilitation and community revitalization efforts. not directly contribute to the identified housing needs, or result in any racially disparate impacts, displacement, or exclusion. nonprofit organizations in the creation of housing opportunities to accommodate the homeless, elderly, physically or mentally challenged, and other segments of the population who have special needs. coordinated approach to providing sufficient special needs housing supports the GMA housing goal. GH-8 Promote and facilitate the provision of affordable housing in all areas and zoning districts of the City. Supportive Solid policy. Language could be changed to promote and facilitate the provision of a variety of housing types that are affordable. CITY OF ARLINGTON 30 Existing Goal/Policy Existing Goal/Policy Language House Bill 1220 Policy Evaluation Policy Evaluation Explanation housing options for low- and moderate- a) dispersed throughout the City to discourage a disproportionate concentration of such housing in any one b) are located near amenities such as commercial and employment areas, transportation facilities, and recreational c) are inclusive of a variety of housing types. Supports GMA housing goal. participate in regional housing cooperatives such as Snohomish County’s Alliance for Affordable Housing and other regional organizations that promote affordable housing. to achieve the GMA housing goal of ensuring housing is available to all income levels. private developers and organizations who seek to provide below-market housing units by utilizing various tools such as a) allowing alternative development types (e.g. ADUs, Clusters, Cottage Housing, Small Lots, Unit Lot Subdivision, Bungalow Courts), b) implementing regulatory tools (e.g. Mixed Use, Inclusionary Zoning, SEPA Exemption, Flexible Development Standards, Performance Standards), c) providing general incentives (e.g. density bonuses, parking reductions, permitting priority), d) financial help (e.g. reduced permit and utility connection fees), e) encouraging project level actions that help with affordability (affordability covenants). The city should provide criteria and process for ensuring that those units remain affordable over time. to achieve the GMA housing goal of ensuring housing is available to all income levels. residential capacity, the City should consider requiring a portion of units to be affordable to low- and moderate-income households. PH-8.5 Work with the County and others on zoning and other strategies around transit-oriented development (TOD) sites to guide sustainable and equitable development patterns that incorporate affordable housing production. Policies can be separated. Both policies support affordable housing. CITY OF ARLINGTON 31 Existing Goal/Policy Number Existing Goal/Policy Language House Bill 1220 Policy Evaluation Policy Evaluation Explanation Snohomish County 2016 Countywide Planning Policy Amendments: future potential public benefits, the city should pursue zoning and other strategies around transit-oriented development (TOD) sites to guide sustainable and equitable development patterns that incorporate affordable housing production. (CWPP LU Policy 3.H.3) Supports GMA housing goal. service providers to serve persons with special needs. (CWPP HO Policy 1.A.5) Language could be amended to address affordability for persons with special needs. diversity in the cultural and economic backgrounds of its residents and shall encourage a broad range of affordable ownership and rental housing opportunities, including opportunities for persons with special needs. (CWPP HO Policy 1.B.2) Supports GMA housing goal. and non-profit sector production of new housing units that are affordable to and occupied by low-income households. a. Explore and evaluate various fiscal and regulatory tools and funding resources and strategies to encourage housing providers to increase the supply of affordable housing units generally, and particularly within mixed-income developments and communities. b. Provide incentives that encourage for- profit and non-profit residential developers to address low- and moderate-income housing needs, such as priority permit processing and exemptions or reductions in impact fee mitigation payments for low- income projects with affordability commitments. c. Evaluate the feasibility of reducing minimum permitted lot sizes in non-PRD developments. d. Encourage through incentives and other techniques a balance of affordable and market-rate housing within urban centers and along transit emphasis corridors. (CWPP HO Policy 1.C.3) to achieve the GMA housing goal of ensuring housing is available to all income levels. CITY OF ARLINGTON 32 Existing Goal/Policy Number Existing Goal/Policy Language House Bill 1220 Policy Evaluation Policy Evaluation Explanation affordable housing units to assess whether an adequate supply of housing affordable to the county’s lower income and special needs residents, is being provided. (CWPP Objective HO 4.B) Supports GMA housing goal. partnerships with other jurisdictions, through the Alliance for Housing Affordability, the Housing Consortium of Everett and Snohomish County, Snohomish County Tomorrow, and similar forums, to track the provision of housing by type and affordability. This effort will include an assessment of progress toward meeting the county’s housing goals, including housing that addresses the needs of households within the Under 30% AMI, 30-50% AMI and 51-80% AMI segments, as projected in the current Housing Characteristics and Needs Report for Snohomish County. (CWPP HO Policy 4.B.1) to achieve the GMA housing goal of ensuring housing is available to all income levels. results from Policy 4.B.1, the City should evaluate the effectiveness of its zoning regulations to produce housing developments that meet the diverse housing needs identified in the Housing Characteristics and Needs Report for the community. (HO Policy 4.B.2) to achieve the GMA housing goal of ensuring housing is available to all income levels. CITY OF ARLINGTON 33 2024 Specific Policy Changes for Housing Book Goals and Policies Foundational Principle 2024 Goal or Policy Number Goal or Policy Reason for Change Original Policy Original Policy Number or Source diverse housing stock within the city. edited. CPP HO-4 housing stock. H-1.1 Maintain a supply of land zoned to accommodate a variety of housing types and densities. edited CPP HO-4 types and densities should be encouraged on lands with a residential land-use designation. development of moderate density and middle housing in single-family residential zones to increase the variety in housing types. MPP H-9 CPP HO- 1. f CPP-HO- 4 ADUs and DADUs in residential zones. edited Dwelling Units should be permissible in residential zones. to moderate density residential zones. edited in low to moderate density residential zones. development standards and regulations to reduce barriers to development, provide flexibility, and minimize additional costs to housing. (edited for Arlington) streamlined permit processing procedures, centralized counter services, pre-application conferences, printed information summarizing permit approval requirements, standards and specifications, area- wide environmental assessments, concurrent permit, and approval processing, permit and approval deadlines, and single hearings. costs by considering the use of a variety of infrastructure funding methods, such as existing revenue sources, impact fees, local improvement districts, and general obligation CPP HO- 12 CITY OF ARLINGTON 34 Foundational Principle 2024 Goal or Policy Number Goal or Policy Reason for Change Original Policy Original Policy Number or Source implications of proposed building and land use regulations so the intended public benefit is achieved with limited additional cost to housing. CPP HO- 11 Equity H-2 Provide housing options affordable to all demographics and incomes. edited. the provision of affordable housing in all areas and zoning districts of the City. H-2.1 Align with the Regional Growth Strategy and Snohomish County Growth Targets by providing capacity for the 20- year allocations, including special needs and affordable housing. MPP H-1 CPP HO-1 CPP H-2 options to accommodate the City's present and future needs across all income levels (including extremely low, very- low, low, and moderate-income households) and demographics (age, race, ethnicity, cultural background, and household types) while recognizing historic inequities in access to homeownership opportunities for communities of color. MPP H-5 the increasing diversity in the cultural and economic backgrounds of its residents and shall encourage a broad range of affordable ownership and rental housing opportunities, including opportunities for persons with special needs. (CWPP HO Policy 1.B.2) County Tomorrow, the Alliance for Housing Affordability, the Housing Consortium of Everett, and similar inter-jurisdictional organizations to assess housing needs, create affordable housing opportunities, track the provision of housing by type and affordability, and coordinate a regional approach to funding and meeting the housing needs of current and future populations. MPP H-11 CPP HO- 1. b CPP HO- 1. d CPP HO- 1.3 CPP HO-3 to support and participate in regional housing cooperatives such as Snohomish County’s Alliance for Affordable Housing and other regional organizations that promote affordable housing. CITY OF ARLINGTON 35 Foundational Principle 2024 Goal or Policy Number Goal or Policy Reason for Change Original Policy Original Policy Number or Source on the Growth Monitoring Report (GMR) to make annual assessment of progress towards meeting the City's housing goals, including housing that addresses the needs of extremely low, very- low, low-, moderate-income households, and those with special housing needs. CPP HO-3 CPP HO-5 CPP HO-7 track the provision of affordable housing units to assess whether an adequate supply of housing affordable to the county’s lower income and special needs residents, is being provided. (CWPP Objective HO 4.B) extremely low to moderate- income households are dispersed throughout the city, inclusive of a variety of housing types, and located near amenities, such as commercial and employment areas, education centers, public services, transportation facilities, existing planned residential communities, and recreational opportunities. MPP H-8 CPP HO- 1. a CPP HO- 1.c CPP HO- 9. a CPP HO- 9. b ensure that housing options for low- and moderate-income a) dispersed throughout the City to discourage a disproportionate concentration of such housing in any one geographical area of the b) are located near amenities such as commercial and employment areas, transportation facilities, and recreational c) are inclusive of a variety of housing types. affordable housing including mobile home and manufactured home parks. manufactured home parks should be permissible in the city subject to specific site plan requirements. CITY OF ARLINGTON 36 Foundational Principle 2024 Goal or Policy Goal or Policy Reason for Change Original Policy Original Policy Number H-2.7 Incentivize developers to produce affordable housing that is well-distributed and thoughtfully located throughout the city. with PH- 8.5.4 MPP H-10 CPP HO- 14 CPP HO- 1. d and encourage private developers and organizations who seek to provide below-market housing units by utilizing various tools such as a) allowing alternative development types (e.g. ADUs, Clusters, Cottage Housing, Small Lots, Unit Lot Subdivision, Bungalow Courts), b) implementing regulatory tools (e.g. Mixed Use, Inclusionary Zoning, SEPA Exemption, Flexible Development Standards, Performance Standards), c) providing general incentives (e.g. density bonuses, parking reductions, permitting priority), d) financial help (e.g. reduced permit and utility connection fees), e) encouraging project level actions that help with affordability (affordability covenants). The city should provide criteria and process for ensuring that those units remain affordable over time. increases residential capacity, the City should consider requiring a portion of units to be affordable to extremely low, very-low, low-, moderate- income households. edited Duplicate of PH- 8.5.1 increases residential capacity, the City should consider requiring a portion of units to be affordable to low- and moderate-income households. PH-8.5 Work with the County and others on zoning and other strategies around transit-oriented development (TOD) sites to guide sustainable and equitable development patterns that incorporate affordable housing production. CITY OF ARLINGTON 37 Foundational Principle 2024 Goal or Policy Number Goal or Policy Reason for Change Original Policy Original Policy Number or Source the zoning regulations to produce housing developments that meet the diverse housing needs identified in the Housing Characteristics and Needs Report for the community. monitoring and evaluation results from Policy 4.B.1, the City should evaluate the effectiveness of its zoning regulations to produce housing developments that meet the diverse housing needs identified in the Housing Characteristics and Needs Report for the community. (HO Policy 4.B.2) Equity H-3 Encourage development of housing opportunities to accommodate those who have special needs (elderly, disabled, people with medical conditions, homeless individuals and families, and displaced people). edited. development of special needs housing within the city. H-3.1 Provide capacity for special needs housing and ensure it is well-distributed and thoughtfully located throughout the City (in close proximity to hospitals, public transportation, retail/service centers, medical facilities, parks, and other essential services). edited Merged with PH- 1.4 located in close proximity to hospitals, public transportation routes, retail/service centers, and parks. housing types (group housing, assisted living, skilled nursing care facilities, and supportive housing) available to various income levels. the development of housing for the elderly, handicapped, and other special needs populations through the allowance of mixed-use housing, group housing, and other housing types. homes and essential public residential facilities (as required by RCW 36.70A.200) in all residential and mixed-use zones and streamline the permitting process for this type of development. homes should be permissible in residential neighborhoods. CITY OF ARLINGTON 38 Foundational Principle 2024 Goal or Policy Number Goal or Policy Reason for Change Original Policy Original Policy Number or Source housing and service providers, and other regional groups to provide a coordinated effort to shelter populations with special housing needs. agency and nonprofit organizations in the creation of housing opportunities to accommodate the homeless, elderly, physically or mentally challenged, and other segments of the population who have special needs. Reviews State and federal housing programs and makes recommendations to City Council regarding future grant applications. Change Commission Reviews State and federal housing programs and makes recommendations to City Council regarding future grant applications. Equity H-4 Strive to provide equal access to housing and to keep residents in their H-4.1 Disseminate information regarding assistance available from the electric and gas utility companies, charitable organizations, and public agencies. encourage weatherization of housing units and disseminate information regarding assistance available from the electric and gas utility companies, charitable organizations, and public agencies. protections to ensure housing stability. add no more to the cost of each housing unit produced than a fairly derived proportionate share of the cost of new public facilities necessary to accommodate the housing unit as determined by the impact fee provisions of the Growth Management Act cited in chapter 82.02 RCW. CPP HO- 13 CITY OF ARLINGTON 39 Foundational Principle 2024 Goal or Policy Number Goal or Policy Reason for Change Original Policy Original Policy Number or Source range of strategies to mitigate displacement of low-income households, historically marginalized populations, and neighborhood-based small business owners that may result from planning, public investments, private development, and market pressure. MPP H-12 CPP HO- 15 Economic Stability and Vibrancy mixed-use neighborhoods. H-5.1 Promote diverse, inclusive, mixed-income residential neighborhoods where residents of varying income levels can live and interact. development in commercial areas to help create an economically vibrant and diverse environment. have a mix of jobs and housing. Climate Adaptation and Resiliency sustainable and climate- resilient building practices, and conservation measures in new residential development and remodels. H-6.1 Incentivize developers and residents to participate in programs such as Built Green and LEED. CPP HO- 10 that make housing more energy efficient and resilient to natural disasters, climate change, and poor air quality. CPP HO- 10 green builders and repair technicians if they choose to retrofit homes in a climate resilient manner. CPP HO- 10 CITY OF ARLINGTON 40 Foundational Principle 2024 Goal or Policy Number Goal or Policy Reason for Change Original Policy Original Policy Number or Source Neighborhoods and Connectivity workforce housing near transportation and employment centers. edited. development of new multi-family housing and small single-family units occur within close proximity to commercial areas within the city. H-7.1 Encourage multi-family housing close to commercial and employment centers, transportation facilities, public services, schools, and park and recreation areas. edited should be located close to commercial and employment centers, transportation facilities, public services, schools, and park and recreation areas. housing, jobs, and services by allowing mixed-use development in commercial zones. edited mechanisms to incentivize housing within close proximity to commercial uses. zoning, regulation, and incentive changes near transit-oriented development (TOD) sites to guide sustainable and equitable development patterns that incorporate affordable housing production and public benefits. edited Duplicate of PH-8.4 MPP H-7 activities that may limit future potential public benefits, the city should pursue zoning and other strategies around transit- oriented development (TOD) sites to guide sustainable and equitable development patterns that incorporate affordable housing production. (CWPP LU Policy 3.H.3) programs to help ensure a range of housing opportunities affordable to Arlington's workforce. MPP H-7 housing near transportation and employment centers as growth occurs. CITY OF ARLINGTON 41 Foundational Principle 2024 Goal or Policy Number Goal or Policy Reason for Change Original Policy Original Policy Number or Source Neighborhoods and Connectivity neighborhoods through public investment in infrastructure, preservation of the existing housing stock, and accommodation of new development in a manner that enhances Arlington's quality of life, its natural environment, and its historical and cultural amenities. edited. residential neighborhoods through public investment in infrastructure and by preserving existing housing stock. H-8.1 Coordinate with willing neighborhood-based groups and other volunteer organizations to promote community revitalization efforts. coordinate with willing neighborhood-based groups and other volunteer organizations to promote housing rehabilitation and community revitalization efforts. programs to catch problems early, avoid extensive deterioration of housing units, and to motivate owners to repair and improve maintenance of their structures. edited code enforcement programs to catch problems early, avoid extensive deterioration of housing units, and to motivate owners to repair and improve maintenance of their structures. Neighborhoods and Connectivity measurable planning tools to preserve neighborhood architectural character in existing homes and provide regulatory context for new construction or re- development of existing housing stock. H-9.1 Develop and refine the Development Design Standards to preserve existing architectural character and ensure new development is aesthetically consistent. edited and maintain Development Design Guidelines/Standards that address aesthetic and environmental design issues for single- family and multi-family residential development. CITY OF ARLINGTON 42 Foundational Principle 2024 Goal or Policy Number Goal or Policy Reason for Change Original Policy Original Policy Number or Source residences in the "Old-Town" residential area to follow Development Design Standards. edited residential area of the City should be protected as a traditional, single- family neighborhood by allowing only single- family, accessory dwellings, and duplexes that are compatible with the neighborhood in terms of use, design, and setback. Healthy Activity Lifestyles Arlington residents have access to a healthy active lifestyle. Encourage new residential developments to include community gardens and green spaces to promote outdoor recreation. developments to include fitness and recreational amenities, such as gyms, pools, and sports facilities, for residents’ use. and assisted living facilities are age and ability appropriate. CITY OF ARLINGTON 43 2015 Policies Recommended for Removal from 2024 Housing Book Policies from 2015 Comprehensive Plan Recommended for Removal Policy Number Policy Language Reason for Removal PH-1.4 Adequate housing opportunities for residents with special housing needs should be provided within the city. Countywide Planning Policy Amendments: persons with special needs. (CWPP HO Policy 1.A.5) PH-8.2 production of new housing units that are affordable to and occupied by low-income a. Explore and evaluate various fiscal and regulatory tools and funding resources and strategies to encourage housing providers to increase the supply of affordable housing units generally, and particularly within mixed-income developments and communities. b. Provide incentives that encourage for-profit and non-profit residential developers to address low- and moderate-income housing needs, such as priority permit processing and exemptions or reductions in impact fee mitigation payments for low-income projects with affordability commitments. c. Evaluate the feasibility of reducing minimum permitted lot sizes in non-PRD developments. d. Encourage through incentives and other techniques a balance of affordable and market-rate housing within urban centers and along transit emphasis corridors. (CWPP HO Policy 1.C.3) through the Alliance for Housing Affordability, the Housing Consortium of Everett and Snohomish County, Snohomish County Tomorrow, and similar forums, to track the provision of housing by type and affordability. This effort will include an assessment of progress toward meeting the county’s housing goals, including housing that addresses the needs of households within the Under 30% AMI, 30-50% AMI and 51-80% AMI segments, as projected in the current Housing Characteristics and Needs Report for Snohomish County. (CWPP HO Policy 4.B.1) PH-8.5.5 or other volunteer organizations to promote rehabilitation and community revitalization efforts. Arlington Comp Plan Land Use Forecasts LELAND CONSULTING GROUP PREPARED BY 2023 Overview 3Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts •How many residents and jobs were located in Arlington 2020*? Where were they located, and in what densities? •How do population and jobs allocations made by Snohomish County for 2044 compare to a) the City’s capacity to accommodate population and jobs, and b) the likely number of residents and jobs. •Can the City accommodate the 2020-2044 population and jobs allocations within its current boundaries, or will boundary expansions to the west and southeast be necessary at some point in the future? *2020 used as a baseline year as the latest available year for some data sources when planning process began. 4Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 1 — Lower Density Uses City’s vacant/underutilized layer; City assumptions re/ employment and housing density. Scenarios 2-5 — Higher Job, Housing Density •Removes high-value properties from City’s vacant/underutilized layer to reflect lower likelihood of redevelopment and to reduce losses for existing jobs and housing. •Density assumptions for employment and housing based on recent development trends using CoStar (commercial real estate information company) and City data on recent developments. Variations added: Work from home estimates, higher density commercial development in Mixed Use zones, and removal of market-based development rate reduction (which reduces the amount of land expected to redevelop in 20 years based on recent development trends by zone). 5Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 1: Lower Job, Housing Density Scenario 2: 1 + Higher Job, Housing Density Scenario 3:2 + No Development Rate Reduction Scenario 4: 2 + Higher Commercial Density, WFH Scenario 5: 2 + WFH + No Development Rate Reduction Developable Land City V/UU Layer City V/UU Layer with High-Value Properties Removed City V/UU Layer with High-Value Properties Removed City V/UU Layer with High-Value Properties Removed City V/UU Layer with High-Value Properties Removed Employment DensityRentable Building Area/acre: •Mixed Use/Comm. Zones •Industrial ZonesSF per Job: •OTBD Zone •Other Comm. Zones •Industrial Zones •3,200 •10,000 •400 •1,000 •2,000 •6,600 •10,000 •400 •500 •2,000 •6,600 •10,000 •400 •500 •2,000 •12,000 •10,000 •400 •500 •2,000 •6,600 •10,000 •400 •500 •2,000 Work from Home Included in Employment #s? Residential Density •SFR Zones •Smokey Point Area •RHC Zones •Mixed Use Zones 3-7 du/ac27 1715 3-7 du/ac27 3434 3-7 du/ac27 3434 3-7 du/ac27 3434 3-7 du/ac27 3434 Market-Based Development Rate Reduction Applied? 6Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 Scenario 1 :Lower Density Scenario 5:2 + WFH + NoDevelopmentRate Reduction Scenario 1 :Lower Density Scenario 5:2 + NoDevelopment Rate Reduction Scenario 1 :Lower Density Scenario 5:2 + WFH + NoDevelopment Rate Reduction H O U S I N GJ O B S P O P U L A T I O N Scenario Findings Chart Guide ## ## ## Scenario 2044 Totals Orange dashed bars represent a shortfall with respect to the target Green bars represent units or jobs associated with “pending” developments (built 2021 —) Light blue bars represent estimated jobs worked from home Orange bars represent forecast “capacity,” or housing, jobs and population that can be accommodated with vacant/underutilized land Scenario 1 & 5 Findings for Jobs, Housing and Population Blue bars represent existing conditions, or the 2020 baseline Yellow dashed bars represent 2044 target allocations 7Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 12,449 12,449 9,120 9,120 20,418 20,418 1,692 1,692 4,368 4,368 5,711 119 5,930 3,593 12,189 17,776 35,031 10,491 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 Scenario 1 :Lower Density Scenario 5:2 + WFH + NoDevelopmentRate Reduction Scenario 1 :Lower Density Scenario 5:2 + NoDevelopment Rate Reduction Scenario 1 :Lower Density Scenario 5:2 + WFH + NoDevelopment Rate Reduction 2044 Target: 15,781 Sources: OFM, BLR, City data, CCP Targets, Snohomish County PAC Working Group, LCG Analysis. H O U S I N GJ O B S P O P U L A T I O N 2044 Target: 24,751 2044 Target: 35,506 Includes population from pending housing projects Capacity exceeds allocation; excess capacity. Scenario 1, 5 Findings Scenario 5 is the scenario selected by the City for its planning processes as of June 2023. Scenario 5 assumes all developable land within the UGA will redevelop by 2044, at densities based on recent development in Arlington, with the inclusion of WFH populations in employment totals. Scenario 5 Total:25,782 Scenario 1 Total:14,260 Scenario 5 Total:25,677 Scenario 1 Total:17,081 Scenario 5 Total:55,449 Scenario 1 Total:38,194 Jobs 9Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Jobs Estimates JOB ESTIMATES Estimate Year Source 10,706 2019 2021 HNA using OFM 2019 10,289 2019 2021 SnoCo BLR UGA estimate 15,733 2019 SnoCo BLR GIS total for UGA (EXEM_T field) 10,390 2019 OnTheMap LEHD (US Census) 10,267 2019 City Slides, source unknown 11,215 2020 PSRC Covered Employment Estimates (No geographic breakdown) 12,477 2020 2021 HNA using LUV2, 2017; OFM Estimates 2019 12,818 2023 ESRI Business Analyst 16,219 2020 EXEM_T adjusted, + 2020 projects (City/CoStar) 12,449 2020 LCG Analysis (BLR + 2020 projects) JOB TARGETS 21,320 2040 2021 HNA using LUV2, 2017; OFM Estimates 2019 24,751 2044 UGA CCP Official Targets, City Slides 10Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Baseline Job Calculation WTU = Wholesale, Transportation, and Utilities. 2019 Job Estimate (2021 Snohomish County BLR)# Jobs 10,289 2020 Projects and Corrections to Existing Jobs (City, CoStar) Project Comm. SF NAICS Type SF per Job # Jobs Amazon Fullfillment Center 3,000,000 WTU 2,400 1,250 188th St Business Park 146,137 WTU 2,000 73 Gayteway Business Park 129,617 WTU 2,000 65 Epoch Design 90,000 WTU 2,000 45 Emory Lofts 6,000 Retail 700 9 Emory Lofts 10,000 Office 350 29 Emory Lofts 5,000 Other 400 13 The Lux 7,250 Retail 700 10 The Lux 7,250 Office 350 21 Centennial Park 7,655 Retail 700 11 SIMPLY Self Storage 45,458 Storage 20,000 2 BLR Job estimates for pending commercial development 461,068 Various 728 633 Subtotal 2,160 2020 Baseline (2019 Job Estimate + 2020 Projects): 12,449 11Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Pending Job Calculation 2021-2023 Pending Projects (City, CoStar, BLR) Comm. SF SF per Job # Jobs Cacade Business Park per CoStar 1,252,000 WTU 2,000 350 2,000 700 -Cola Distribution Center 59th Ave per BLR 2,000 700 350 400 700 700 350 350 700 350 700 20,000 700 Total Pending:1,692 ** “Other” = “residential lounge” in Cascade Mixed Use apartment development. 12Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 1 Vacant/Underutilized Parcel Acreage Commercial Rentable Building Area per Acre ÷ SF per Job Jobs Lost to Redevelopment % of Vacant & Underutilized Acres Expected to Develop in 20-year Period Net New Jobs Capacity City Vacant/Underutilized Parcel Data LCG Estimate & City Input BLR 2019 Estimates Joined to City Vacant & Underutilized Parcel Data LCG Estimate S O U R C E : 13Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 2, 3, 4, 5 Vacant/Underutilized Parcel Acreage High Value Properties Removed* Commercial Rentable Building Area per Acre ÷ SF per Job Jobs Lost to RedevelopmentHigh Value Properties Removed* % of Vacant & Underutilized Acres Expected to Develop in 20-year Period Net New Jobs Capacity City Vacant/Underutilized Parcel Data, County Property Value Data LCG Estimate & City Input BLR 2019 Estimates Joined to City Vacant & Underutilized Parcel Data LCG Estimate S O U R C E : *High value properties defined as those with an Improvement to Land Value Ratio, or ratio of building value relative to land, at or over 1.0. 14Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Properties (City Data) 15Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Properties, PendingRemoved 16Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 2, 3, 4, 5. High-Value Properties Excluded 17Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 2, 3, 4, 5. High-Value Properties Excluded 18Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 12,449 12,449 12,449 12,449 12,449 1,692 1,692 1,692 1,692 1,692 4,130 5,711 119 2,642 5,930 4,385 5,930 10,491 7,967 4,680 2,095 - 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 Scenario 1:Lower Job,Housing Density Scenario 2:1 + Higher Job,Housing Density Scenario 3:2 + NoDevelopmentRate Reduction Scenario 4:2 + HigherCommercialDensity, WFH Scenario 5:2 + WFH + NoDevelopmentRate Reduction Sources: OFM, BLR, City data, CCP Targets, LCG Analysis. J O B S 2044 Target: 24,751 Work from home estimate: 10.3% * 2044 population. LCG methodology calculated WFH population based on estimated days WFH per week by sector, and workers employed in that sector. Job Capacity (2044) Scenario 5 is the scenario selected by the City for its planning processes as of June 2023. Scenario 5 assumes all developable land within the UGA will redevelop by 2044, at densities based on recent development in Arlington, with the inclusion of WFH populations in employment totals. Scenario 5 Total:25,782 Scenario 1 Total:24,632 Scenario 2 Total:16,784 Scenario 3 Total:20,071 Scenario 4 Total:22,656 19Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts TAZ Boundaries 20Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Current Jobs by TAZ (2020) Total: 12,449 21Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 1. Jobs Lost to Redevelopment by TAZ Total: 1,131 22Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 1. Net New Jobs Units by TAZ (2044) In Scenario 1, most job growth is focused in the CIC due to a lower displacement of existing employment relative to other areas and redevelopable industrial and commercial lands Yet, given the lower historic and recent employment densities for this area as well as mixed-use developments in other areas, the City requires additional land to accommodate an estimated shortfall of 10,491 jobs according to the Scenario 1 forecast. Total: 1,811 (Includes Pending and Capacity) *Work from home estimates associated with pending housing development not included. 23Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 5. Net New Jobs Units by TAZ (2044) Scenario 5 surpasses the 2044 jobs target by excluding higher-value parcels (which greatly reduces jobs lost to redevelopment) and assuming higher employment densities, leading to a net new jobs of 5,930 on developable acreage in addition to 1,692 pending. Scenario 5 is the scenario selected by the City for its planning processes as of June 2023. Scenario 5 assumes all developable land within the UGA will redevelop by 2044, at densities based on recent development in Arlington, with the inclusion of WFH populations in employment totals. Total: 7,622 (Includes Pending and Capacity)* *Does not include WFH totals. 24Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Source: Washington Employment Security Department, Long-term alternative occupational employment projections, July 2022 -30%-20%-10%0%10%20%30%40%50% Architecture and Engineering Occupations Production Occupations Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations Computer and Mathematical Occupations Business and Financial Operations Occupations Farming, Fishing, and Forestry Occupations Office and Administrative Support Occupations Legal Occupations Management Occupations Protective Service Occupations Sales and Related Occupations Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations Community and Social Service Occupations Transportation and Material Moving Occupations Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media… Education, Training, and Library Occupations Building and Grounds Cleaning and Maintenance… Construction and Extraction Occupations Healthcare Practitioners and Technical Occupations Personal Care and Service Occupations Healthcare Support Occupations Food Preparation and Serving Related Occupations Projected Employment Change, Snohomish County, 2020-2030 For the county overall, higher-density occupations including healthcare and education are expected to grow faster than lower-density industrial jobs—with potential implications for future employment land use needs in Arlington. 25Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Source: PSRC LUV-IT Land Use Projections, May 2023 Yet Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) forecasts the largest actual increase in jobs in Arlington will be in Manufacturing and WTU (2020-2044). - 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 Construction and Resource Manufacturing, Wholesale, Transportation andUtilities Retail and Food Services Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, and Other Public Sector Public and Private education 2020 2044 26Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Historically, the CIC has been a “low density” Manufacturing Industrial Center (1.3 jobs per acre 2010) due to: •Varied density of industrial, non-industrial uses •Construction HQ housing equipment vs. workers •Marijuana production Source: Arlington-Marysville Manufacturing-Industrial Center Market Study, Community Attributes Inc 2016, pp 2, 13, 28, 37. AMMIC Firms by Employment & Sector, 2015 27Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Recent Project Employment Density Top Ten Employment Projects Built 2012+ by Rentable Building Area 2. Gayteway Business Park 2 3 3. Cascade Business Park 7. 188th St Business Park 4. SmartCap Arlington Air 10. Epoch Design 6. The Outpost Apts5. Centennial Park 8. Cascade NW Storage 1. Amazon 9. Best Western 4 1 5 6 7 8 109 28Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Arlington’s jobs target does not match actual historic trends in job growth. Employment Growth Needed To Reach … 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 Linear Trendline Based on 2000-2021 Job Growth 29Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Source: 2044 Initial Growth Targets Recommended by SCT PAC presentation, 2021 High-Capacity Transit: Bus Rapid Transit, 2027 Source: Community Transit Allocation of Growth Targets: 30Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Cascade Industrial Center Recent, Future Development Source: Cascade Industrial Center webpage Source: HeraldNet.com Housing and Population 32Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Housing Estimates HOUSING ESTIMATES Estimate Year Source 7,254 2019 2021 HNA using OFM 2019 7,521 2019 2021 SnoCo BLR 7,733 2019 SnoCo BLR GIS 8,269 2020 ACS 5-Year 7,751 2020 OFM 7,750 2020 County PAC Working Group 9,120 2020 LCG Analysis (BLR + 2020 projects) HOUSING TARGETS 9,654 2040 2021 HNA using LUV2, 2017; OFM Estimates 2019 15,088 2044 HO-5 Report (To be replaced by HO-5 update) 15,781 2044 County PAC Working Group Target 33Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Population Estimates POPULATION ESTIMATES Estimate Year Source 19,740 2019 2021 HNA using OFM 2019 19,734 2019 2021 SnoCo BLR 19,868 2020 Census (CITY ONLY) 19,868 2020 OFM (CITY ONLY) 20,418 2020 UGA CCP Official Targets (UGA) POPULATION TARGETS 26,390 2040 2021 HNA using LUV2, 2017; OFM Estimates 2019 34,649 2044 CITY CCP Official Targets, City Slides 35,506 2044 UGA CCP Official Targets, City Slides 34Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts People per Housing Unit (Historic) People per Housing Unit (based on 2044 Target) Historic Population Historic Housing Units Population Growth Needed to Achieve 2044 Allocation Housing Unit Growth Needed to Achieve 2044 Allocation 3-Year Population Growth Rate 3-Year Housing Unit Growth Rate 2010-20 Population Growth Rate 2010-20 Housing Unit Growth Rate 2 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000 45000 50000 Pe o p l e P e r H o u s i n g U n i t Po p u l a t i o n o r H o u s i n g U n i t s Achieving Arlington's population and housing allocations would be possible based on more recent growth trends, but not the longer-term historic growth rates. OFM Population and Housing Units, 2000-2020, OFM/Snohomish County 2044 Population Allocations and 35Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 2019 Housing Estimate (BLR GIS)# Units 7,733 2020 Projects (City) Project # Units Notes The Villas 428 Adds 312 to 116 in BLR Cedar Point Senior / Baker Moore 255 Centennial Park 206 Park 77 200 Adds 18 to 182 in BLR Emerald Springs RV Park 180 Affinity 170 The Lux 129 Smokey Point RV Park 65 BLR states 85 Emory Lofts 64 31st St Apartments / The Landing at Smokey Point 48 SFR Completed Units per City 25 1,770 2020 Baseline (2019 Units + 2020 Project Units):9,120 36Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Pending Housing Calculation 2021-2023 Pending Projects (City, BLR) Project # Units East Hill 2,000 Outpost 516 Zahradnik 334 Williams 300 Pilchuck Village 182 Reserve / Portage Creek Apartments 150 Gillman Walk Townhomes 115 Cascade Mixed Use 108 Ironwood 102 Magnolia Place 100 Goldstream 96 Pioneer Point 94 Amber Grove 84 Paisley Lofts 46 Allen Townhomes 43 Fullwiler 28 VanLeuven 18 Arlington Townhomes 18 Bridgemont (Single family homes)18 Portage Creek Village 8 SFR Pending in BLR 8 Total Pending:4,368 37Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Housing & Population Capacity Calculation Vacant/Underutilized Parcel Acreage, Smokey Point Subarea Unit Per Acre Assumption per Zone, or 27 Unit per Acre Assumption for Parcels in Smokey Point Subarea Housing Units Lost to Redevelopment % of Vacant & Underutilized Acres Expected to Develop in 20-year Period Net New Housing CapacitySource: BLR 2019 Estimates Joined to City Vacant & Underutilized Parcel Data Source: LCG Estimate Source: City Vacant/Underutilized Parcel Data & City Neighborhood Boundaries Source: LCG Estimate & City Input Net New Housing Units People per Household per zone Population Lost to Redevelopment (HU lost * 2.55 PPH current avg) Net New Population Source: City Input Note: As in the Jobs Capacity Calculation, Scenarios 2, 3, 4, and 5 removed High-Value Vacant and Underutilized Properties, or those with an Improvement to Land Value Ratio of 1.0 or higher. Source: BLR 2019 Estimates Joined to City Vacant & Underutilized Parcel Data 38Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 9,120 9,120 9,120 4,368 4,368 4,368 3,593 4,525 12,189 - 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 Scenario 1:Lower Job, Housing Density Scenario 2:1 + Higher Job, Housing Density Scenario 5:2 + No Development Rate Reduction Sources: OFM, BLR, City data, Snohomish County PAC Working Group, LCG Analysis. H O U S I N G Housing Capacity (2044) 2044 Target: 15,781 Scenario 5 is the scenario selected by the City for its planning processes as of June 2023. Scenario 5 assumes all developable land within the UGA will redevelop by 2044, at densities based on recent development in Arlington, with the inclusion of WFH populations in employment totals. Scenario 1 Total:17,081 Scenario 2 Total:18,013 Scenario 5 Total:25,677 39Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Current Housing Units by TAZ (2020) Total: 9,120 40Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 1. Net New Housing Units by TAZ (2044) In Scenario 1, housing growth is focused in TAZ’s with residential-zoned vacant and underutilized lands, including Smokey Point. This also includes the master-planned East Hill area and vacant/underutilized lands near the CIC, in an RHC-zoned area in the southeast of the city along SR-9, and the single-family zoned area between the CIC and Old Town along 67th Ave NE. Total: 7,961 (Includes Pending and Capacity) 41Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 5. Net New Housing Units by TAZ (2044) Scenario 5’s housing growth pattern largely mirrors Scenario 1’s. The lower amount of housing lost to redevelopment, higher assumed densities in zones allowing multifamily, and (especially) the removal of a market-based development rate reduction produces a larger net housing (in addition to pending housing) of 12,189 compared to 3,593 in Scenario 1—though both alternatives show sufficient capacity for meeting the 2044 growth target. Scenario 5 is the scenario selected by the City for its planning processes as of June 2023. Scenario 5 assumes all developable land within the UGA will redevelop by 2044, at densities based on recent development in Arlington, with the inclusion of WFH populations in employment totals. Total: 16,557 (Includes Pending and Capacity) 42Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Current Population by TAZ (2020) Total: 20,418 43Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 1. Net New Population by TAZ (2044) In Scenario 1, a large share (18%) of overall forecasted population growth is to occur in the Smokey Point Area (3,339 people). This represents a growth of 62% over the subarea’s approximate current 5,423 residents. This outpaces growth in other subareas with concentrated population, such as Old Town’s forecast 14% growth of 369 new residents over its 2,557 current. Other growth areas (all based on housing development) include the master-planned East Hill area and vacant/underutilized lands near the CIC—an area that has seen recent multifamily construction. Total: 17,776 (Includes Pending and Capacity) 44Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 5. Net New Population by TAZ (2044) In Scenario 5, population growth (based on housing development) is slightly more dispersed throughout the city—though as in Scenario 1, Smokey Point accounts for a significant amount of growth, with the added 8,241 residents representing about 24 percent of the overall projected net population growth of 35,031. Due to Scenario 5’s higher assumed residential densities, greater population growth is forecast for commercial/mixed use zoned areas near the CIC and in RHC-zoned property in the southeast of the City. Scenario 5 is the scenario selected by the City for its planning processes as of June 2023. Scenario 5 assumes all developable land within the UGA will redevelop by 2044, at densities based on recent development in Arlington, with the inclusion of WFH populations in employment totals. Total: 35,031 (Includes Pending and Capacity) Conclusions 46Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts •Jobs •Only under Scenario 5 does the City have enough land to accommodate future jobs targets, but this is an aggressive outlook on development, which assumes a continuation of the current estimated work from home levels and that all developable land within the UGA will redevelop by 2044, regardless of market constraints observable in recent development. •Future land needs for (and densities of) employment depends on many factors, including what job types the market brings—either lower-density industrial jobs as seen in past and recent development, higher-density industrial employment in emerging industries, and/or increased employment in higher-density occupations such as healthcare. •Housing + Population •All forecasts show sufficient land for accommodating the 2044 housing and population targets. Scenario 5 assumes all developable land within the UGA will redevelop by 2044, at densities based on recent development in Arlington. LELAND CONSULTING GROUP People Places Prosperity 503.222.1600www.lelandconsulting.com Strategic Advisors to Public and Private Development Forecast Charts and Maps Presented 6/14/23 49Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 12,449 12,449 9,120 9,120 19,868 19,868 1,738 1,738 4,368 4,368 6,133 119 5,930 4,070 14,509 18,731 39,671 10,445 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 Scenario 1Lower Density Scenario5: 3 + WFH Scenario 1Lower Density Scenario5:3 + WFH Scenario 1LowerDensity Scenario 5:3 + WFH 2044 Target: 15,483 Sources: OFM, BLR, City data, CCP Targets, Snohomish County PAC Working Group, LCG Analysis. H O U S I N GJ O B S P O P U L A T I O N 2044 Target: 24,751 2044 Target: 35,506 Includes population from pending housing projects Capacity exceeds allocation; excess capacity. Scenario 1, 5 Findings Presented to City of Arlington 6/14/23, before land undevelopable for housing in airport property and Island Crossing (floodplain area) removed, and adjustments for pending jobs projects. This chart also depicts City-only 2020 population, since revised to include an additional population of 550 from the existing UGA in 2020. 2044 Housing Target for has also been corrected since this version to the UGA total (15,781) vs. City Only (15,483). 50Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 12,449 12,449 12,449 12,449 12,449 1,738 1,738 1,738 1,738 1,738 4,251 6,133 119 2,642 5,930 4,385 5,930 10,445 7,921 4,634 1,928 - 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 Scenario 1:Lower Job,Housing Density Scenario 2:1 + Higher Job,Housing Density Scenario 3:2 + No MarketFactor Scenario 4:2 + HigherCommercialDensity, WFH Scenario 5:3 + WFH Sources: OFM, BLR, City data, CCP Targets, Snohomish County PAC Working Group, LCG Analysis. J O B S 2044 Target: 24,751 Work from home estimate: 10.3% * 2044 population. LCG methodology calculates WFH population based on estimated days WFH per week by sector, and workers employed in that sector. Job Capacity (2044) Presented to City of Arlington 6/14/23, before land undevelopable for housing in airport property and Island Crossing (floodplain area) removed , and adjustments for pending jobs projects.. 51Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 9,120 9,120 9,120 4,368 4,368 4,368 4,070 5,386 14,509 - 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 Scenario 1:Lower Job, Housing Density Scenario 2:1 + Higher Job, Housing Density Scenario 3:2 + No Market Factor Sources: OFM, BLR, City data, CCP Targets, Snohomish County PAC Working Group, LCG Analysis. H O U S I N G Housing Capacity (2044) 2044 Target: 15,483 Presented to City of Arlington 6/14/23, before land undevelopable for housing in airport property and Island Crossing (floodplain area) removed. 2044 Housing Target for has also been corrected since this version to the UGA total (15,781) vs. City Only (15,483). 52Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 2. Net New Jobs Units by TAZ (2044) Includes Pending and Capacity. In Scenario 2, while excluding higher-value parcels leads to lower jobs forecasts for certain TAZ’s, the lower amount of jobs lost to redevelopment produces a larger net jobs (in addition to pending jobs) of 1,146, compared to 119 for Scenario 1—but this alternative still shows a shortfall in capacity (of 7,921 jobs) for meeting the city’s 2044 jobs target. Presented to City of Arlington 6/14/23, before land undevelopable for housing in airport property and Island Crossing (floodplain area) removed, and adjustments for pending jobs projects. CIC boundary also updated in current version to omit Commercial Corridor (CC) zone area along 204th Street NE. 53Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 1. Net New Housing Units by TAZ (2044) Includes Pending and Capacity. In Scenario 1, housing growth is focused in TAZ’s with residential-zoned vacant and underutilized lands, including Smokey Point. This also includes the master-planned East Hill area and vacant/underutilized lands near the CIC, in an RHC-zoned area in the southeast of the city, and a single-family zoned area between the CIC and Old Town. Presented to City of Arlington 6/14/23, before land undevelopable for housing in airport property and Island Crossing (floodplain area) removed. CIC boundary also updated in current version to omit Commercial Corridor (CC) zone area along 204th Street NE. 54Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 2. Net New Housing Units by TAZ (2044) Scenario 2’s housing growth pattern largely mirrors Scenario 1’s. While excluding higher-value parcels leads to lower housing forecasts for certain TAZ’s (e.g., in Smokey Point), the lower amount of housing lost to redevelopment and higher assumed densities in zones allowing multifamily produces a larger net housing (in addition to pending housing) of 5,386 compared to 4,070 in Scenario 1—though both alternatives show sufficient capacity for meeting the 2044 growth target. Includes Pending and Capacity. Presented to City of Arlington 6/14/23, before land undevelopable for housing in airport property and Island Crossing (floodplain area) removed. CIC boundary also updated in current version to omit Commercial Corridor (CC) zone area along 204th Street NE. 55Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 1. Net New Population by TAZ (2044) Includes Pending and Capacity. In Scenario 1, a large share (17%) of forecasted population growth (3,339 people), is forecast for the Smokey Point area. This represents a growth of 64% over the subarea’s approximate current 5,278 residents. This outpaces growth in other subareas with concentrated population, such as Old Town’s forecast 12% growth of 388 new residents over its 3,143 current. Other growth areas (all based on housing development) include the master-planned East Hill area and vacant/underutilized lands near the CIC—an area that has seen recent multifamily construction. Presented to City of Arlington 6/14/23, before land undevelopable for housing in airport property and Island Crossing (floodplain area) removed. CIC boundary also updated in current version to omit Commercial Corridor (CC) zone area along 204th Street NE. 56Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Scenario 2. Net New Population by TAZ (2044) In Scenario 2, population growth (based on housing development) is slightly more dispersed throughout the city—with Smokey Point’s addition of 1,784 residents representing about half the growth rate (33%) seen in Scenario 1, due to the exclusion of higher-value underutilized properties. Due to Scenario 2’s higher assumed residential densities, greater population growth is forecast for commercial/mixed use zoned areas near the CIC and in RHC-zoned property in the southeast of the City. Includes Pending and Capacity. Presented to City of Arlington 6/14/23, before land undevelopable for housing in airport property and Island Crossing (floodplain area) removed. CIC boundary also updated in current version to omit Commercial Corridor (CC) zone area along 204th Street NE. Additional Slides/ Appendices 58Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts *From City’s layer of vacant and underutilized parcels. Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Gross Buildable Acres V & UU* Gross Buildable Acres V & UU* New Jobs NewJobs Jobs LostRedev.Jobs LostRedev.Net NewJobs Net NewJobs Multi-Family Residential High Capacity 0 Commercial / Mixed Use NC (Neighborhood Commercial)- OTBD - 1 (Old Town Business District) OTBD - 2 - OTBD - 3 GC (General Commercial) HC (includes HC-N BLR acres)- BP (Business Park) CC (Commercial Corridor)- Medical Services Subtotal -4345 LI (Light Industrial) GI (General Industrial) Subtotal 59Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Residential High Capacity 70 30 0 19%3,200 0 17 4,000 500 34 Commercial / Mixed Use Neighborhood Commercial 70 30 0 80%3,200 1,000 15 4,000 500 34 Old Town Business District - 1 70 30 0 7%3,200 400 0 4,000 400 34 Old Town Business District - 2 70 30 0 0%3,200 400 0 4,000 400 34 Old Town Business District - 3 70 30 0 0%3,200 400 0 4,000 400 34 General Commercial 70 30 0 100%3,200 1,000 15 4,000 500 34 Highway Commercial 70 30 0 25%3,200 1,000 15 4,000 500 34 Business Park 0 100 0 100%12,000 1,000 0 12,000 500 0 Commercial Corridor District 70 30 0 7%3,200 1,000 15 4,000 500 34 Medical Services 70 30 0 0%3,200 1,000 0 4,000 500 0 Industrial Light Industrial 0 0 100 46%10,000 2,000 0 10,000 2,000 0 General Industrial 0 0 100 46%10,000 2,000 0 10,000 2,000 0 Scenario 1 Scenario 2 The SF per Job assumption of 500 is based on averages for recent projects provided by the City; 400 for past development in OTBD, and 2,000 for WTU/industrial provided by the City. Development Rate is the % of vacant and underutilized parcel acreage expected to develop or redevelop during the study timeframe. LCG estimates are based on historic growth patterns by zone. Commercial Rentable Building Area/Acre is the amount of commercial rentable area that will be developed per acre of commercial and mixed-use zoned land. LCG estimates are based on typical FARs and averages for recent developments using CoStar data (see next slides). Note: new changes to assumptions in yellow. 60Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Calculation 593 Commercial Based on development last 10 years in Commercial & Mixed Use ZonesMultifamily Future Development Type (Acres): Commercial Mixed-Use/Multifamily Assumed Commercial Rentable Building Area/Acre: Commercial FAR 0.28 * 43,560 (SF in Acre) Mixed-Use/Multifamily Avg for developments last 10 years Total Commercial Rentable Building Area: Commercial Mixed-Use/Multifamily Total Avg Commercial Rentable Building Area/Acre: 61Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Arlington Multifamily Projects, 2012-2022 Project Year Built Units DU/Acre per Acre Acres Cedar Pointe 2020 256 63 0 4.05 2019 40 58 30435 0.69 2023 29 50 4750 0.58 2020 171 48 0 3.54 2014 8 47 0 0.17 2022 181 46 4788 3.91 2014 30 38 0 0.8 2021 202 23 869 8.81 2017 182 23 0 8.02 2019 312 21 0 14.71 Average 42 5,013 4.528 62Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 4,634 4,634 4,634 Future Land Use Pattern Mostly Mix of Historical Office and Retail Commercial Pattern and MFR MFR, Com, Ind Land RBA/Acre 12,000 4,000 SF/Job 500 500 Jobs/Acre 24 8 1.6 GBA Parcel Acres required to meet the 2044 jobs shortfall 193 579 2,884 Gross Acres required to meet the 2044 jobs shortfall*261 782 3,893 What amount of land is needed to accommodate undersupply (Scenario 5)? *Assumes 35% of land for roads, critical areas, buffers, easements, and other undevelopable uses. Scenario 1 New Jobs per buildable acre Employees per acre assumptions in WA + OR: Source: ECONorthwest, Employment Density Assumptions in Clark Co. Vacant Buildable Lands Model. 63Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts accommodate undersupply? 64Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts vs. 1,601 jobs in Scenario 2 Scenario 2 2044 Total Jobs by TAZ PSRC LUV-IT Model 2044 Total Jobs by TAZ 65Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 20015 67th Avenue NE1 million SF industrial & manufacturing18,519 units per acreBuilt 2022 66Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 3823 172nd Street NE41,915 SF; Built 20128,843 SF/acre 67Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Residential, Population Density Assumptions Scenario 1 Scenario 2 ResidentialDu/Ac People per HH ResidentialDu/Ac People per HH Development Rate (same as in jobs calcs) Single-Family Residential Ultra Low Capacity Residential Low Capacity Old Town Residential District Multi-Family Residential Moderate Capacity Residential Medium Capacity Residential High Capacity Commercial / Mixed Use Neighborhood Commercial Old Town Business District - 1 Old Town Business District - 2 Old Town Business District - 3 General Commercial Highway Commercial Business Park Commercial Corridor District Medical Services 68Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts Housing Development Since 2010 (HUD) 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Units in Single-Family Structures Units in 2-unit Multi-Family Structures Units in 3- and 4-unit Multi-Family Structures Units in 5+ Unit Multi-Family Structures Housing development in Arlington has changed significantly since 2010. Before 2017, most of the housing built in the City was single family housing. After 2017, most of the housing has been multifamily. 69Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 63 58 50 48 47 46 38 23 23 21 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Cedar Pointe Emory Lofts Fullwiler Affinity atArlington Bridge Place PilchuckVillage StillaguamishGardens CentennialPark Park77 Villas atArlington Un i t s p e r A c r e Units/Acre Avg. Units/Acre, Arlington NewConstruction Dwelling Units per Acre Source: CoStar. All Multfamily projects built in City of Arlington, 2012 to present 70Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 18222 Smokey Point Boulevard69 units; Built 20093.64 acres 71Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 17327 67th Avenue NE202 units; Built 20215,022 SF retail/office8.81 acres 72Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 18318 Smokey Point Boulevard, Arlington30 units; Built 20140.8 acres 73Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 6605 204th Street NE, Arlington29 units; Built 20232,755 SF retail/office0.58 acres 74Arlington Comp Plan | Land Use Forecasts 17309 40th Avenue NE, Arlington256 units; Built 20204.05 acres Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update HB 1220 Analysis | DRAFT Leland Consulting Group, 2023 Overview As part of Arlington’s 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update, Leland Consulting Group (LCG) analyzed Arlington’s compliance with new statewide regulations resulting from HB 1120’s amendments to the Growth Management Act (GMA) requiring jurisdictions to evaluate land capacity for all housing needs as well as to make adequate provisions to accommodate all housing needs. This report documents LCG’s findings as outlined in the Washington State Department of Commerce guidebooks for this process.1 Land Capacity Analysis Overview and Arlington Allocation As amended by HB1220, RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c) requires cities to show sufficient land capacity to meet housing needs of moderate, low, very low, and extremely low-income households, defined by household income as a percentage of area median income (AMI), and show capacity for permanent supportive housing and emergency housing and shelters. The methodology for this analysis, as outlined in the Department of Commerce guidebook, is shown at right in Figure 1. Using this methodology, the capacity for new housing development or redevelopment in Arlington is summarized by zone, and the zones are then aggregated into zone categories based on housing types allowed in those zones. These categories are then related to the potential income levels that could be served by new housing development or redevelopment in those areas. Generally, the methodology assumes that the housing needs of lowest-income households (earning between 0 and 80 percent AMI) will be provided in zones allowing medium- to large-scale multifamily development, such as the type of deeply subsidized affordable apartment development typically funded by the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC), as well as other denser apartment types. The housing needs of moderate-income households (earning 80 to 120 percent AMI) are assumed to be served by zones allowing various “middle housing” types such as duplexes, triplexes, and 4-plexes, as well as by ADUs in any zone. Finally, higher-income households (earning over 120 percent AMI) are assumed to be served by zones allowing single-family detached housing. Per Commerce guidance, cities may also show additional potential for higher-income households to be served by higher-end market-rate housing in a portion of multifamily or mixed-use zones, based on market-rate and subsidized development trends in those zones.2 Figure 2 below shows Arlington’s housing allocations by income band for the 2020-2044 planning horizon. These allocations were determined by the County PAC working group in winter and spring 2022 resulting from a methodology which combined elements 1 The full Commerce guidebooks are available at https://www.commerce.wa.gov/serving-communities/growth-management/growth-management-topics/planning-for-housing/updating-gma-housing-elements/ 2 Department of Commerce. “Guidance for Evaluating Land Capacity to Meet All Housing Needs.” December 2022. Footnote 4, p. 14 Figure 1. Land Capacity Analysis Methodology Source: Washington State Department of Commerce Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update | HB1220 Analysis Page 2 of the original Commerce methodologies “A” and “B” provided to the counties in the Housing for All Planning Tool.3 The new methodology, called “Method C” as shown below, allocates future housing needs by income band to all Snohomish County jurisdictions. In total, Arlington must plan to accommodate 7,794 new permanent units by 2044, and an additional 482 emergency housing units. Figure 2. Arlington Housing Allocations by Income Source: Snohomish County HO-5 Report Step 1 – Capacity by Zone The first step in the analysis is to determine the potential unit capacity within each of Arlington’s zones which allow housing. This was accomplished using data developed by LCG during the forecasting process for this comprehensive plan update. To provide an additional level of detail for this analysis, parcels in the Mixed-Use Overlay were considered separately, using the more recent form-based code Transects which supersede the base zoning, and which have more specific assumptions and regulations about future housing types. This provided a more granular level of detail on what types of housing were assumed to develop over the planning horizon within the Mixed-Use Overlay. The overall result of this analysis is a capacity for 11,183 new units on vacant or redevelopable acreage in the City. Figure 3 below shows the calculations for this capacity analysis and a discussion of data sources and methodology follows. 3 Housing For All Planning Tool (HAPT): https://deptofcommerce.app.box.com/s/48o8fzedzxnh63xth6aofi2jc2npcjoa Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update | HB1220 Analysis Page 3 Figure 3. Capacity for New Housing by Zone in Arlington, 2020-2044 Source: Snohomish County, City of Arlington, Washington Department of Commerce, Leland Consulting Group Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update | HB1220 Analysis Page 4 The gross vacant or redevelopable acreage was based on City data provided during the forecasting process, and the reduction factor was determined by the percentage of land in each zone considered unbuildable in the Snohomish County Buildable Lands Report (BLR). This resulted in the net developable acreage by zone. The assumed maximum density in single-family zones was based on the zoning code. In multifamily zones, commercial zones and the mixed-use overlay transects, assumed maximum density was based on achieved density in recent and forthcoming projects as well as city feedback received during the forecasting process. Data on the number of existing housing units on parcels considered to be redevelopable was from the Snohomish County Buildable Lands Report. Step 2 – Categorize Zones by Housing Types The next step in the process was to assign each zone and mixed-use transect to one of several categories based on the type of housing allowed in the zone/transect. These housing types were based on the description of the zone in the zoning code or form- based code. The zone categories used for this analysis are shown below. Figure 4. Categories for Classifying Zones by Housing Types Allowed Low Density Detached Single-Family, Limited Duplexes Moderate Density Some Detached Single-Family, Duplex, Triplex, Fourplex, Attached Townhomes/Row Houses Low-Rise Garden Apartments, Condos, Attached Townhomes/Row Houses, Live/Work Units Mid-Rise Vertical or Horizontal Mixed Use up to 4 stories, Multifamily Apartments above Commercial The breakdown of all allowed housing types and corresponding zone categories in Arlington’s zones and mixed-use transects is shown below in Figure 5, along with the unit capacity of each zone or transect. Figure 5. Arlington Zones and Transects with Housing Types and Zone Categorization Source: Washington Department of Commerce, Arlington Zoning Code, Arlington Form-Based Code, Leland Consulting Group Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update | HB1220 Analysis Page 5 Step 3 – Relate Zoning Categories to Income Levels The next step of the analysis is to relate the zoning categories to the potential income levels that could be served by new development or redevelopment in those areas. The Department of Commerce provides assumed affordability levels for each zone category in their guidance. To refine these affordability assumptions, recent housing sales price data from Redfin and multifamily rent data from CoStar was analyzed by Zone or mixed-use transect. These prices were compared Arlington’s income limits used by HUD to calculate housing cost burden and eligibility for subsidized housing. As shown below, the market data from Arlington shows a wide range of potential incomes being served by moderate density, low-rise, and mid-rise zones. Further discussion of the assumed breakdown between future market-rate and subsidized units in low- and mid-rise zones is found below in Steps 4 and 5. Figure 6. Arlington Zoning Categories and Income Levels Source: CoStar, Redfin, HUD, WA Center for Real Estate Research at UW, Leland Consulting Group Step 4 – Summarize Capacity by Zone Category The next step in the methodology is to total the previously calculated capacity by zone category. In addition, an extra step beyond Commerce’s methodology was added in Arlington to reflect the large amount of housing currently under construction or in the development pipeline, as well as the potential split of future units in low- and mid-rise zone categories between subsidized and market-rate units. In LCG’s forecasting model for this comprehensive plan, there were 4,368 units considered to be “pending” based on data provided by the City. These are units which have been constructed, are under construction, or are currently planned for the period from 2020-2044, and therefore should be factored into the total 2044 unit counts. These units were categorized by location and assigned a zone category, and were also classified as market-rate or subsidized units based on City data provided during the forecasting process. Because the income range potentially served in low- and mid-rise zones is very wide, a portion of the capacity of each zone category (aside from Low Density) was assumed to develop as market-rate units serving households above 120 percent AMI. This share of capacity was calculated based on the acreage of each zone which redeveloped as market-rate housing over the past 10 years projected forward for the next 20 years. The remaining acreage is assumed to be flexible to accommodate units serving a wide range of income levels, including potentially subsidized units. The pending units, assumed market rate share of capacity, and total unit capacity are shown below in Figure 7. Figure 7. Arlington Capacity by Zone Category and Assumed Market-Rate Share Source: City of Arlington, Leland Consulting Group Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update | HB1220 Analysis Page 6 Step 5 – Compare Housing Needs to Capacity The final step in the methodology is to compare the aggregated housing needs as determined by Snohomish County and Arlington’s land capacity to determine if a shortfall exists. As shown below in Figure 8, this analysis shows a surplus of land capacity in each zone category in Arlington, after capacity and pending units have been allocated to zone categories and income bands as described above. Figure 8. Arlington Housing Needs and Capacity, 2020-2044 Emergency Housing Needs [to be completed] Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update | HB1220 Analysis Page 7 Adequate Provisions Analysis RCW 36.70A.070(2)(d) also requires that jurisdictions compare the yearly production of housing type by zoning category which would be needed to reach countywide targets with historical production trends in the city to see if there is a demonstrated barrier to production of a certain housing type. If barriers are found for a housing type, the jurisdiction must document the barriers that exist and appropriate programs and actions to overcome each identified barrier for that housing type. This analysis also requires an analysis of employment location in relation to housing location and considerations of ADUs as a tool to meet housing needs. Step 1 – Review Housing Production Trends The first step is to review data on recent housing production. Figure 9 below shows data on recent housing production trends in Arlington provided by city staff, showing permits for single-family and “middle housing” units and production statistics for market- rate and below market-rate multifamily units over the past five years, including 2023 to date. As shown, there has been a recent uptick in “middle housing units” as well as consistent production of multifamily units in recent years, including a substantial number of subsidized units. Figure 9. Historic Permit and Development Data in Arlington Year Single-Live-Multifamily (Below Market-Multifamily (Market- 2019 8 0 0 0 0 312 376 2020 8 0 4 0 0 255 425 2021 17 20 6 0 0 0 204 2022 4 0 2 6 48 0 330 2023 0 0 8 3 28 101 203 Total 37 20 20 9 76 668 1,538 Yearly 7 4 4 2 15 134 308 Source: City of Arlington Next, this data is compared with the annual unit production needed to achieve countywide growth targets by income band discussed in the Land Capacity Analysis section above. As in the Land Capacity Analysis, a more granular view of low-rise and mid- rise zone categories was used in this analysis, breaking out historic production of below-market rate and market-rate units in those zones to more accurately reflect the wide potential range of incomes being served by those zones. The results shown below in Figure 10 show that Arlington is producing a sufficient amount of low-rise and mid-rise subsidized units as well as low density and market-rate units. However, past production trends indicate a barrier to the production of moderate density units such as townhomes, duplexes, triplexes, and ADUs. Figure 10. Historic Production and Annual Needed Production in Arlington by Zone Category, 2020-2044 Low-Rise + Mid-Rise (Below Market-Rate) Moderate Density Low Density + Market-Rate in Other Zones Total 2,979 1,417 3,397 7,793 124 59 142 325 134 21 319 474 Source: City of Arlington, Washington State Department of Commerce, Leland Consulting Group Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update | HB1220 Analysis Page 8 Steps 2 and 3 – Gather Information on Barriers and Document Programs and Actions to Overcome Barriers Barriers to the production of moderate density housing types can take numerous forms. Commerce guidance breaks down these barriers into three categories: Development Regulations, Process Obstacles, and Limited Land Availability and Environmental Constraints. The checklist below in Figure 11 is designed to document both potential barriers to moderate density housing production and programs and actions designed to overcome these barriers. These programs and actions are not required to be adopted by the periodic update deadline of this comprehensive planning process, but Arlington will be required to submit a progress report to the Department of Commerce five years after this plan’s adoption covering: • The implementation of previously adopted changes to the housing element and any effect those changes have had on housing affordability and availability • Permit processing timelines • Progress towards implementing any actions to achieve reductions to meet greenhouse gas and vehicle miles traveled requirements as provided for in any element of the comprehensive plan Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update | HB1220 Analysis Page 9 Figure 11. Moderate Density Housing Barrier Review Checklist Barrier Is this barrier likely to affect housing Why or why not? Provide evidence. Actions needed to address barrier. Unclear development regulations Prohibiting some moderate density housing types, such as: • Duplexes • Triplexes • Four/five/six-plexes • Townhomes • Cottage housing • Live-work units • Manufactured home parks No Middle housing is allowed in many areas of Arlington, particularly in the mixed-use overlay districts in the Smokey Point Boulevard Corridor. Duplex, triplex, and fourplex construction has increased in recent years as shown above in Figure 9. Low maximum densities or low maximum FAR High off-street parking requirements Lack of alignment between building codes and development codes Other (for example: complex design standards, maximum impervious Process Obstacles Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update | HB1220 Analysis Page 10 Lack of clear and accessible information about process and fees Permit fees, impact fees and utility connection Processing times and staffing challenges Yes The most significant difference is that we request that all permits applied for go through concurrent review processes; land use, civil review and building review. This creates an environment that requires collaboration of all reviewing staff so that any issues identified during the review process can be addressed immediately and resolved with the applicant in a time Streamline permit processes by eliminating the requirements for some conditional uses or zoning verifications frequently found in the permissible use table. Limited Land Availability and Environmental Constraints Lack of large parcels for infill development Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update | HB1220 Analysis Page 11 Consideration of Housing Locations in Relation to Employment Location Another requirement of this analysis is that cities consider the location of housing in relation to employment location. Arlington is a jobs center, with a portion of the Cascade Industrial Center within city limits. Strategic Objective I from the Arlington’s Housing Action Plan contains considerations around the housing-jobs balance and ensuring adequate housing supply for Arlington employees: Arlington has been expanding and is projected to continue doing so. As an employment center, jobs and businesses are increasing and prospering. As a desirable place to live, more and more people are seeking to build a life here. The goal of this strategic objective is to ensure those opportunities not only remain but thrive. The City has a high jobs-to-housing ratio. Although the City wishes for the high ratio to remain, it can still ensure people who work in Arlington also have the option to live here. The lack of affordable housing options (particularly for ownership) is supported by responses to the Arlington Housing Needs Survey. A goal of this objective is to alleviate the inadequate supply of affordable homeownership opportunities by connecting those interested in ownership with more resources. It can also expand the allowances for more affordable options to be built, so developers have the tools to meet this demand. If more people that work in Arlington also live there, intracity trips will increase, decreasing commute times and giving the City more reason to expand its multimodal transportation network. For some households, monthly transportation costs, usually tied to a long commute, can equal or exceed a household’s monthly housing costs. Transportation costs cannot be left out of the City’s discussion of Arlington’s affordability. Another goal of this objective is to leverage Arlington’s growth to increase quality of life in Arlington. The City should evaluate mechanisms for funding affordable housing in tandem with increased commercial and industrial investment. It should also figure out how to efficiently combine residential development with planned infrastructure improvements. This strategic objective serves as Arlington’s highest priority for implementation. All actions under this objective should be pursued within the next five years, with resources, such as staff time and budget allocations, that are specified in this plan being primarily devoted toward their completion. Consideration of the Role of ADUs in Meeting Housing Needs This analysis also requires that cities consider the role of ADUs in meeting housing needs. Although ADUs are allowed in Arlington, none have been permitted in recent years, per city staff. The passage of HB 1337 in 2023 will significantly change ADU regulations statewide, and as part of that legislation, Arlington will be required to further relax any remaining restrictions on ADU development. The new legislation requires that cities allow 2 attached or detached ADUs on all lots and eliminates other barriers to ADU development such as owner-occupancy requirements and size, location, and design requirements that are more stringent than those imposed on the primary dwelling. Finally, the new legislation will cap impact fees for ADUs at 50 percent of those charged for the primary unit. Implementing HB 1337 will significantly reduce barriers to ADU production in Arlington. In addition, as outlined in Action 1.2 of the Housing Action Plan, Arlington could consider other incentives to ADU development such as streamlining permitting processes through providing stock designs for ADUs in the city. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT CHECKLIST JUNE 2024 LOCAL GOVERNMENT DIVISION ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT CHECKLIST This checklist provides the framework Commerce regional planners will use to review periodic update submissions. This checklist is NOT required to be completed by each jurisdiction; it is an additional tool to help local planners meet the intent of the statute. Regional planners will review draft comprehensive plans and development regulations for the items IN BOLD CAPITALIZED TEXT BELOW EACH ITEM. information on these requirements are included in parenthesis if additional information is needed Questions? Contact Anne Fritzel at Anne.Fritzel@commerce.wa.gov 360-259-5216. Accessory dwelling units (ADU)s [CITIES, TOWNS AND UNINCORPORATED UGAS IN COUNTIES] Allow two ADUs per lot within urban growth areas (UGAs) by six months after the next periodic update due date. If a city or county does not amend its rules to be consistent with the law, the statute will "supersede, preempt and invalidate any conflicting local development regulations. HB 1337, passed in 2023. See Commerce’s Guidance for Accessory Dwelling Units in Washington State. Consistent? Yes/No Changes needed? a. ADUs defined as consistent with a dwelling unit located on the same lot as a single-family housing unit, duplex, triplex, townhome or other housing unit. RCW 36.70A.696(6) Dwelling unit is defined as a residential living unit that provides complete independent living facilities for one or more persons and that includes permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation. RCW 36.70A.696(1) Yes AMC 20.44.042(a) Code documents at the link below, as Municode is still in the process of updating the city’s code amendments from July 2024. Zoning Code and Development Design Standards & Guidelines | Arlington, WA b. Within urban growth areas, cities and counties must allow AT LEAST two ADUs on all lots that meet the minimum lot size in zoning districts that allow for single-family homes. RCW 36.70A.681(1)(c) The ADUs may be: Two attached ADUs such as unit in a basement, attic, or garage; One attached ADU and one detached ADU; or Yes AMC 20.44.042(c)(1) 20.44.042(c)(3) 20.44.042(c)(4) ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT CHECKLIST JUNE 2024 2 Cities and counties are not authorized to allow construction of ADUs in locations where development is restricted under other laws, rules, or ordinances due to physical proximity to on-site sewage system infrastructure, critical areas or other unsuitable physical characteristics of a property. RCW 36.70A.680(4&5) and RCW 36.70A.681 c. Must allow a gross floor areas of at least 1,000 square feet within UGAs. RCW 36.70A.681(1)(f) Yes AMC 20.44.042(c)(6) d. The city or county may not establish roof height limits on an ADU of less than 24 feet, unless the height limitation on the principal unit is less than 24 feet, in which case, a city or county may not impose roof height limitation ADUs is less than the height limit that applies to the Yes AMC 20.44.042(c)(7) e. No setback requirements, yard coverage limits, tree retention mandates, restrictions on entry door locations, aesthetic requirements, or requirements for design review for ADUs that are more restrictive than those for principal units. RCW 36.70A.681(1)(h). Must allow detached ADUs to be sited at a lot line if the lot line abuts a public alley, unless the city or county routinely plows snow on the public alley. RCW 36.70A.681(1)(i) Yes AMC 20.44.042(c)(5) 20.44.042(c)(8) 20.44.042(c)(11) 20.44.042(c)(12) 20.44.042(c)(13) f. Within UGAs, cities and counties may not require owner occupancy, unless used for short term rentals. RCW 36.70A.680(5)(a) RCW 36.70A.696(9) defines owner as any person who has at least 50% ownership in a property on which an ADU is located. Must allow sale by condominium RCW 36.70A.681(1)(k) Yes AMC 20.44.042(c)(2) 20.44.042(c)(19) g. Parking limits for ADUs are subject to the following: • No off street parking may be required within one-half mile of a major transit stop. RCW 36.70A.681(2)(a)(i) • On lots equal to or smaller than 6,000 square feet, no more than one off-street parking space may be required per ADU before any zero lot line subdivisions or lot splits. RCW 36.70A.681(2)(a)(ii) • On lots greater than 6,000 square feet, no more than two off-street parking spaces per ADU may be required before any zero lot line subdivisions or lot splits. RCW 36.70A.681(2)(a)(iii) • If an empirical parking study is submitted to Commerce for certification that a certain area would be unsafe is less parking was required RCW 36.70A.681(2)(b)(i), • Areas within a one mile radius of SeaTac airport. Yes AMC 20.44.042(c)(15) h. Impact fees on the construction of accessory dwelling units are no greater than 50 percent of the impact fees that would be imposed on the principal unit. RCW 36.70A.681(1)(a) Also RCW 82.02.060 requires that jurisdictions adopt a schedule of proportional impact fees area required by Yes AMC 20.44.042.(c)(17) 20.44.042(c)(18) i. The code does not require public street improvements as a condition of permitting ADUs. RCW 36.70A.681(1)(l) Yes AMC 20.44.042(c)(14) MIDDLE HOUSING CHECKLIST OCTOBER 2024 LOCAL GOVERNMENT DIVISION MIDDLE HOUSING CHECKLIST Overview: This checklist provides the framework Commerce regional planners will use to review all relevant development regulation submissions. This checklist is NOT required to be completed by each jurisdiction; it is an additional tool to help local planners meet the intent of the statute. The Tier 1 provisions in this checklist apply to cities with a population of at least 75,000 based on 2020 Office of Financial Management population estimates. Tier 2 provisions apply to cities with a population of at least 25,000 but less than 75,000 based on 2020 Office of Financial Management population estimates. Tier 3 provisions apply to cities with a population of less than 25,000, that are within a contiguous urban growth area with the largest city in a county with a population of more than 275,000, based on 2020 Office of Financial Management population estimates. Timeline: Local codes should be updated to reflect all applicable requirements by six months after the deadline for the city’s next periodic comprehensive plan and development regulation update required under RCW 36.70A.130. Local codes not updated by this timeline will be invalidated and superseded by the appropriate version of the Commerce Middle Housing Model Ordinance until the city takes all actions necessary to implement RCW 36.70A.635. Guidance: Information on implementing middle housing requirements may be found on the Commerce Planning for Middle Housing web page: Planning for Middle Housing – Washington State Department of Commerce Questions: Contact Lilith Vespier at Lilith.vespier@commerce.wa.gov or (509)-606-3530. ** Please Note: Per the definition and information in RCW 36.70A.635 (1) (a-c), Arlington is not a Tier 1, Tier 2, or Tier 3 city yet and is not required to comply with the regulations. The City’s population is less than 25,000 and is not within a contiguous urban growth area of the largest city in the county with a population of more than 275,000. However, the city has already complied with some of the aspects of middle housing within the Zoning Code – Title 20. The city is working towards these requirements and regulations knowing that the population increase to 25,000 is not far away. Future updates to the Zoning Code include: AMC 20.36 – Zoning Districts AMC 20.40 – Permissible Uses AMC 20.48 – Density and Dimensional Regulations AMC 20.72 – Parking AMC 20.112 – Affordable Housing Program (new chapter in 2025) Additional Future Documents Include: Transit Oriented Development and the Smokey Point Subarea Plan MIDDLE HOUSING CHECKLIST OCTOBER 2024 2 Definitions The statutory definitions in this section are needed to implement middle housing requirements under state law Code requirement Consistent? Yes/No Changes needed? Administrative design review means a development permit process whereby an application is reviewed, approved, or denied by the planning director or the planning director's designee based solely on objective design and development standards without a public pre-decision hearing, unless such review is otherwise required by state or federal law, or the structure is a designated landmark or historic district established under a local preservation ordinance. A city may utilize public meetings, hearings, or voluntary review boards to consider, recommend, or approve requests for variances from locally established design review standards. RCW 36.70A.030 (3) Yes AMC 20.46.015 (a-d) Zoning Code documents at the link below, as Municode is still in the process of updating the city’s code amendments from July 2024. Zoning Code and Development Design Standards & Guidelines | Arlington, WA Cottage housing means residential units on a lot with a common open space that either: (a) Is owned in common; or (b) Has units owned as condominium units with property owned in common and a minimum of 20 percent of the lot size as open space. RCW 36.70A.030 (9) Yes AMC 20.44 Part IV & AMC 20.08 (pg. 8) “Cottage Housing” Courtyard apartments means attached dwelling units arranged on two or three sides of a yard or court. RCW 36.70A.030 (10) AMC 20.08 (pg. 12) “Courtyard Major transit stop means a stop on a high capacity transportation system funded or expanded under the provisions of chapter 81.104 RCW, commuter rail stops, stops on rail or fixed guideway systems, and stops on bus rapid transit routes, including bus rapid transit routes under construction. RCW 36.70A.030 (25) AMC 20.08 (pg. 25) “Major Transit Stop” Middle housing means buildings that are compatible in scale, form, and character with single- family houses and contain two or more attached, stacked, or clustered homes including duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes, townhouses, stacked flats, courtyard apartments, and cottage housing. RCW 36.70A.030 (26) Yes AMC 20.08 (pg. 26) “Middle Housing” Single-family zones means those zones where single-family detached residences are the predominant land use. RCW 36.70A.030 (39) AMC 20.08 (pg. 36) “Single-Family Stacked flat means dwelling units in a residential building of no more than three stories on a residential zoned lot in which each floor may be separately rented or owned. RCW 36.70A.030 (40) AMC 20.08 (pg. 37) “Stacked Flat” Townhouses means buildings that contain three or more attached single-family dwelling units that extend from foundation to roof and that have a yard or public way on not less than two sides. RCW 36.70A.030 (41) Yes AMC 20.08 (pg. 34) “Residence, Multi- MIDDLE HOUSING CHECKLIST OCTOBER 2024 3 Lots zoned predominantly for residential use Requirements in this table should be applied to all lots zoned predominantly for residential use, and represent the minimum requirements necessary to meet state law Code requirement Consistent? Yes/No Allows at minimum the following permitted unit per lot densities: • TIER 1 CITIES: (1) Four units per lot, (2) six units per lot on all lots within one-quarter mile walking distance of a major transit stop, (3) six units per lot if at least two units on the lot are affordable housing as defined below • TIER 2 CITIES: (1) Two units per lot, (2) four units per lot on all lots within one-quarter mile walking distance of a major transit stop, (3) four units per lot if at least one unit on the lot is affordable housing as defined below • TIER 3 CITIES: Two units per lot Exempts lots below 1,000 square feet after subdivision, unless the city has enacted an allowable lot size below 1,000 square feet in the zone. RCW 36.70A.635(1)(a - c) N/A The City of Arlington is not a Tier 1, Tier 2, or Tier 3 city yet. Please see the note on page 1 For Tier 1 and 2 cities, requires units qualifying for affordable housing provisions to meet the following standards, per RCW 36.70A.635(2): • Housing costs do not exceed 30% of the monthly income of a household making at or below 60% of median household income for rental housing, or 80% of median household income for owner-occupied housing for the county where the household is located. Median household income is as reported by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. Housing costs include utilities other than telephone. Median household incomes are adjusted for household size. • A covenant or deed restriction ensures that units are maintained as affordable for a term of at least 50 years, consistent with the conditions in chapter 84.14 RCW. • A covenant or deed restriction addresses criteria and policies to maintain public benefit if the property is converted to a use other than affordable housing. • Affordable units are provided in a format comparable to other units in the development, including in range of size, number of bedrooms, functionality, and distribution throughout the development. * If a city has enacted a program under RCW 36.70A.540, then the terms of that program govern to the extent they vary from the requirements of RCW 36.70A.635(2). However, programs under RCW 36,70A.540 are not to substitute for the Tier 1 and Tier 2 cities’ middle housing affordable housing density requirement. N/A The City of Arlington is not a Tier 1 or Tier 2 city yet. Please see the note on page 1. MIDDLE HOUSING CHECKLIST OCTOBER 2024 4 For Tier 1 and Tier 2 cities, allows at least six of the nine types of middle housing by-right in all zones predominantly for residential use: duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, fiveplexes, sixplexes, townhouses, stacked flats, courtyard apartments, cottage housing. RCW 36.70A.635(5) For Tier 3 cities, allows all middle housing types that meet the two unit per lot density requirements in RCW 36.70A.635(1)(c) (i.e. duplex, stacked flats, courtyard apartments, cottage housing) by-right in all zones predominantly for residential use. RCW 36.70A.635(5) N/A Living Housing Allowed w/Land Use Permit: Triplex, Fourplex, Townhomes, Row Houses, Cottage Housing, Garden Apartments Allows zero lot line short subdivisions where the number of lots created is equal to the required unit density. RCW 36.70A.635(5) Yes Currently Unit Lot Subdivisions are allowed in all residential zones, OTBD-3, and within Mixed-Use Developments per AMC 20.40.120, 20.40.130, and 20.44.020. Reviews compliance with middle housing design standards using an administrative design review process. RCW 36.70A.635(6)(a) Yes Does not require more restrictive development regulations for middle housing than those required for detached single-family residences. RCW 36.70A.635(6)(b) Yes and all of AMC 20.46 within the same zone. Applies the same development permit and environmental review processes to middle housing as those applied to detached single-family residences, unless otherwise required by state law. RCW 36.70A.635(6)(c) Yes Currently under AMC 20.16, 20.93, and 20.98 for all development Does not require off-street parking within one-half mile walking distance of a major transit stop. RCW 36.70A.635(6)(d) N/A plans. Currently only in place for ADUs Requires no more than one off-street parking space per unit on lots 6,000 square feet or less, before any zero lot line subdivisions or lot splits. RCW 36.70A.635(6)(e) N/A plans. Currently only in place for ADUs Requires no more than two off-street parking spaces on lots greater than 6,000 square feet before any zero lot line subdivisions or lot splits. RCW 36.70A.635(6)(f) N/A plans. Currently only in place for ADUs For cottage housing, requires a minimum of 20 percent of the lot be common open space.. The common open spaced must be owned in common or has condominium units with property owned in common. Yes Cottage Housing For courtyard apartments, requires at least one yard or court, which must be bordered by attached dwelling units on two or three sides. N/A to these as garden apartments. For townhouses, requires at least three attached single family dwelling units that extend from the foundation to roof and have a yard or public way on not less than two sides. Yes fee simple lots and allowed outright for multi-family under one ownership MIDDLE HOUSING CHECKLIST OCTOBER 2024 5 Exemptions As applicable, local code should specify the following exemptions to middle housing requirements Code requirement Consistent? Yes/No Changes needed? Exempts the following areas from the middle housing requirements of RCW 36.70A.635: • Portions of a lot, parcel, or tract designated with critical areas designated under RCW 36.70A.170 or their buffers as required by RCW 36.70A.170, except for critical aquifer recharge areas where a single-family detached house is an allowed use provided that any requirements to maintain aquifer recharge are met. • Watersheds serving a reservoir for potable water if that watershed is or was listed, as of July 23, 2023, as impaired or threatened under section 303(d) of the federal clean water act (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1313(d)). • Lots designated as urban separators by countywide planning policies as of July 23, 2023. • A lot that was created through the splitting of a single residential lot. • Areas designated as sole-source aquifers by the United States Environmental Protection N/A regulations within the ADU code section of AMC 20.44.042. All development is required to follow the regulations of AMC 20.93 – Critical Areas. Some of these items have been addressed but will be updated with the future zoning code update with the addition of a new chapter for an Affordable Housing Program and will be under AMC 20.112. This is to be updated in 2025, so there is not a code chapter with that number yet. Exempts the following areas from parking standards for middle housing, per RCW 36.70A.635(7): • Portions of the city for which the Department of Commerce has certified a parking study in accordance with RCW 36.70A.635(7)(a), in which case off-street parking requirements are as provided in the certification from the Department of Commerce. • Areas within a one-mile radius of Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. RCW 36.70A.635(7)(b). N/A empirical parking study due to the lack of transit and alternative modes of transportation within the city. The only area this will likely be established is within the Smokey Point Subarea Plan for the future BRT – Gold Line. Emergency Shelter Bed Capacity by Zone Zone Sites Acres Acres Acres Acre Capacity 59.6 39 2,307 34.6 39 1,339 18.6 39 720 0.0 39 0 36.6 39 1,416 1.9 39 74 0.0 39 0 0.9 39 35 6.6 39 255 9.2 39 356 317.8 39 12,299 0 0 Emergency Shelter Bed Capacity Total Emergency Shelter Need (Beds)Deficit 18,800 18,800 610 SW Alder Street, Suite 1200, Portland, Oregon 97205 | 503.222.1600 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Population, Housing and Jobs Forecast | DRAFT Methodology and Discussion Leland Consulting Group, 2023 Overview To help inform Arlington’s 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update, Leland Consulting Group (LCG) analyzed a range of development scenarios to forecast where the growth necessary for meeting its 2044 Snohomish County growth allocations for population and jobs is most likely to occur. These forecasts were prepared at the Transportation Analysis Zone (TAZ) level, a small geography used primarily in origin-destination travel modeling. Five scenarios were developed to reflect different potential development outcomes, described in detail below. This document summarizes LCG’s methodology and findings. Forecast Inputs Vacant and Underutilized Land and Parcel-Level Data from Buildable Lands Report The City provided a layer of vacant and underutilized lands to serve as the base from which forecasted job, housing and population growth will occur. Of 1,197 records, 63 were removed either because they have recent projects identified by the City or were duplicates. GIS data from the Snohomish County 2021 Buildable Lands Report (BLR) was incorporated for baseline housing and estimated jobs/housing lost to redevelopment. Parcel-level data was exported from GIS into Excel for forecasting calculations. For Scenarios 2 through 5, parcels with high value improvements were removed, since these were considered to be less likely to develop during the planning horizon. Improvement-to-Land Value ratio (the relative value of buildings, also referred to as improvements, compared to the underlying land) was used for defining such parcels, using County Assessor parcel data. Parcels with an improvement-to-land value ratio at or over 1.0 were removed. Twenty-nine parcels with no calculated ILV (due to missing property value data) were kept in all scenarios. Baseline Jobs, Housing and Population Jobs The Snohomish County 2021 Buildable Lands Report (BLR) provides an estimate of 10,289 jobs in the UGA in 2019, based on data from the Washington Employment Security Department (ESD). Because there is no parcel-level data on existing jobs available, LCG used micro-analysis zone (MAZ)-level existing jobs data provided by the County to apportion the 10,289 jobs to TAZs, based on each TAZs share of existing MAZ employment.1. In order to use 2020 as the baseline year for analysis, LCG added known 2020 jobs data from recent real estate development projects provided by the City and CoStar (a leading nationwide data source for commercial real estate development). Unless provided directly, existing jobs were estimated based on square feet (SF) of commercial development and BLR estimates of square feet per job by employment type as follows: • Retail: 1 job per 700 SF • Office/Live Work: 1 job per 350 SF • Mini-Storage: 1 job per 20,000 SF • Other: 1 job per 400 SF • Manufacturing: 1 job per 500 SF • Wholesale, Transportation, Utilities (WTU): 1 job per 2,000 SF (City revision of estimate in 2021 BLR) The final baseline 2020 jobs count for Arlington used in all scenarios is 12,449 jobs. 1 The assignment of MAZ-level jobs to TAZs was estimated using the parcel-level; “EXEM_T” field in the 2019 BLR GIS data. This field represents the County’s estimate of “Existing total employment estimate on parcel” and was developed during the BLR process to estimate the number of jobs which would be lost to redevelopment on redevelopable parcels, but also serves as a useful proxy for the relative job distribution across TAZs. www.lelandconsulting.com Page 2 Housing and Population The BLR provides an estimate of 7,733 housing units in the UGA in 2019, and as with employment, LCG added units from 2020 projects provided by the City and CoStar to arrive at 9,120 units in 2020. The UGA’s 2020 population of 20,418 (according to the Countywide Planning Policies) was apportioned to TAZ’s by taking each TAZ’s 2020 housing units multiplied by the observed 2020 persons per household (calculated as 20,418 population divided by 9,120 housing units, resulting in 2.23 people per household). Pending Jobs, Housing and Population LCG assumed that projects that have been built since 2020, are permitted, or are under construction, should be included in the total unit and jobs counts for the 2020-2044 period using their actual unit and square footage counts. These projects were designated as “pending” in this analysis. For projects built in 2021 or later, LCG used housing unit and jobs numbers from the City, CoStar, and the BLR. BLR data was only used when neither City nor CoStar data was available, for example, for a 135,000 SF Swire Coca-Cola warehouse distribution center on 59th Avenue. LCG assumed that sites that developed during this “pending” period will not be redeveloped again during the study period (2020 to 2044). Pending population was calculated by multiplying pending housing units at the parcel level by an estimated persons per household (2.00 for Multifamily, Commercial and Mixed Use zones; 3.00 for Single Family, per City input). Development Assumptions for Vacant and Underutilized Parcels For vacant and underutilized parcels, the following assumptions for development density and development rate (Table 1) were applied in order to produce forecasts for the five scenarios. Table 1. Scenario Assumptions for Arlington Population, Housing and Jobs 2044 Forecasts 2 + WFH + No Development Rate Reduction2 + Higher Commercial Density, WFH2 + No Development Rate Reduction1 + Higher Job, Housing DensityLower Job, Housing Density City V/UU Layer with High-Value Properties Removed City V/UU Layer with High-Value Properties Removed City V/UU Layer with High-Value Properties Removed City V/UU Layer with High-Value Properties Removed City V/UU Layer •6,600 •10,000 •400 •500 •2,000 •12,000 •10,000 •400 •500 •2,000 •6,600 •10,000 •400 •500 •2,000 •6,600 •10,000 •400 •500 •2,000 •3,200 •10,000 •400 •1,000 •2,000 Rentable Building Area/acre: •Mixed Use/Comm. Zones •Industrial ZonesSF per Job: •OTBD Zone •Other Comm. Zones •Industrial Zones  3-7 du/ac27 3434 3-7 du/ac27 3434 3-7 du/ac27 3434 3-7 du/ac27 3434 3-7 du/ac27 1715 •SFR Zones •Smokey Point Area •RHC Zones •Mixed Use Zones  www.lelandconsulting.com Page 3 Employment Assumptions Forecasted job totals were estimated by applying square foot per job estimates to estimated rentable building acres (RBA) of commercial and industrial space to be developed. • Rentable building Area per Acre (RBA/acre). RBA/acre is the area within a building that will be rented to or owned by job-creating tenants; it does not include area rented as apartments. The estimated RBA/acre for mixed use zones is based on the average commercial space developed in mixed use projects in these zones over the past ten years (4,084 SF for scenarios 2 through 5, with a lower estimate of 897 SF for Scenario 1) and an estimated RBA/acre of 12,000 SF/acre for purely commercial projects.2 From these estimates, an average RBA/acre was calculated for mixed use zones (3,200 for Scenario 1, 6,600 for Scenarios 2, 3, and 5), based on the share of commercial versus multifamily RBA/acre developed in these zones over the past ten years (30 percent commercial, 70 percent multifamily). Scenario 4 assumed 12,000 SF/acre for mixed use zones (explained further under “Scenario Development”). For the Business Park zone, which does not allow housing, an RBA/acre of 12,000 was used. For industrial zones, 10,000 was used for all scenarios, based on the density of past development. • SF per job. Estimated SF per job varies by zone. The highest density employment, or 400 SF per job (across all scenarios), is seen in Old Town Business District zones, and was calculated using CoStar data on the existing square footage of commercial space and existing employment estimates from the BLR GIS data. The 2,000 SF per job for industrial zones (across scenarios) is based on City input regarding recent density for the prevailing employment type (WTU) in industrial zones. For commercial and mixed use zones, the 1,000 SF per job used in Scenario 1 was based on existing job density in commercial zones (using BLR job and CoStar SF data), and the 500 used in all other scenarios was based on the density of recent and pipeline projects provided by the city. Housing and Population Assumptions • Single Family Zones: based on density of existing development (calculated with BLR data), which was in line with allowed densities per the zoning code. • Mixed Use and Multifamily Zones: o Residential Moderate (“RMod”) and Medium Capacity. No CoStar data was available for projects within these zones, and because calculated density of existing development (6 and 4 du/acre respectively) is below the allowed densities of (7-11 du/acre for RMod, 12-16 for Residential Medium Density), a middle ground 10 du/acre was used across all scenarios. o Residential High Capacity. For Scenario 1, City input of 17 units per acre was used (also the RHC zone allowed density). The 34 units per acre used for all other scenarios was based on the 42 per acre average seen in multifamily projects developed over the past ten years, reduced slightly (20 percent) considering the City’s expectation of lower density development. o Commercial and mixed use zones. For Scenario 1, City input of 15 units per acre was used (also the RHC zone allowed density). For all other scenarios, the RHC assumption was used. • Population: Across all scenarios, an average household size of 2.00 persons per household was used for multifamily development, and 3.00 for single family, per City input. 2 The lower 897 RBA/acre assumption incorporated in Scenario 1 was an initial estimate based only on data available in CoStar, while the higher 4,084 figure incorporated data on more recent mixed use projects provided by the City. The 12,000 RBA/acre (rounded from 12,197) for commercial development is based on a Floor Area Ratio of 0.28 assumption. www.lelandconsulting.com Page 4 Development Rate Development Rate is the percent of vacant and redevelopable parcels that are estimated to redevelop between 2020 and 2044 (Table 2). LCG estimated development rates for all zones, used across all scenarios, based on: • Single and Multifamily Zones: based on average annual acreage developed in single family homes for 2010-2021, using HUD permit data, and apportioned to zones based on their share of available single-family acreage. • Commercial/Mixed-Use and Industrial Zones: based on CoStar data on average annual acreage developed into a commercial or industrial use since 2015, including planned/future pipeline development, and each zone’s share of available commercial/mixed-use or industrial acreage. Development Rate can also be estimated by reviewing construction, deliveries, and to a lesser degree, absorption data that is reported by various planning and real estate data sources. Development Rate can even focus on density expected from future development, versus what has been seen in the past. Table 2. Development Rate Residential High Capacity 19% Neighborhood Commercial 80% Old Town Business District - 1 7% Old Town Business District - 2 0% Old Town Business District - 3 0% General Commercial 100% Highway Commercial 25% Business Park 100% Commercial Corridor District 7% Medical Services 0% Light Industrial 46% General Industrial 46% *Applied in Scenarios 1, 2, 4 only. While Development Rate represents the Percent that WILL develop, BLR and other studies quantify this metric as “Market Factor,” which is the inverse of Development Rate (or the percent that will NOT develop). www.lelandconsulting.com Page 5 Forecast Methodology Capacity Calculation Using the inputs described above in Table 1, LCG calculated Arlington’s “capacity” for development that can accommodate population, housing, and jobs within the City of Arlington Urban Growth Area by 2044. These capacity totals were added to baseline and pending totals and compared to 2044 growth allocations from Countywide Planning Policies (for population and jobs) and County PAC Working Group (for housing) to determine if the Arlington UGA has sufficient capacity of land to accommodate allocated housing and employment growth, as required by RCW 36.70A.115. Figures 1 and 2 show the steps used to calculate capacity across scenarios. Figure 1. Employment Capacity Calculation Figure 2. Housing and Population Capacity Calculation Note: Scenarios 2, 3, 4, 5 removed parcels with Improvement-to-Land-Value Ratios of 1 or higher from Vacant/Underutilized layer. www.lelandconsulting.com Page 6 Scenario Development Leland Consulting Group (LCG) analyzed a range of development scenarios to forecast where the growth necessary for meeting its 2044 regional growth targets for population, housing and jobs is most likely to occur.3 All scenarios calculated growth using the same methodology as shown in Figures 1 and 2, but are differentiated in terms of inputs used (e.g., assumed density of residential development), which are depicted in Table 1. Scenario 1 began with assumptions based on past growth trends for housing and jobs, but though the course of LCG analysis, higher density assumptions and other variables needed to be applied in order to reach the 2044 Snohomish County jobs target, which resulted in the multiple scenarios presented here. While all scenarios showed sufficient capacity for meeting 2044 housing and population targets, only Scenario 5 met the future jobs target (as shown below in Figures 3, 4, and 5). A summary of the context behind scenario development follows. Scenario 1: Lower Job, Housing Density. The initial scenario utilized assumed residential and employment densities provided by City staff and included all parcels marked as Vacant or Underutilized in the City’s Vacant and Underutilized layer. Scenario 2: Scenario 1 + Higher Job, Housing Density. LCG removed parcels from the City’s Vacant and Underutilized layer with high value improvements that, based on consultant experience, are considered less likely to redevelop within the planning horizon (as described above under “Forecast Inputs”). Excluding these parcels led to smaller losses of existing jobs and housing units due to redevelopment. Other changes in this scenario include higher job and housing densities, based on the density of recent and pending developments (while keeping employment densities the same for Industrial and Old Town zones—though with a higher rate of Rentable building Area per Acre in Old Town). Scenario 3: Scenario 2 + No Market-Based Development Rate Reduction. Because calculated jobs capacity in Scenarios 1 and 2 fell short of the 2044 jobs target, LCG removed development rate, and performed the analysis as if all Vacant and Underutilized land (without the high Improvement to Land Value-rating parcels) were to redevelop by 2044. Past market constraints on development may be less of a factor for future development in Arlington due to the addition of high-capacity transit and ongoing economic development activity geared towards ensuring that the Cascade Industrial Center serves as a significant employer for the region. As stated in Puget Sound Regional Council’s Guidance for Growth Targets to Implement VISION 2050, “historical growth targets may not be as useful a guide for these [high-capacity transit] jurisdictions compared to some cites. In many cases, transit investments represent new, future opportunities to accommodate growth.” Scenario 4: Scenario 2 + Higher Commercial Density, Work from Home (WFH). This scenario sought to answer the question of whether the jobs target could be met while including development rates, if more aggressive (though not unreasonable) density of commercial development were assumed in mixed use zones and estimated future work from home populations included. LCG calculated work from home population at 10.3 percent of 2044 population, which is based on national estimates for days worked from home per week by sector and workers employed in that sector in Arlington (applied only to the employed share of Arlington’s population, calculated using current figures). Scenario 5: Scenario 2 + WFH + No Market-Based Development Rate Reduction. Because calculated job capacity for Scenario 3 fell short of the 2044 target, LCG removed the market-based reduction and ran the model at “full-build out” to analyze if the jobs target would be met if all parcels assumed to be vacant and redevelopable (excluding high-value parcels as described above) were to redevelop during the planning horizon. As in Scenario 4, an estimate of work from home population was included. In this scenario, the housing allocation was greatly exceeded and the jobs allocation was met and slightly exceeded. 3 2044 regional growth targets for population and jobs are derived from Countywide Planning Policies, while housing targets are set by the State Department of Commerce for counties, and allocated to jurisdictions by the Planning Advisory Committee (Snohomish County Tomorrow). www.lelandconsulting.com Page 7 Figure 3. Job Capacity (2044) Findings, All Scenarios Figure 4. Housing Capacity (2044) Findings, All Scenarios www.lelandconsulting.com Page 8 Figure 5. Scenario 1, 5 Findings Discussion While all scenarios showed sufficient capacity for meeting 2044 housing and population targets, only Scenario 5 met the future jobs target. Scenario 5 meets this target by assuming high-end rates of commercial development densities, a continuation of current work from home trends, and that all developable land within the UGA will redevelop by 2044—regardless of market constraints. While Scenario 5 is an aggressive outlook on development, the City considers it most prudent to plan for the highest end of potential development, and is utilizing the Scenario 5 forecasts for its 2024 plan development. Scenario 5’s removal of the development rate reduction produces a surplus residential capacity—or a capacity for 9,896 additional units beyond the 15,781 unit target for 2044. While the Puget Sound Regional Council advocates for consistency with county- provided growth targets, their Plan Review and Comprehensive Plan FAQ advises that “capacity for growth can exceed growth targets, which may be particularly important in planning for growth under new affordability requirements in HB 1220.” Additionally, PSRC’s Guidance for Growth Targets to Implement VISION 2050 states “historical growth targets may not be as useful a guide for these [high-capacity transit] jurisdictions compared to some cites. In many cases, transit investments represent new, future opportunities to accommodate growth.” Because Arlington is a high-capacity transit community, with bus rapid transit service anticipated in 2027—and Scenario 5’s base of vacant and underutilized land from the City contained significantly more parcels in the Smokey Point area (where the BRT transit center will be located) than the BLR, Arlington arguably has capacity for more residential development than previous analyses suggest. PSRC’s FAQ also states that “when a community substantially increases capacity beyond its adopted target it should document how the additional capacity is necessary to support regional policies.” This report has documented how the additional residential capacity was deemed necessary in order to align with regional policies for concentrating growth near Manufacturing Industrial Centers and high-capacity transit stations. Arlington’s existing land capacity may prove to be insufficient for accommodating the 2044 employment target if the City’s current lower-density development trends continue. Future planning processes should assess how development trends of employment and other lands have shifted in light of CIC development, connection to the region’s high-capacity transit, and other changes. Arlington, Washington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) July 2024 Mayor and City Council Don Vanney, Mayor Heather Logan Debora Nelson Michele Blythe Jan Schuette Yvonne Gallardo-Van Ornam Rob Toyer Leisha Nobach Previous Mayor and City Council Barb Tolbert, Mayor Mike Hopson Marilyn Oertle Parks, Arts & Recreation Commission (PARC) Barbara Butner, Chair Clayton Conway Jennifer Harrington Brittany Kleinman Steve Maisch Rick Sloan City Staff Sarah Lopez, Community Engagement Director Marc Hayes, Director Community & Economic Development Consultant Tom Beckwith FAICP, Beckwith Consulting Group, Team Leader Jennifer Kiusalaas ASLA, JKLA Landscape Architects Dan Podoll AIA, ARC Architects Michael Read PE, Trails Planner Jennifer Hackett, GIS Analyst Contents Chapter 1 Introduction Objectives 1 Approach 1 Public involvement 2 Documentation 2 Chapter 2 Goals and Objectives Goals and policies 3 Chapter 3 Program Elements Population projections 11 Recreation demand 13 Recreation clearinghouse 21 Pricing and delivery criteria 22 Park service gaps 23 Social equity 24 Chapter 4 Public Opinions Resident outreach survey 31 Chapter 5 Plan Elements Conservancies 39 Resource parks 44 Trails 49 Athletic parks 54 Community facilities 67 Special use facilities 71 Support facilities 76 Chapter 6 Park Plan Exhibits Bill Quake Memorial Park 78 Centennial Park 79 Forest Trail Park 81 Lebanon Park 86 City of Marysville Parks Strawberry Fields Athletic Complex 92 Marysville School District Soccer Complex 93 Snohomish County Parks Gissberg Twin Lakes 95 Twin Rivers Park 97 Nonprofit Arlington Boys & Girls Club 101 Chapter 7 Implementation Adopt plan 103 Adopt program finance strategies 103 Adopt project finance strategies 104 Initiate PRMP projects 107 Appendix A Community Setting Climate Earth Water Wildlife habitats Land use implications Appendix B Existing Lands and Facilities Arlington Marysville Snohomish County Washington State Department of Natural Resources Arlington School District Inventory implications Appendix C Opportunities Environmental resources Conclusions Appendix D Surveys Resident outreach survey PRMP priorities survey Appendix E Land and Facility Demand Land requirements Appendix F Finances Revenue and expenditure trends – general government Revenue prospects – general government Expenditures - PRMP functions Revenue prospects – PRMP public sources Implications Appendix G Prototype Costs Prototype facility development costs Appendix H SEPA Checklist Arlington PRMP 1 Chapter 1: Introduction Arlington has grown since the last Park & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) was updated in 2016. The choices that confront Arlington at the present time are significant and could alter the character and quality of open space, trail, and park facilities, and recreation programs and services if not adequately planned. This document outlines the choices that are available and the means for implementing preferred actions found to be beneficial to Arlington residents. Objectives The specific objectives of this planning effort were to: Define the setting – within Arlington including climate, environment, wildlife habitat, history, culture, population changes, and current development conditions. Inventory assets – existing public and private park facilities and recreational services that have been developed to-date within and near Arlington by the city, Marysville, Marysville School District, Snohomish County, Arlington School District, Washington State, and private non-profit and for-profit organizations. Forecast demand – for future open space, trails, and park facilities and recreation services that may be provided by the city or other agencies. Identify appropriate roles and responsibilities – that should be undertaken by Arlington to meet critical open space, trail, and park facilities and recreation program needs. Develop the elements of a citywide plan – for open space, trails, and park facilities and recreation programs including wildlife habitat and conservation areas, open spaces and natural resource areas, trails, athletic fields and facilities, indoor community and recreation centers, and other special purpose facilities. Determine the costs – involved in maintaining and/or improving open space, trails, and park facilities and recreation program levels- of-service (LOS), particularly the possible use of innovative financing tools or methods. Define an implementation program – outlining the actions necessary to realize the plan and update park impact fees including supporting actions necessary for agreements with Snohomish County, Arlington School District, Washington State, and private non-profit and for-profit organization. Determine public opinion – through a series of public participation events and resolve final project, plan, and financing components based on the results of public input. Approach This study analyzed the supply, demand, and need for public and private open space, trail, and park facilities and recreation services within Arlington on a citywide basis and in the city’s urban growth area. The analysis includes city, county, state, school district, homeowner association (HOA), and some private park and recreation assets in order to holistically determine needs, and demand, and thereby the city’s ultimate role in coordinating the development of park and recreational facilities in the future including the city’s role and responsibilities. While HOA and other private facilities are included, that does not mean that these parks are available for public use. It is up to park users to follow posted and adopted rules and make authorized use of HOA and other private facilities. The proposed implementation strategies are the result of this comprehensive or holistic analysis. Generally, the proposed strategies recommend the city focus its resources where open space, trail, and park facilities and recreation needs are most critical and the most effective. 2 Arlington PRMP Public involvement The Arlington Parks & Recreation Department and Parks, Art & Recreation Commission (PARC) oversaw this planning process. During the course of the planning program, the Department conducted a series of: On-line surveys – conducted of city adult residents at the beginning and end of the process to determine their current park utilization practices, condition assessments, and recommendations. The proposals contained within this document represent the opinions developed from these public participation events. Documentation This report is organized into 6 chapters outlining goals and objectives, plan and program elements, and implementation measures. Separate technical appendices detailing the city setting, facility inventories, park opportunities, land and facility demands, finances, and public opinion are available from the Arlington Parks & Recreation Department. Arlington PRMP 3 Chapter 2: Goals and policies Goals and objectives form the framework for the Parks & Recreation, Master Plan (PRMP). A goal is a general statement describing an outcome the City wishes to provide. Goals - typically do not change over time unless community values or economic conditions make it necessary. Policies - are more specific statements that describe a means to achieving goals, are measurable and may change over time. Goal 1: Recreation programs Promote healthy and active lifestyle programs and outreach activities of special interest and lifestyle benefit for city residents with an emphasis on social equity. Promote, and work with other public, nonprofit, and for-profit agencies, organizations, and vendors including Snohomish County, Arlington School District, Washington State, and other public, nonprofit, and for-profit agencies. Such programs may include athletic leagues and sport groups (like youth soccer, little league, lacrosse, and football), youth, teen, and senior age groups, and special needs population where these activities are of major interest and benefit to city residents of all ages, skills, incomes, and cultures. Policy 1.1: Healthy lifestyle Promote healthy and active lifestyle programs including education, awareness, and developmental partnerships for youth, teen, and senior age groups, and special needs populations where these activities are of major interest and benefit to city residents of all ages, skills, incomes, and cultures. Policy 1.2: Active lifestyle Facilitate development of a network of parks, trails, facilities, and programs that encourage an active lifestyle involving walking, hiking, biking, playing, swimming, exercising, and other pursuits that help regulate weight and physical condition, and mental and physical health and well-being for all age, skills, income, and cultural groups. Policy 1.3: Environmental Promote the operation of environmental, historical, cultural, and recreational programs providing instruction, volunteerism, and participation in habitat restoration, water-based recreation, trail development and security, interpretive and outdoor programs, summer and day camps, maintenance, and other site-specific activities at park sites and properties in Arlington. Policy 1.4: Historical Support historical and cultural initiatives to develop and display artifacts, reports, and exhibits; and conduct lectures, classes, and other programs that document and develop awareness of Arlington’s heritage at park sites and properties. Policy 1.5: Art and culture Promote programs for enrichment, physical conditioning and health care, meeting facilities, daycare, after school, and other program activities for all age, developmental ability, income, and cultural groups in Arlington by all agencies and vendors as appropriate. Policy 1.6: Athletics Designate and preserve appropriate sites and facilitate agreements with user and league organizations to operate basketball, volleyball, tennis, soccer, baseball, softball, and other instruction and participatory programs for all age, skill level, income, and cultural groups in the city. Goal 2: Cultural arts Promote development of high quality, diversified cultural arts facilities and programs that increase awareness, attendance, and participation opportunities at parks and properties in Arlington. 4 Arlington PRMP Policy 2.1: Programs Support successful collaborations between Arlington and Snohomish County, Arlington School District, and other public agencies, service groups, schools, arts patrons, and artists that optimally utilize artistic resources and talents at parks and properties in Arlington. Policy 2.2: Artworks Where appropriate, incorporate public artworks including paintings, sculptures, exhibits, and other media for indoor and outdoor display to expand resident access and appropriately furnish public places in parks and properties in Arlington. Goal 3: Resource conservancies Assume a major responsibility for the planning, coordination, and preservation of unique environmental areas, wetlands, wildlife habitat, open spaces, forestlands, and scenic areas. Work with other public and mission related nonprofit and private agencies, such as Snohomish County, Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) and Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and others to create an effective approach to the following conservation issues. Policy 3.1: Wildlife habitat Identify and conserve critical wildlife habitat including nesting sites, foraging areas, and migration corridors within or adjacent to natural areas, open spaces, and the developing urban areas – especially along Portage, March, and Middle Fork Quilceda Creeks, Stillaguamish River, and including, where appropriate, parks around stormwater retention sites. Policy 3.2: Natural areas Preserve and protect significant environmental features including unique wetlands, open spaces, woodlands, shorelines, waterfronts and other characteristics that support wildlife and reflect the city’s resource heritage – especially Country Charm and Stormwater Wetland Parks. Policy 3.3: Public access Provide non-intrusive public access to environmentally sensitive areas and sites that are especially unique to the city and surrounding area – including Portage, March, and Middle Fork Quilceda Creeks, and Stormwater Wetland Park. Policy 3.4: Forestlands Conserve and restore forest cover and the scenic attributes woodlands provide – especially the remaining wooded hillsides that define the bluffs of the city overlooking the Stillaguamish River. Policy 3.5: Open spaces Define and conserve a system of open space corridors or separators to provide definition between natural areas and urban land uses in the city – especially the open spaces in and around homeowner association (HOA) developments. Policy 3.6: Linkages Increase natural area and open space linkages within the developed urban areas as well including along Portage, March, and Middle Fork Quilceda Creeks, and the other numerous creeks draining into the Stillaguamish River. Policy 3.7: Urban growth preserves Cooperate with other public and private agencies including Snohomish County, Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) and Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and with private landowners to set-aside land and resources necessary to provide high quality, convenient open space, trail, and park facilities before the most suitable sites are lost to development. Policy 3.8: Set aside Preserve unique environmental features or areas in future land developments and increase public use and access. Cooperate with other public and private agencies, and with private landowners to set aside unique features or areas as publicly accessible resources. Arlington PRMP 5 Goal 4: Historical resources Assist where appropriate in the planning, coordination, and preservation of unique archaeological, historical, cultural, scenic, and man-made places, sites, landmarks, and vistas. Work when appropriate with other public and private agencies, such as the Stillaguamish Valley Pioneer Association, Stillaguamish Genealogical Society, Washington State Historical Societies, Stillaguamish Tribe, and others, to create an effective approach to the following resource conservation issues and proposals. Policy 4.1: Historical features and interests Identify, preserve, and enhance the city's heritage, traditions, and cultural features including historical sites, buildings, artworks, views, and monuments within park sites and historical areas – especially Arlington’s historic downtown. Policy 4.2: Significant lands and sites Identify and incorporate significant historical and cultural lands, sites, artifacts, and facilities into the open space, trail, and park system to preserve these interests and provide a balanced social experience – especially including important Native American, homestead sites, and other places of interest in the city. Policy 4.3: Incorporate into parks Work with the Stillaguamish Valley Pioneer Association, Stillaguamish Genealogical Society, Washington State Historical Society, and other archaeological and cultural groups to incorporate historical and cultural activities into park developments and recreational programs. Policy 4.4: Manmade environments Incorporate man-made environments, structures, activities, and areas into the open space, trail, and park system to preserve these features and provide a balanced recreational experience. Policy 4.5: Public access Work with property and facility owners to increase public access and utilization of these special sites and features. Goal 5: Trail systems Assume a major responsibility for the planning, development, and operation of a variety of trails including water trails, off-road hike and bike that are related to environmental resources that are of most interest to city residents. Work with other public and private agencies, including Snohomish County, and Washington State Departments of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW), Natural Resources (DNR) to develop and maintain an integrated system of trails. Policy 5.1: Water access Support a system of kayak, canoe, and other hand carry boat access landings and other improvements for appropriate access to the Stillaguamish River. Policy 5.2: Water trails Where feasible designate a water trail network for hand-carry or car- top craft including canoes and kayaks. Policy 5.3: Scenic routes and vistas Develop where practical viewpoints and interpretive exhibits that integrate scenic routes with specific historical, cultural, environmental, and scenic points of interest – especially including the historic downtown and the bluffs overlooking the Stillaguamish River. Policy 5.4: Artworks Integrate as feasible artworks into trails, parks, park facilities, and historical sites – especially within the historic downtown district, residential neighborhoods, and at the gateways to the city. Policy 5.5: On and off-road trail systems Support a comprehensive system of hike and bike trails that access scenic, environmental, historic, and open space attributes in and around the city expanding and linking existing trail systems to create city and area-wide networks – especially the Centennial and Whitehorse Trails. 6 Arlington PRMP Policy 5.6: Trailheads Develop a series of trailheads, trailside rest stops, viewpoints, interpretive exhibits, and trail signage systems that integrate hike and bike trails with specific historical, cultural, environmental, and scenic points of interest. Policy 5.7: Local connections Integrate continuous trail corridors and local spur or loop routes with parks, schools, other public facilities, historical sites, and Arlington’s downtown district and residential neighborhoods. Policy 5.8: Furnishings Furnish trails with appropriate supporting trailhead improvements that include interpretive and directory signage systems, rest stops, restrooms, parking and loading areas, water, and other services. Policy 5.9: Joint locations Where appropriate, locate trailheads at or in conjunction with park sites, schools, and other community facilities to increase local area access to citywide trail systems and reduce duplication of supporting improvements. Policy 5.10: Standards Develop trail improvements following design and development standards that make it easy to maintain and access by maintenance, security, and other appropriate personnel, equipment, and vehicles. Policy 5.11: Stewardship Where appropriate and economically feasible, develop and support an Adopt-A-Trail program for citizens and organizations to help provide trail maintenance and litter pick-up activities. Policy 5.12: On and off-leash dog areas Designate a system of on and off-leash dog areas that provide controlled and convenient exercise opportunities for dog owners including appropriate segments of the trail system and parks. Policy 5.13: Dog parks Where appropriate, designate and develop off-leash dog parks that provide controlled and convenient exercise and social area opportunities for dog owners in convenient service areas of the city. Goal 6: Resource parks Plan, develop, and operate a variety of resource-oriented facilities. These facilities may include fishing sites, hand-carry boat access, swimming beaches, and picnicking areas that are related to environmental resources that are of most interest to city residents. Work with other public and private agencies, particularly Snohomish County, and Washington State Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) and Department of Natural Resources (DNR) to develop and operate the following appropriate resource park facilities. Policy 6.1: Waterfront access and facilities Acquire and support additional shoreline access for waterfront fishing, wading, swimming, and other related recreational activities and pursuits along Stillaguamish River shoreline. Policy 6.2: Picnicking and day-use activities Acquire and develop additional citywide picnic sites, shelters, and day-use group picnic grounds at major resource parks and along major off-road trail corridors in and around the city. Goal 7: Playgrounds and fields Develop an integrated system of local neighborhood playgrounds, courts, and fields that are of most interest to city residents. Assume responsibility for the planning of a system of local and regional athletic park facilities including competitive soccer, lacrosse, softball, and baseball and multiuse fields that are of interest to city residents and league participants. Coordinate and assist as appropriate other public and private agencies including Snohomish County, Arlington School District, and city youth sports league organizations. Site and sponsor the development of major competitive outdoor and indoor athletic Arlington PRMP 7 facilities for all ages, skills, income, and cultural groups that are within reasonable geographic service areas of local neighborhoods in the city. Policy 7.1: Playgrounds and tot lots Develop and designate a network of local play sites and facilities that meet playing standards and requirements for all ages, skills, income, and cultural groups within convenient walking distances of residents. Policy 7.2: Recreational courts Develop and designate a network of local park sites that provide a variety of recreational sports courts (such as basketball, sand volleyball, bike polo, pickleball, and tennis courts) that meet the highest quality pick-up and competitive practice and playing standards and requirements for all age, skill, income, and cultural groups and recreational interests within convenient walking distances of residents. Policy 7.3: Skateboard parks, pump tracks, disc golf and challenge courses Develop park sites that provide specialized activities (such as skateboard, in-line skating, pump tracks, disc golf, climbing walls, and challenge courses) that meet the highest quality recreation practice and playing standards and requirements for all age, skill, income, and cultural groups and recreational interests. Policy 7.4: Athletic fields Designate a network of sites that can be developed for organized sports leagues (such as soccer, lacrosse, softball, and baseball fields) to meet the highest quality recreation practice and playing standards and requirements for all age, skill, income, and cultural groups and recreational interests – including competition field sites at Bill Quake Memorial and Waldo E Evans Memorial Parks as well as potential joint ventures with the City of Marysville and Arlington School District. Goal 8: Recreation facilities Coordinate the planning, development, and operation of specialized indoor facilities including aquatic facilities, gymnasiums, arts and crafts, classrooms, meeting rooms for special populations, children, teens, seniors, and the general population that are of major interest to city residents of all ages, skills, incomes, and cultures. Seek cooperation from other public and private agencies including Snohomish County, Arlington School District, and related nonprofits, among others, to realize the following effective facilities and services within reasonable geographic service areas of neighborhoods. Policy 8.1: Aquatics centers Ddevelop and maintain indoor aquatics facility that provides instruction, aerobics, recreation, and competition facilities for all age, skill, income, and cultural groups and aquatics interests on a seasonal or year-round basis – working with groups such as Arlington School District, Boys & Girls Club, and YMCA. Policy 8.2: Recreation centers Develop and designate multiple use indoor recreational centers that provide gymnasiums, physical conditioning, recreational courts, and other athletic spaces for all age, skill, income, and cultural groups and community interests on a year-round basis – working with groups such as Arlington School District, Boys & Girls Club, YMCA, and other nonprofit and private groups. Policy 8.3: Community centers Develop and designate a system of multipurpose community centers and facilities that can provide arts and crafts, music, video, classroom instruction, meeting facilities, eating and health care, daycare, latch key, and other spaces for all age, skill, income, and cultural groups including preschool, youth, teens, and seniors on a year-round basis like the Boys & Girls Club. Policy 8.4: Meeting facilities Support the continued development of relationships with the Arlington School District, Boys & Girls Club, YMCA, and other organizations of special meeting, assembly, and other community facilities that provide general support to school age populations 8 Arlington PRMP and community-at-large functions like the Arlington Boys & Girls Club. Policy 8.5: Arts centers Develop and maintain special indoor and outdoor cultural and performing arts facilities that enhance and expand music, dance, drama, cultural and historical interpretations, and other audience and participatory opportunities for the city-at-large including special summer farmers’ markets, festival events in the city, and the Byrne’s Performing Arts Center. Goal 9: Special purpose facilities If practical and economically feasible, coordinate and assist other public and private agencies including the Arlington Boys & Girls Club and the Arlington School District, among others, with special purpose facilities. Policy 9.1: Special enterprises Where appropriate and economically feasible, support the development and operation of specialized and special interest recreational facilities, like the Arlington Boys & Girls Club, Stillaguamish Pioneer Historical Museum, Stillaguamish Athletics Club, Stilly Valley Center, and Stilly Valley Health Connections. Policy 9.2: Joint planning Where appropriate and economically feasible, participate in joint planning and operating programs with other public and private agencies for special activities like the farmers’ market and other activities in the city. Goal 10: Design standards Design and develop Arlington facilities that are accessible, safe, and easy to maintain, with life cycle features that account for long-term costs and benefits. Policy 10.1: Outdoor accessibility Design outdoor picnic areas, trails, playgrounds, courts, fields, parking lots, restrooms, and other active and supporting facilities to be accessible to individuals and organized groups of all physical capabilities, skill levels, age groups, income, and cultural interests. Policy 10.2: Indoor accessibility Design indoor facility spaces, activity rooms, restrooms, hallways, parking lots, and other active and supporting spaces and improvements to be accessible to individuals and organized groups of all physical capabilities, skill levels, age groups, income, and cultural interests. Policy 10.3: Maintenance Design, retrofit, and develop facilities that are sustainable, of low maintenance, and high capacity design to reduce overall facility maintenance and operation requirements and costs. Where appropriate, incorporate low maintenance materials, settings or other value engineering considerations that reduce care and security requirements, and retain natural conditions and experiences. Policy 10.4: Volunteers Where practical and appropriate, continue an Adopt-a-Trail and Adopt-a-Park programs where volunteer users and citizens can help perform maintenance, collect litter, and other support activities. Policy 10.5: Pest management Integrate pest management principles in the management of park landscape resources by utilizing a comprehensive approach to managing pests using biological, cultural, mechanical, and herbicide tools. Policy 10.6: Security and safety standards Implement the provisions and requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Washington State Building Codes, and other design and development standards that improve park facility safety and security features for park users, department personnel, and the public-at-large. Arlington PRMP 9 Policy 10.7: Safety procedures Maintain safety standards, procedures, and programs that provide proper training and awareness for department personnel. Policy 10.8: Safety regulations Maintain and enforce rules and regulations concerning park activities and operations that protect user groups, department personnel, and the general public-at-large. Goal 11: Financial resources Create effective and efficient methods of operating, maintaining, acquiring, and developing facilities and programs that accurately distribute costs and benefits to public and private interests. Policy 11.1: Finance Investigate innovative available methods, such as impact fees, land set-a-side or fee-in-lieu-of-donation ordinances, and inter-local agreements, for the financing of facility development, maintenance, and operating needs in order to reduce costs, retain financial flexibility, match user benefits and interests, and increase services. Policy 11.2: Joint ventures Consider joint ventures with other public, nonprofit, and private agencies including Snohomish County, Arlington School District, Washington State, and other regional, state, federal, public, and private agencies including for-profit concessionaires, where feasible and desirable. Policy 11.3: Public and private resource coordination Create a comprehensive, balanced open space, trail, park, and recreation system that integrates Arlington facilities and services with resources and funding available from the county, nonprofit organizations, school districts, and other regional, state, federal, and private park and recreational lands and facilities in a manner that will best serve and provide for Arlington resident interests. Policy 11.4: Joint planning Cooperate with Snohomish County, Arlington School District, Washington State, and other regional, state, and federal, public, nonprofit organizations, and private organizations to avoid duplication, improve facility quality and availability, reduce costs, and represent resident area interests through joint planning and development efforts. Policy 11.5: Cost/benefit assessment Define existing and proposed land and facility levels-of-service (ELOS/PLOS) standards that differentiate requirements due to population growth impacts, improved facility standards, and regional and local nexus of benefits. Differentiate Arlington standards compared to composite standards that include the city, county, school districts, state, and other public and private provider agency efforts in order to effectively plan and program open space, trails, parks, and recreation needs in the city. Policy 11.6: Public/private benefits Create effective and efficient methods of acquiring, developing, operating, and maintaining open space, trail, park, and recreational facilities in manners that accurately distribute costs and benefits to public and private user interests – such as the application of impact fees where new urban developments impact potential level-of- service (ELOS) standards. Policy 11.7: Cost recovery Develop and operate recreational programs that serve the broadest needs of the population, recovering program and operating costs with a combination of registration fees, user fees, grants, sponsorships, donations, scholarships, volunteer efforts, and the use of general funding. Policy 11.8: Sponsorships Where appropriate, provide recreational programs, like retreats and conferences for those interested groups who are willing to finance the cost through user fees, registration fees, volunteer efforts, or other means and methods. 10 Arlington PRMP Goal 12: Human resources Develop, hire, train, and support professional parks and recreation staff that effectively serves Arlington in the realization of the above listed goals and objectives. Policy 12.1: Personnel Employ a diverse, well-trained work force that is motivated to achieve citywide goals. Encourage teamwork through communications, creativity, positive image, sharing of resources, and cooperation toward common goals. Policy 12.2: Staff development Where appropriate, provide staff with education, training, technology, equipment and supplies to increase personal productivity, efficiency, and pride. Arlington PRMP 11 Chapter 3: Program elements The following proposals concerning elements of the recreational programs approach are based on the results of demand analysis, workshop planning sessions, and the survey of resident households. The proposals outline the vision developed for recreational programs within Arlington for the next 6-20 years. The program proposals are CONCEPTUAL, in some instances, subject to further study and coordination with public and private participants that may modify the eventual program particulars. Population projections Snohomish County’s population - in 1900 was 23,950 persons located primarily along Possession Sound waterfront in Everett. The county’s population increased to 59,209 persons by 1910 or by an annual rate of growth of 9.5% as railroads extended into Snohomish County and the area’s logging, agriculture, and fishing industries grew in importance. Snohomish County population increased over the decades due to the development of the aircraft building industry, the advent of World War 1and 2, and the location of military installations in the area. Recent growth rates, however, have been gradual averaging 1.9% between 2010-2015 and 1.8% between 2015-2020 due largely to the impact of the economic recession on area industries. Washington State’s Office of Financial Management (OFM) expects Snohomish County’s rate of growth will gradually decline from 1.8% on an annual average basis between 2015 and 2020 to 0.7% by 2050 due to the aging of the population. Population components - OFM expects the number of deaths in Snohomish County will increase from 27,272 between 2010-2015 to 47,491 by 2035-2040 due to the aging of the county population while births will only slightly increase from 50,303 between 2010- 2015 to 57,787 by 2035-2040 due to a declining proportion of the population in child-bearing ages and a stable and low birth rate. Net migration will decline from 61,367 in-migrating persons in 2015- 2020 to 38,043 persons by 2035-2040 contributing to Snohomish County’s gradual resident population growth. Age distribution – within Snohomish County will shift with a slightly less proportion of the population in child ages 0-19 of 25.4% in 2020 versus 23.0% by 2050 and more in senior ages 65+ of 14.4% in 2020 versus 23.4% by 2050 reflecting the continued aging of the population in the county like the trends nationally. Arlington’s population – in 1910 was 1,476 people, located along the Stillaguamish River. Arlington’s population fluctuated between 1,418 in 1920 and 1,635 by 1950 or by an annual average rate of - 0.4% to 1.1% as the city’s agriculture, logging, and fishing industries stabilized. Arlington’s population totals and rate of growth increased significantly from 1960 to 1990 as the city’s natural resource industries stabilized and retailing increased, and more significantly from 2000 to 2020 as the area attracted housing developers and warehouse and manufacturing industries. The city’s population and annual average rate of growth are expected to increase from 19,868 persons in 2020 to 36,584 persons by the year 2050 or by 184% due to the area’s urban densification under GMA allocations and an assumption that the city will gradually annex the residential developments within its unincorporated urban growth area (UGA). Population components – most of Arlington’s growth is expected to be due to births and in-migration from households seeking to live in Arlington’s emerging urban center. 12 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 13 Age distribution – Arlington’s age distribution is generated by determining the percent Arlington has attracted of each Snohomish County age group then factoring the attraction rate forward through the projection years and reducing the resulting combined age group totals to match the city’s total population allocation for each year. Arlington’s age distribution will gradually shift with an increasing population in child ages 0-19 of 5,835 persons in 2020 to 9,449 by 2050 or by 162% and a significantly increasing proportion of the population concentrated in senior ages 65+ of 3,086 persons in 2020 to 9,545 persons by 2050 or by 309% similar to what will occur in Snohomish County. Recreation demand Washington State’s Recreation & Conservation Office (RCO) develops a Statewide Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (SCORP) every 6 years to help decision-makers better understand recreation issues statewide and to maintain Washington’s eligibility for federal Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) funds. RCO conducted a series of 12-month diary surveys of a random sample of Washington State residents in 2000 and 2006, and an annual survey in 2012 to determine the type of indoor and outdoor recreation activities residents engaged in over the year including the resident’s age, gender, ethnicity, income, and regional place of residence. The RCO SCORP surveys recorded what residents participated in of 140 different indoor and outdoor activities and special spectator events including the participation rate and number of occasions per year by season, month, week, and type of environment (urban, rural, mountain). The surveys did not record the location of the activity. The 2006 RCO diary-based survey is used in this analysis because it was the most comprehensive and age-specific of the RCO surveys and used computer-assisted telephone interviews of randomly sampled persons (with no more than 1 person per household) during each month of the 12-month survey period from each of the 10 tourism regions. Snohomish County is in the Puget Sound Region that includes Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties. For projection purposes, however, Arlington recreation behaviors are likely more representative of the Seattle-King County Region given Arlington’s level of urbanization and age distributed population groups. The 2006 statewide survey was completed by 2,135 persons and collated and weighted by age, gender, region, race, and income of which 300 were completed from the Seattle-King County region and weighted accordingly. The survey is within a +/-2.5% statewide and +/-6.0% by region. Response by age, gender, region, race/ethnicity, and income varies. The 2006 RCO survey elicited what participants did for recreational activities but not where the activity occurred. Survey participants from Seattle-King County may engage in activities but possibly outside of Seattle-King County, and conversely participants from other regions may travel to engage in activities in Seattle-King County. The survey did not control user transpositions between regions. Since the survey was taken in 2006, the survey may not completely reflect recent regional activity trends in some select and emerging activities such as skateboard parks, dog parks, lacrosse, or other niche behaviors. Arlington (Seattle-King County region) Walking without a pet 62.9% 27.4 Picnic, BBQ, or cookout 48.4% 4.8 Sightseeing 48.1% 5.1 Bicycle riding 37.7% 8.2 14 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 15 16 Arlington PRMP Annual participation rates Participation Frequency Flower or vegetable gardening 33.6% 8.9 Aerobics/fitness activities 33.4% 9.6 Jogging or running 32.6% 11.7 Beachcombing 20.7% 2.8 Soccer 15.7% 6.1 Golf 10.1% 5.5 Baseball 8.9% 5.4 Fishing from a bank, dock, jetty 5.7% 3.2 Climbing or mountaineering 5.3% 1.0 Arts and crafts class or activity 5.0% 3.9 Skateboarding 3.1% 11.3 Volleyball 2.8% 4.4 Surfboarding 0.0% 0.0 Rugby 0.0% 0.0 Participation rate – the percent of the population that participates in a recreational activity Frequency – the number of times per year those that participate engage in the activity Source: 2006 SCORP RCO Diary Based Survey Participation rates The 2006 RCO survey found significant differences in the statewide population’s participation in recreation activities including distinctions for Arlington (Seattle-King County) participants. Top 5 activities with the highest percent of the population participating – in Arlington (Seattle-King County) included walking without a pet, picnicking, barbequing, or cooking out, sightseeing, bicycle riding, and social event indoors. Bottom 5 activities with the lowest percent of the population participating – in Arlington (Seattle-King County) included rugby, surfboarding, wind surfing, lacrosse, and bicycle touring. Organized team sports – involved lesser percentages of the population of the Arlington (Seattle-King County) ranging from the highest for soccer (15.7%) to the lowest for rugby (0.0%). Indoor community center activities – involved a varying range of percentages of the population participating from a social event indoors (35.9%), aerobics/fitness activities (33.9%), swimming in a pool (27.6%), weight conditioning at a facility (21.6%), class or instruction (15.1%), activity center (11.5%), and arts and crafts class or activity (5.0%). Generally, indoor or community center related activities engage the population in greater percentages than organized team sports. Environmental or cultural activities – involved a varying range of percentages of the population participating in sightseeing (48.1%), observe or photograph wildlife or nature (34.2%), beachcombing (20.7%), and visit a nature interpretive center (15.1%). Generally, environmental, or cultural related activities engage the population in greater percentages than indoor or community centers as well as organized team sports. Arlington PRMP 17 Annual frequencies The 2006 RCO survey determined the number of times or the annual frequency that an average participant would engage in each activity. The frequency averages are for all kinds of participants. Enthusiasts or organized team players may engage more frequently than the average indicates but are included within the averaging, nonetheless. Activities with the highest annual frequencies of over 10.0 occasions – in Arlington (Seattle-King County) were for walking without a pet (27.4 times per year), walking with a pet (18.0), observing and photographing wildlife (16.3), jogging or running (11.7), skateboarding (11.3), and playgrounds (10.5). Activities with the lowest annual frequencies of less than 2.0 occasions – in Arlington (Seattle-King County) were for rugby (0.0 times per year), surfboarding (0.0), climbing or mountaineering indoors (1.0), windsurfing (1.0), and visiting a nature or interpretive center (1.7). Organized team sports – in Arlington (Seattle-King County) ranged from the highest for basketball (6.8 times) to the lowest for rugby (0.0). Indoor community center activities – in Arlington (Seattle-King County) were activity center (7.7 times per year), class or instruction (6.0), swimming in a pool (5.0), arts and crafts (3.9), and social event (2.4). Generally, indoor or community center frequencies are like the range of organized team sports. Environmental or cultural activities – in Arlington (Seattle-King County) were observing or photographing wildlife (16.3 times per year), sightseeing (5.1), beachcombing (2.8), and visiting a nature or interpretive center (1.7). Generally, environmental, or cultural related activities that involve observing or photographing wildlife occur in greater numbers per year than indoor or community centers as well as organized team sports. Arlington’s annual volumes 2020-2050 Arlington’s total volume of annual recreation activity is determined by multiplying the age-specific participation and frequency or occurrence rates by the number of persons projected to be in each age-specific category for the projection years. The following table itemizes the projected total annual volume in 2020, 2050, and the amount and percent of volume increase that will occur between 2020-2050. Activity 2020 2050 Add’l Pct Observe/photograph wildlife 98,039 176,479 78,440 80% Sail boating 1,214 2,056 841 69% Bike riding – urban/rural trails 10,956 18,470 7,515 69% Bike riding – day trip touring 148 238 90 61% Swim – outdoor/indoor pool 27,503 48,195 20,693 75% Roller/in-line skating – on trail 1,680 2,763 1,083 64% 18 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 19 Basketball – outdoor/indoor 21,067 34,844 13,778 65% Tennis – outdoor/indoor 6,652 12,351 5,700 86% Football 8,240 13,414 5,174 63% Lacrosse 221 359 139 63% Activity center 20,060 36,341 16,281 81% Arts and crafts class/activity 3,594 6,213 2,619 73% 2040 – the total volume that will occur in 2040, Additional – the volume increase in volume over 2020 by 2050, Pct – the percent increase the additional volume between 2020-2050 represents Source: RCO SCORP Survey 2006  Greatest annual volume in 2050 – will be observing wildlife (176,479 occurrences) due to the high percentage of the population that engage in the activity and the high number of times or frequencies that they engage per year.  Significant but substantially less volumes in 2050 – will be playground at a park or school (120,021 occurrences), aerobics or fitness at a facility (112,822 occurrences) and walking in a park or trail setting (103,046 occurrences).  Lowest annual volume in 2050 – will be for bike riding as a daytrip tour (238 occurrences), lacrosse (359 occurrences), and skateboarding on a trail or in a skateboard park (612 occurrences) due to the low percentage of the population that engages in the activity and the low annual frequency. Percent would like to do more In addition to participation and frequency, the 2006 survey also asked respondents to indicate their preferences to engage in activities they did not participate in or to engage more frequently in activities that they did. Survey results were collated on a statewide per person basis only due to the smaller respondent sample size. Washington State Sightseeing 50.6% Hiking 38.4% Picnicking 37.9% Social event 29.5% Swimming/wading at beach 28.5% Walking without a pet 25.4% Beachcombing 23.2% Walking with a pet 16.0% Visit nature/interpretive center 16.0% Weight conditioning with equipment 11.8% Arts/Crafts class or activity 11.4% Playground activities 10.0% Volleyball 7.2% Bicycle touring 6.5% Badminton 4.6% Football 4.1% 20 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 21 Handball, racquetball, and squash 3.9% Surfboarding 3.8% Activities at indoor community 3.2% Wind surfing 3.0% Source: 2006 SCORP RCO Diary Based Survey Generally, survey participants would like to do and if already participating in, would like to do more of activities with the highest participation rates already including sightseeing (50.6% do and do more), hiking (38.4%), picnicking (37.9%), and so on. Were survey participants to engage in activities and to engage more in activities they are already participating in they could increase the volume of activity but not change the overall rank order of activity participation. Recreational clearinghouse Arlington could seek to operate a web-based recreational clearinghouse coordinating recreational program offerings that include as wide a variety of activities as there is an interest by city residents and tourists, regardless of age, skill level, income – or program provider. Recreational program offerings offered through the clearinghouse should include activities providing health, education, social, recreational, and other welfare activities for children, teens, adults, seniors, and special populations. Parks and Recreation staff or contractors could conduct programs to the extent possible, practical, and consistent with the city’s mission. However, depending on demand, cost, and feasibility, the clearinghouse can also coordinate programs to be conducted by other public, non-profit, or for-profit organizations and even vendors. To the extent possible and practical, program offerings should include activities that will be conducted in Arlington parks, community centers, and trail facilities. However, depending on demand, the clearinghouse may also include program offerings that may be conducted in schools and other public facilities inside or out of the city, as well as at non-profit sites and facilities. Vision The web-based recreational clearinghouse may be realized through the coordination of:  Arlington programs – where there is sufficient demand to meet the city’s park and recreation mission and pricing and delivery objectives.  Other jurisdictions – including Snohomish County and Arlington School District.  Non-profit organizations – such as YMCA, Boy and Girl Scouts, Campfire USA, Arlington athletic leagues, Lions, Rotary, and Kiwanis Clubs, among others. Pricing and delivery criteria Arlington will continuously assess the mission criteria illustrated in the program formula for all program offerings the city is considering of providing with staff, contract instructors, or vendors: 1: Is the program consistent with the city’s park and recreation mission and level of service proposals? If not - the city does not offer the program but may facilitate the program to be offered by other providers including the option of partnering or brokering the program, and/or offering scholarships or other services, and/or publishing the program offering on the clearinghouse. 2: If yes – should the city directly provide the program? If not – the city does not offer the program but may facilitate the program to be offered by other providers including the option of partnering or brokering the program, and/or offering scholarships 22 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 23 or other services, and/or publishing the program offering on the clearinghouse. 3: If yes – what pricing policy or goal should the city establish for the program on a public good or benefit versus private good or benefit scale – full cost recovery, merit pricing, or full subsidy?  Full cost recovery programs - will recover all direct costs (including full and part-time staff, supplies, materials, maintenance, and utilities) and indirect costs (including department overhead for staff benefits). Generally, full cost recovery programs will include services that primarily provide private goods or benefits to a specialized user group, such as golf courses, marinas, RV parks, gun and rifle ranges, equestrian facilities, elite adult sports field rentals, and classes. In some instances, the city may add a surcharge to recover a slight profit or return on investment with which to defray long-term life cycle costs for maintenance and repair, and/or to reinvest in similar facilities elsewhere in the system.  Merit pricing (partial cost recovery) programs – will partially recover direct and indirect costs based on a policy decision about the degree to which each program provides public versus private goods or benefits. Merit pricing programs may also include the providing of scholarships to eligible user individuals or user groups that would prevent the program from realizing full cost recovery. Merit pricing program determinations will consider the degree to which the program provides a public benefit to the public at large or to special users within the general population (such as teens or seniors); whether the program can or is able to be offered by other providers at a reasonable cost; and the practicality of collecting fees for service. Generally, merit price programs may include boat launches, facility rentals, day camps and field activities, youth sports field rentals, senior health and nutrition programs, and safety and instruction programs of all kinds.  Subsidy (no or very low-cost recovery) programs – will not attempt to recover costs as a fee, although it may ask for donations or grants from using individuals, groups, or organizations who benefit or are likely sponsors. Generally, subsidy programs benefit the population at large sufficiently to justify the use of public funding and/or include activities that are not practical to effectively recover a fee or charge, such as special events or festivals, special need programs and playgrounds, interpretive exhibits, parks, and trail related activities. Park service gaps An effective park system should provide a park, trail, playground, 24 Arlington PRMP community center, or other recreation facility within a 5-minute walk of any residential area measured by actual walking routes on trails, paths, sidewalks, or other routes. Natural features such as steep hillsides, water bodies, and other obstacles as well as manmade obstacles like limited access highways or major traffic corridors or the lack of safe paths, trails, sidewalk improvements affect a 5-minute walk measurement. Walkability maps are generated by Geographic Information Systems (GIS) that calculate 5-minute walk distances using roads, sidewalks, paths, and trails that account for natural and manmade obstacles from existing park, recreation, school, and other community facilities. Service gaps are areas that are beyond the 5-minute walk distances of residential developments indicating residents of these areas have to walk further time-distances or commute by bike or vehicle or are blocked by natural or manmade obstacles from or in order to engage in a recreational activity. A walkability map generated around existing city, Snohomish County, Arlington School District, and Homeowner Association (HOA) facilities indicates there are significant developed areas of the city and UGA that lack effective park and recreational services:  Arlington employment center – including portions of the designated manufacturing employment center south of the Airport.  Undeveloped lands – in the southwest of Smokey Point,  Residential neighborhoods – in the northeast central areas where residential developments are providing open space but not picnicking, playgrounds, sports courts, or other park amenities. The plan proposes trails, parks, and recreation facilities to fill these service gaps. Social equity An effective park system should also ensure that park and recreational services and facilities, including those that provide health, nutrition, childcare, education, employment, and socialization as well as recreational activities are provided residents in areas of the city that are less advantaged than the general population due to:  Poverty – particularly for families with children under age 18  Single parent households – headed by a male or female with children with no other spouse present  Non-English speaking – defined by immigrant households where members do not speak English very well or not at all  Housing cost stressed – of households paying more than 35% of gross income for rent or mortgage payments GIS maps generated for the city using the US Census Bureau’s 2019 American Community Survey (ACS) Block Groups indicate:  Households with high housing costs – are more than 40% of all households located in the older neighborhoods of the city east of downtown.  Households headed by single parents – are 21-30% of all households located in the southwest corner and northwest of Smokey Point.  Households with incomes below poverty lines – more than 10% of all households located in the older neighborhoods east of downtown.  Households of non-English speaking – are more than 4% of all households located northwest of Smokey Point. The plan proposes to increase trails, parks, and recreation amenities in these areas to provide social equity. Arlington PRMP 25 26 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 27 28 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 29 30 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 31 Chapter 4: Public opinion Resident outreach survey An on-line with mail-back option survey was conducted of all Arlington households within the city zip codes using USPS’s Every Door Direct Mail (EDDM) postcard notification. The zip code boundaries are imperfect matches to city limits with some extending beyond and some not completely covering corporate boundaries. As shown below, 15% of the respondents indicated, or believe, they live outside of Arlington city limits. Survey questions sought to obtain information on park and recreation behavior, use of programs and parks, and opinions and priorities for potential future improvements. 431 people completed the survey. The following is a summary of the findings – detailed results including comments are available from the Parks & Recreation Department. In most instances, the results have been statistically weighted and ranked as noted to provide meaningful findings. How did you find out about this survey? Answered: 283 Skipped: 5 City Facebook 54% Word of mouth 15% Where do you live – inside or outside of city limits (based on a reference map included in the survey)? Answered: 280 Skipped: 8 Zone 1 21% Zone 4 25% How many years have you lived in Arlington? Answered: 281 Skipped: 7 0-2 11% 11-15 9% How many people are in your household? Answered: 280 Skipped: 8 4 29% What age group are you in? Answered: 280 Skipped: 8 10-14 0% 41-55 33% How many members in your household are in the following age groups? (Fill in a number for all that apply.) Answered: 280 Skipped: 5 6-10 0.40 41-55 0.84 11-14 0.39 55-65 0.39 15-18 0.37 65+ 0.46 What language do the members in your household speak at home? Answered: 279 Skipped: 9 Vietnamese 0% Other Pacific Island 0% Chinese 0% Other 1% 32 Arlington PRMP What is your gender? Answered: 282 Skipped: 6 What is your current housing situation? Answered: 282 Skipped: 6 Do you have any suggestions or recommendations concerning the development of parks, recreation, and open space in Arlington? Answered: 139 Skipped: 149 Implications Residents who completed the outreach survey:  Are informed primarily by Facebook and postcard mailer.  Are distributed proportional to each zone’s population.  Have lived in Arlington predominately for 16+ years.  Live primarily in 2 and 4-person households.  Are concentrated in ages 26-65.  Speak English almost exclusively.  Were predominantly female.  Are primarily owners though with a suitable representation of renters. The survey priority results were numerically weighted for each option where lowest was 1, low 2, moderate 3, high 4, and highest 5 and then divided by the number of responses to determine an average or weighted score where 5.00 was the highest and 1.00 the lowest possible priority. How often do you utilize the following Arlington parks or improved open spaces (map included)? Answers ranked in order of highest use. Answered: 286 Skipped: 2 Arlington parks Weight Legion Park 2.81 Haller Park 2.75 Centennial Park 2.32 Terrace Park 2.04 Bill Quake Memorial Park 1.81 Forest Trail Park 1.54 York Memorial Park 1.43 Implications  While Legion and Haller Parks are the most used, respondents use all city parks. How often do you utilize the following Snohomish County parks? Answers ranked in order of highest use. Answered: 285 Skipped: 3 Snohomish County parks Weight Implications  Snohomish County parks are frequented as much as Arlington parks even though some are located outside city limits. Only residents of Homeowner Associations (HOA) can use private HOA parks. If you are a HOA resident, how often do you utilize private HOA parks? Answered: 265 Skipped: 23 Never 9% Weekly 11% Yearly 6% Daily 8% Implications  40% of the respondents are HOA residents and use HOA parks on a yearly to weekly basis. Arlington PRMP 33 How often do you utilize the following trails in Arlington (map included)? Answers ranked in order of highest use. Answered: 283 Skipped: 5 Arlington trails Weight Centennial Trail – city portion 3.10 Centennial Trail – county portion 2.70 Airport Trail 2.54 Whitehorse Trail 1.78 Zimmerman Trail Climb 1.31 Rivercrest Trail 1.30 Implications  The most used trails are multipurpose including the Centennial Trail in the city and county and Airport Trail. What priority would you give to having the following types of outdoor facilities increased or added in Arlington? Answers ranked in order of use. Answered: 286 Skipped: 2 Outdoor facility Weight Trails and open spaces 3.75 Soccer, baseball, and softball fields 3.16 Implications  Trails and open spaces and playgrounds ranked the highest priority of all outdoor facility options though all options have scores of moderate and above except skate parks that are used by smaller percentages of the population. What priority would you give to having the following types of indoor facilities increased or added in Arlington? Answers ranked in order of use. Answered: 284 Skipped: 4 Indoor facility Weight Children’s museum 3.43 Indoor playground 3.34 Childcare 3.07 Spray/splash feature 3.00 Nonprofit space (leased option) 2.48 Implications  Highest priorities were given to the youth activity center, leisure swimming pool, lap swimming pool, indoor gymnasium, and children’s museum. What recreational groups or programs have you participated in? Answers ranked in order of use. Answered: 281 Skipped: 7 Activity by organization Weight 34 Arlington PRMP Independent sports group or league 1.95 Snohomish County Parks & Recreation 1.79 Nonprofit club (YMCA) 1.75 Marysville Parks & Recreation 1.60 Implications  While school, private, and church programs are the most cited, a variety of groups are providing residents recreation services. What priority would you give to having the following recreation programs provided in Arlington by age group? Answers ranked in order of use. Answered: 281 Skipped: 7 Programs by age group Weight Senior programs (55-70) 3.39 Young adult programs (21-20) 3.20 Implications  While programs for all ages scored moderate to high priority, teen-youth programs were ranked highest. What priority would you give to the addition of the following types of recreational programs in Arlington? Answers ranked in order of use. Answered: 282 Skipped: 6 Recreation programs Weight Environmental (park and trail maintenance) 3.72 Aquatics classes/programs 3.39 Dance, music, or drama 3.30 Travel (local trips to museums, exhibitions, etc.) 3.10 Landscape and gardening classes 3.08 Implications  Environmental, after-school, and outdoor recreation programs ranked high though all recreation programs ranked moderate and above priorities. What priority would you give to the addition of the following types of indoor programs in Arlington? Answers ranked in order of use. Answered: 277 Skipped: 11 Indoor programs Weight After-school programs 3.64 Education 3.53 Athletics (basketball, handball, volleyball, etc.) 3.44 Art or textile 3.14 Media 2.82 Implications  After-school and education programs ranked moderate-high while all indoor programs ranked moderate priorities. What priority would you give to attend the following types of events in Arlington? Answers ranked by response. Answered: 283 Skipped: 5 Types of events Weight Walking and running events 3.06 Events with alcohol (age 21+) 2.81 Implications  Respondents gave moderate-high scores to farmers’ markets, Arlington PRMP 35 craft bazars, and festival events. If you have not attended any special events in Arlington, what are the reasons? Answers ranked by response. Answered: 247 Skipped: 41 Reasons for not attending Weight Schedule conflicts/too busy 1.11 Unaware of events 1.10 Implications  While respondents indicated schedule conflicts and unaware of events as the major reason for not attending, the scores do not indicate any significant factors account for not attending. What is the best way to communicate with you? Answered: 280 Skipped: 8 Voter priorities survey A follow-up on-line with mail-back option survey was conducted of all Arlington households within the city zip codes using USPS’s Every Door Direct Mail (EDDM) postcard notification. Survey questions sought to obtain priorities for the specific open space, trails, parks, financing, and other particulars in the proposed PRMP. 401 people completed the survey. The following is a summary of the findings – detailed results including comments are available from the Parks & Recreation Department. In most instances, the results have been statistically weighted and ranked as noted to provide meaningful findings. Where do you live based on the reference map included in the survey? Answered: 395 Skipped: 6 Zone 3 25% Implications  The responses are proportional to the population within each zone. How many years have you lived in Arlington? Answered: 398 Skipped: 3 0-1 6% 11-20 21% 2-5 21% 21+ 33% Where do you work? Answered: 397 Skipped: 4 What type of housing do you live in? Answered: 397 Skipped: 4 Implications  The representative proportion of renters responded to the survey. How many people in your household are in the following age groups? Answered: 397 Skipped: 4 Are you a registered voter of the City of Arlington? Answered: 164 Skipped: 3 36 Arlington PRMP Using the map provided of public parks, what is the estimated walking time to and name of the park closest to your residence? Answered: 396 Skipped: 5 5 minutes 40% 15+ minutes 40% Implications Adults who completed the PRMP priorities survey:  Are representative of the populations within each city zone.  Have lived in Arlington proportionally for all years ranging from 2 to 21+.  Are retired or work in Arlington elsewhere in Snohomish County.  Include a representational proportion of renters.  Are in households with members in all age groups from 18-65+.  Are majority registered voters in the city of Arlington.  A significant percentage live more than 15 minutes from a public park. The survey priority results were numerically weighted for each option where lowest was 1, low 2, moderate 3, high 4, and highest 5 and then divided by the number of responses to determine an average or weighted score where 5.00 was the highest and 1.00 the lowest possible priority. In general, how would you rate the location, quantity, and quality of the existing inventory of parks, recreation, open spaces, and trails provided in Arlington by the city, neighboring cities, county, and school districts? Answers ranked in order of highest ranking. Answered: 398 Skipped: 3 Park characteristics Weight Quantity – the number and size of existing parks 3.14 Location Quality Implications  Survey respondents gave moderate scores to all characteristics of existing parks. CONSERVE AND ENHANCE CREEK CORRIDORS – under the proposed plan, the city could conserve and enhance corridors along Eagle, Prairie, Kruger, Edgecomb, Portage, March, and Quilceda Creeks including some that are and will remain privately owned. The objective would be to remove invasive species, replant native vegetation, and install interpretive signage and exhibits. How important is this proposal to you (illustrated in Chapter 5)? Answered: 394 Skipped: 7 Conserve and enhance creek corridors 3.38 Implications  This proposal was given a moderate-high priority. PARK PICNIC SHLETERS AND TABLES – under the proposed plan, the city could install picnic facilities and park trails to provide public access to passive park features including woodlands, wetlands, and wildlife habitat. The proposal would provide picnic facilities within a 5-minute walk of most residential areas, including group picnic shelters in locations suitable for public gatherings. How important is this proposal to you (illustrated in Chapter 5)? Answered: 397 Skipped: 4 Implications  This proposal was given a high priority. MULTIUSE TRAILS – under the proposed plan, the city could develop a multiuse trail network to provide connections to parks, schools, and other community destinations that access all residential areas. The trail segments would be designed for hike, bike, and dog use depending on environmental constraints and neighborhood property impacts. The proposal would install wayfinding signage and directories along trail corridors. How important is this proposal to you (illustrated in Chapter 5)? Answered: 395Skipped: 6 Implications  This proposal was given a high-highest priority. Arlington PRMP 37 PLAYGROUNDS AND PLAY AREAS – under the proposed plan, the city could develop playgrounds and play areas to provide access within a 5-minute walking distance of most residential areas in the city. The proposal would design age-appropriate features for young and older age children. The proposal would upgrade some existing playground equipment to meet ADA requirements, safety concerns, and new activity interests. How important is this proposal to you (illustrated in Chapter 5)? Answered: 397Skipped: 4 Develop playgrounds and play areas 3.73 Implications  This proposal was given a high-highest priority. SPORTS COURTS – under the proposed plan, the city could develop sports courts to provide multiuse basketball, pickleball, volleyball, and other activities within a 5-minute walking distance of most residential areas in the city. The proposal would upgrade some existing basketball courts to increase surface and equipment durability, meet safety concerns and accommodate new activity interests. How important is this proposal to you (illustrated in Chapter 5)? Answered: 397 Skipped: 4 Implications  This proposal was given a high priority. ATHLETIC (MULTIUSE) FIELDS – under the proposed plan, the city could develop multiuse soccer/baseball fields at Country Charm Park and possibly improve other existing fields for multiuse to serve all age groups with practice and competition game opportunities. How important is this proposal to you (illustrated in Chapter 5)? Answered: 396 Skipped: 5 Implications  This proposal was given a moderate priority. SPECIAL EVENT AREAS – under the proposed plan, the city could develop flexible large and small areas to host community festivals, celebrations, and other special events at appropriate park sites throughout the city. How important is this proposal to you (illustrated in Chapter 5)? Answered: 396Skipped: 5 Develop special event areas 3.28 Implications  This proposal was given a moderate priority. 38 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 39 Chapter 5: Plan elements The following proposals concerning elements of the parks, recreation, and open space plan are based on the results of environmental inventories, field analysis, demand analysis, workshop planning sessions, and surveys of resident households. The proposals outline the vision developed for parks, recreation, and open spaces in Arlington for the next 20 years. The proposals are CONCEPTUAL, in some instances, subject to further study and coordination with public and private participants that may modify the eventual project components. The proposals refer to a site or property that may provide a major type of park, recreation, or open space activity. A particular site or property may include one or all of the described plan features. The proposals in each section describe the improvements that will be accomplished under each major type of plan element. Conservancies Resource conservancies or open spaces protect, preserve, and conserve lands that have environmental features of critical area significance (floodplains and landslide hazard), ecological importance (shorelines, wetlands and watersheds), forestland (old growth, woodland cover, and prime productive), wildlife habitat (threatened and endangered species), and open space. To the extent possible and practical, resource conservancy lands will link preserved open spaces (even though these lands may not be publicly accessible) to greenways and open space networks. These linked areas will visually define the developed urban area in accordance with the objectives of the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA). Resource conservancy lands may provide nature and interpretive trails, exhibits, and interpretive facilities to increase public awareness and appreciation for significant and visually interesting environmental, wildlife, and forest features. Resource conservancy activities may be located on independent properties or include portions of other sites that provide resource activities, trail corridors, or other public facilities. Conservancies may also be developed on other publicly owned lands subject to public use agreements or easements; or on lands acquired for other public purposes including storm water management, groundwater recharge, potable water storage, and wastewater treatment. Vision Conservancies may be realized through:  Acquisition of development rights and/or title of resource lands or historical sites - that would otherwise be developed or used for other urban land use;  Provision for public access and interpretive use - that would not be possible if the lands remained in private ownership without such provisions.  Provisions for signing and interpretation - subject to appropriate security measures and underlying property owner agreements, Conservancies – open space Existing public conservancy sites The following sites provide open space conservancy protection through easements, land use agreements, or acquisitions by Arlington, Marysville, Snohomish County, Washington State, and Arlington School District. In most instances, the open spaces conserve wetlands, woodlands, steep slopes, and other features. Existing public conservancy acreage This community park is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 604 East Gilman Street.  Riparian habitat along South Fork Stillaguamish River  Extensive woodlands along river and south site  Large open fields suitable for major events 40 Arlington PRMP 2 Stormwater Wetland Park 10.0 This community park is located in the Old Town Business District 3 Subarea at 1100 West Avenue.  Riparian habitat along the Stillaguamish River  Wetland ponds and wildlife habitat 3 67th Avenue 6.0 67th Avenue NE.  Triangular parcel located along the west edge of 67th Avenue north from SR-531/172nd Street NE  Wooded lot at the end of Hillside Court  Large woodland parcel located along 67th Avenue  Wooded lot located on the southeast corner of Highland View Drive and 67th Avenue 4 Crown Ridge 5 10.8 the Crown Ridge Estates Subdivision.  Riparian habitat along Portage Creek 5 Old Burn Road 4.0 This open space is located in the Kent Prairie Subarea along Old Burn Road south of Kent Prairie Elementary School.  Heavily wooded site 6 Portage Creek Wildlife Area Access 5.0 This open space is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea off 206th Street NE adjoining Portage Creek Wildlife Area.  Wooded ravine City of Marysville 122.9 7 Strawberry Fields Athletic Complex 72.0 southeast of Arlington city limits.  Quilceda Creek riparian habitat 8 Smokey Point Boulevard 50.9 This open space is located on Smokey Point Boulevard north of 156th Street NE adjacent to Arlington city limits.  Extensive wetlands Snohomish County 256.9 9 Centennial Trail Park 8.3 This trailhead park is located along the Centennial Trail on 67th Avenue NE across from and provides access to North County  Scrub woodland 10 Gissberg Twin Lakes 54.0 This regional park is located at 16324 Twin Lake Road at the southwest Arlington city limits.  North Lake  South Lake 11 River Meadows 144.6 Stillaguamish River east of Arlington UGA.  Open meadows and woodlands  Fishing sites along the river 12 Twin Rivers Park 50.0 from Arlington at 8003 SR-530 NE near the confluence of the North and South Forks of the Stillaguamish River.  Woodlands and riparian habitat along the river  Open meadows and fields Washington State DNR 238.2 13 SR-9 238.2 This timber trust property is located across SR-9 south of 158th Street NE.  Heavily wooded parcels on both sides of SR-9 Arlington School District 75.7 14 Post Middle School Open Space 58.4 adjacent and east of Post Middle School and adjacent to the south boundary of Country Charm Park.  Wooded riparian habitat along South Fork Stillaguamish River  Open fields 15 Pioneer School Environmental Area 17.3 at 8213 Eaglefield Drive adjoining Pioneer Elementary School.  Extensive woodlands  Wetlands  Nature trails and exhibits Total existing public conservancy acres 818.5* * Total site acreage may also provide for other resources or recreational activities. Arlington PRMP 41 42 Arlington PRMP Proposed corridor conservancies  Conserve and enhance the riparian habitat along Portage Creek from that flows north through Arlington High School then west through and around Portage Creek Wildlife Area to the Stillaguamish River. 17 March Corridor tbd  Conserve and enhance the riparian habitat along March Creek that flows west from SR-9 to the Stillaguamish River. 18 Middle Fork Quilceda Creek Corridor tbd  Conserve and enhance the riparian habitat along the Middle Fork of the Quilceda Creek that flows north through Gleneagle Golf Course then south along SR-9 and through a series of irrigation canals. Total proposed conservancy acres tbd Tbd – proposed to be determined based on open space assets, property boundaries, and conservation method. Existing HOA conservancy sites The following sites provide private open space conservancy protection through land use agreements by Homeowner Associations (HOA). In most instances, the open spaces conserve wetlands, woodlands, steep slopes, and other features. Existing HOA conservancy acreage HOA open spaces 128.22 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea on the corner of Bovee Lane and 67th Avenue NE.  Grass lot 2 Carola Addition 0.49 This open space is located in the West Arlington Subarea with access from 34th Drive NE to 180th Street NE.  Grass corridor 3 Claridge Court 0.13 Tracts 996, 997, and 995 off 189th Place NE, 43rd Drive NE, and 44th Avenue NE.  Grass lots 4 Country Manor 1 6.93 perimeter open space from 168th Place NE to 165th Place NE.  Natural open space perimeter 5 Country Manor 2 0.09 This open space is located in the West Arlington Subarea as perimeter open space around 42nd Avenue NE.  Natural open space perimeter 6 Crown Ridge 5A 0.31 Boulevard North.  Woodland corridor 7 Crown Ridge 5B 13.80 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea between Crown Ridge Boulevard and SR-9 south of Vista Drive and adjacent to Arlington High School.  Natural perimeter  Wetland  Stormwater pond 8 Dogwood Meadows / Magnolia Meadows 1.83 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea at the end of 81st Drive NE adjacent to Middle Fork Quilceda Creek  Natural Perimeter  Wetland  Stormwater Pond 9 Eagle Creek Place 2.11 This open space is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea between the powerlines and houses located along 87th Avenue NE adjoining the south boundary of Eagle Creek Elementary School.  Wooded corridor on the west  Open grass area adjacent to 87th Avenue NE 10 Eagle Heights 1 5.61 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea between 179th Place NE and 176th Place NE adjoining SR-9.  Woodland corridor  Stormwater pond at the end of 175th Street NE 11 Eagle Heights 2 2.71 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea from 175th Street NE south across 172nd Place NE to 172nd Street NE.  Wooded corridor Arlington PRMP 43 12 Gleneagle Division Phase 1 4.67 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea extending south from Gleneagle Golf Course across West Country Club Drive adjoining Wedgewood Park south across Gleneagle Boulevard to Condor Drive.  Wooded corridor  Stormwater pond 13 Gleneagle Division Phase 3 0.84 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea at the end of Troon Court.  Stormwater retention pond 14 Gleneagle Sector 3B 0.27 Inverness Drive and Ballantrae Drive adjoining the powerlines and paved trail to Gleneagle Golf Course.  Dirt path access 15 Gregory Park 10.31 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea between SR-9 and 89th Avenue NE.  Woodland  Stormwater retention pond 16 High Clover 10.12 This open space is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea as the perimeter open space extending from High Clover Park north above Portage Creek Wildlife Area to 200th Street NE.  Woodland corridor 17 High Clover Division 2 6.73 High Clover Boulevard from 45th Avenue NE to 48th Avenue NE.  Open grass areas 18 Highland View Estates 0.61 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea at the south end of Hillside Court.  Wooded lot 19 Kona Crest 3.15 between Joann Lane and BNSF Railroad tracks along SR-9.  Wooded corridor 20 Magnolia Estates 2.24    Fences and alley access  2 parking stalls 21 Meadowbrook 8.04 powerlines around the housing cluster on 89th Avenue NE off Tveit Road.  Woodlands  Grass area under powerlines 22 River Crest Estates 1.01 th Street NE providing access to Portage Creek Wildlife Area.  Wooded corridor  Access trail 23 Smokey Point 1.20 This open space is located in the West Arlington Subarea in the interior of Smokey Point Drive behind Smokey Point Transit Center.  Wooded area 24 Stoneway 0.27 end of 174th Place NE.  Woodland 25 Terah/Marie 3.37 Drive NE and 195th Place NE.  Woodland 26 The Bluff at Arlington Condo 3.21 This open space is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea on Circle Bluff Drive bordering the Portage Creek Wildlife Area.  Woodland 27 The Colony Division – Rosecreek 1 5.92 Street NE under the powerlines.  Grass area under powerlines 28 The Colony Division – Twin Ponds 9.96 This open space is located in the Kent Prairie Subarea off Stillaguamish Avenue north of 207th Street NE.  2 large wetland ponds 44 Arlington PRMP 29 The Colony Division – Rosecreek 2 6.09 This open space is located in the Kent Prairie Subarea under the powerlines off Tveit Road.  Grass area under powerlines 30 Woodlands Sector 12.51 These open spaces are located in the Hilltop Subarea off Woodlands Way, Woodbine Drive, and Silverleaf Place.  Woodland corridors 31 Walnut Ridge 0.83 Drive NE north of 191st Place NE.  Woodland area 32 Wedgewood at Gleneagle 1.69 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea at the corner of Gleneagle Boulevard and 172nd Street NE/SR-531.  Natural open space perimeter 33 Whispering Breezes 0.61 This open space is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea in an interior lot from 35th Avenue NE north of 186th Place NE.  Woodland  Grass area Private 144.9 This private facility is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 7619 Country Club Lane.  Woodland perimeter  Wetlands 35 Stilly Valley Pioneer Park 6.7 20722 67th Ave NE.  2 large wetland ponds  Wooded areas Total existing conservancy acres 273.12* * Total site acreage may also provide for other resources or recreational activities. Arlington PRMP 45 Resource parks Resource parkland will be conserved in Arlington that provides public access to significant environmental features including shorelines, woodlands, and scenic areas. Where appropriate, resource park sites will be improved with a variety of outdoor facilities including group and individual campsites and picnic facilities. Supporting services will include parking lots, restrooms, and utilities. Resource park activities may be located on independent properties or include portions of other sites provided for environmental conservancies, trail corridors, recreation, or other public facilities. Resource park activities may also be developed on other publicly owned lands subject to public use agreements or easements. Vision As described herein, the resource park vision will be realized through:  Acquisition of resource parklands - that would otherwise be developed for other land uses,  Provision of public access - and use of natural features which would not be possible if the lands remained in private ownership,  Conservation for public access - and use of unique and available natural features that visually define and separate developing urban areas. Waterfront access Existing waterfront access sites The following sites provide access to significant freshwater access points that include fishing, beach, boating, and other waterfront access activities. Existing waterfront access sites This community park is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 604 East Gilman Street.  Riparian habitat along South Fork Stillaguamish River  Extensive dirt trails along river and looped in the south portion 2 Haller Park 1 Subarea at 1100 West Avenue.  Beach access to the Stillaguamish River  Boat launch adjacent to SR-9 bridge 3 Stormwater Wetland Park 1 Subarea at 1100 West Avenue. Access from West Cox Street through Haller Park and under SR-9 bridge.  Riparian habitat along the Stillaguamish River  Trails through site and around ponds Snohomish County 3 4 Gissberg Twin Lakes 1 southwest Arlington city limits.  Fishing sites on North Lake (age 14 years and under)  Fishing sites on South Lake (age 15 years and up)  Wading area (no lifeguards)  Paddling  Hand carry boating  Model boat racing 5 River Meadows 1 Stillaguamish River east of Arlington UGA.  Fishing sites along the river  1.6-miles of walking trails throughout the park and along the shoreline 6 Twin Rivers Park 1 from Arlington at 8003 SR-530 NE near the confluence of the North and South Forks of the Stillaguamish River.  Woodlands and riparian habitat along the river  Trail access to the shoreline Arlington School District 1 7 Post Middle School Open Space 1 Residential Subarea adjacent and east of Post Middle School and adjacent to the south boundary of Country Charm Park.  Wooded riparian habitat along South Fork Stillaguamish River Total waterfront access sites 7 46 Arlington PRMP Proposed waterfront access  Extend riverfront trail network from Country Charm Park through this site and then to Post Middle School to increase access to waterfront. Total waterfront access sites - Camping Existing campsites The following sites provide overnight tent, yurt, and RV camping facilities in parks with appropriate natural features and attractions. Existing campsites 1 River Meadows 20 This regional park is located at 20416 Jordan Road on the Stillaguamish River east of Arlington UGA.  6 rental 16 and 20-foot yurts (1 ADA accessible) with heat, electricity, and fire pits  14 rental campsites with water and firepits Total existing campsites 20 Proposed campsites Arlington 12 2 Country Charm Park 12  Develop a seasonal campground for dry camping for tents and RVs. Total proposed campsites 12 Picnic facilities Existing picnic tables and shelters The following sites provide day-use picnic tables and shelter facilities for group activities in existing parks within a 5-minute walk of most residential neighborhoods. Existing picnic tables - shelters This community park is located in the MIC Subarea at 18501 59th Avenue.  Picnic tables 2 Forest Trail Park 2 - 0 This neighborhood park is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 18005 Oxford Drive.  Picnic tables 3 Haller Park 2 - 1 This community park is located in the Old Town Business District 3 Subarea at 1100 West Avenue.  Picnic tables  Picnic shelter 4 J Rudy York Memorial Park 2 - 0 3209 180th Street NE.  Picnic tables 5 Jensen Park 3 - 1 This neighborhood park is located in the Kent Prairie Subarea at 7801 Jensen Farm Lane. Large open grass play area  Picnic tables  Picnic shelter 6 Legion Park 4 - 0 This community park is located in the Old Town Business District 1 at 114 North Olympic Avenue.  Picnic tables 7 Stormwater Wetland Park 4 - 1 This community park is located in the Old Town Business District 3 Subarea at 1100 West Avenue.  4 picnic tables  Covered shelter suitable for picnics and special events 8 Terrace Park 4 - 1 This community park is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 809 East Fifth Avenue.  Picnic tables  Picnic shelter Arlington PRMP 47 9 Waldo E Evans Memorial Park 1 - 0 This community park is located in the MIC Subarea at 18813 59th Avenue.  Picnic table 10 Wedgewood Park 2 - 0 This neighborhood park is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 17510 Gleneagle Boulevard.  Picnic tables Marysville parks 4 - 1 11 Strawberry Fields Athletic Complex 4 - 1 This community park is located at 6100 152nd Avenue Street NE southeast of Arlington city limits.  Picnic areas  Picnic shelter Snohomish County parks 16 - 3 12 Centennial Trail Park 2 - 0 This trailhead park is located along the Centennial Trail on 67th Avenue NE across from and provides access to North County Wildlife Area Park.  2 picnic tables 13 Gissberg Twin Lakes 4 - 0 southwest Arlington city limits.  Picnic tables 14 River Meadows 8 - 3 This regional park is located at 20416 Jordan Road on the Stillaguamish River east of Arlington UGA.  Picnic tables  3 picnic shelters with water and electricity 15 Twin Rivers Park 2 - 0 from Arlington at 8003 SR-530 NE near the confluence of the North and South Forks of the Stillaguamish River.  Picnic tables HOA miniparks 9 - 0 16 Aspen Wood Meadows 1 - 0 This minipark is located in the West Arlington Subarea on 186th Place NE.  Picnic table 17 Crown Ridge 1 6 - 0 This minipark is located in the Hilltop Subarea between Valley View Drive and Crown Ridge Boulevard.  6 picnic tables 18 High Clover Division 2 2 - 0 These open spaces are located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea along High Clover Boulevard from 45th Avenue NE to 48th Avenue NE.  2 picnic tables All total picnic tables All total picnic shelters 8 Proposed picnic tables - shelters Arlington 12 - 2 18 Country Charm Park 6 - 1  Install picnic tables and shelter  Install picnic tables and shelter Total proposed picnic shelters 2 48 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 49 Trails Trail systems will be developed to link major environmental assets, park and recreational facilities, schools, community centers, and historical features throughout Arlington. Trails will provide for several modes of recreational and commuters use including bicycles and pedestrians where appropriate. Park walking trails Park walking trails will be developed within major parks and open spaces to provide internal access to wetlands, woodlands, picnic areas, courts, and fields with parking lots, restrooms, and other supporting facilities. Park walking trails will be developed to Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) or US Forest Service (USFS) walking trail standards with a crushed rock, bark, or compacted dirt base. Most trail segments will be ADA accessible and usable by all age and skill groups. Walking trails will be developed in urban park sites with an asphalt or concrete surface, ADA accessible, and usable by all age and skill groups. Vision The parks walking trails vision will be realized by providing trail opportunities in Arlington and the surrounding area that:  Access natural features – within major park sites and open spaces,  Serve persons - with varied physical abilities and skills,  Establish high visibility and volume pedestrian routes - through the most developed urban areas and park sites, Existing parks trails The following park trails have been developed within major park sites in the city that access wetlands, ponds, lakes, woodlands, and other park activities. Existing parks trail miles This community park is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 604 East Gilman Street.  Dirt trail from Gilman Avenue south around the wetlands then north along the Stillaguamish River and across Eagle Creek to Alcazar Avenue NE. 2 Eagle Trail/Stormwater Park Trail 1.7 Scout project and is located in the Old Town Business District 3 Subarea in Stormwater Wetland Park. The trail links with dirt trails around the perimeter of the site.  Dirt trail around wetland ponds Marysville 1.5 This community park is located at 6100 152nd Avenue Street NE southeast of Arlington city limits.  Walking trails throughout park Snohomish County 2.8 This regional park is located at 16324 Twin Lake Road at the southwest Arlington city limits.  Walking track around lakes 5 River Meadows 1.6 Stillaguamish River east of Arlington UGA.  1.6-miles of walking trails throughout the park 6 Portage Creek Wildlife Area 0.7 This wildlife conservancy is located in Arlington Bluff at 20802 59th Avenue NE on the property previously owned by Gene Ammon for a peat farm.  Wetland and meadow trail network around and through site  Parking access from 59th Avenue NE on the northeast boundary Total existing park trail miles 8.0 50 Arlington PRMP Multipurpose trails Multipurpose on and off-road trails will be developed within corridors separate from vehicular or other motorized forms of transportation such as utility easements or in separate property alignments. In some instances, an on-road trail may be developed as improvements within the right-of-way of established vehicular or other transportation corridors. Multipurpose trails will be developed to Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) and American Association of State Highway & Transportation Officials (AASHTO) trail standards. The trails will be concrete, asphalt or very fine crushed rock base, handicap accessible, and usable by all age and skill groups. Trail corridors will be improved with trailhead services including rest stops, parking lots, restrooms, water, and air utilities. Where the trail is located in another park and recreational improvement or public facility, the trailhead may be improved with active picnic, playgrounds, and play areas. Multipurpose trail corridors will be independent properties or include portions of other sites provided for resource conservancies, resource activities, athletic facilities, and other park and recreational or public facility properties. Vision As described, the multipurpose trails vision may be realized by providing recreational trail opportunities that:  Access natural features - that may not be available otherwise,  Link open spaces - and other conservation areas into a greenway system,  Serve persons - with varied physical abilities and skills,  Establish high visibility and volume pedestrian routes - through the most developed urban areas and park sites,  Expand roadway corridors - to provide recreational and commuter trail opportunities, Existing off-road multipurpose trails The following multipurpose trail systems have been developed to provide combined hike and bike trail opportunities. Existing multipurpose trail miles 1 188th Street Connector Trail 0.5 This off-road trail is located in the MIC Subarea on the northwest boundary of the airport.  Connects the north segment of the Airport Trail using 188th Street NE right of way to Centennial Trail 2 Airport Trail 6.5 This off-road trail is located in the MIC Subarea circumventing the complete airport property. Trail access is provided by parking lots located at:  Cemetery Road  Airport Office  Bill Quake Memorial Park  Weston High School  North County Fire Station #48 3 Centennial Trail (city portion) 2.7 This multipurpose bike and hike trail is located through the MIC, Hilltop, Old Town Residential, and Old Town Business District 1,2 & 3 Subareas.  10-foot-wide multipurpose paved trail suitable for skating, skateboarding/longboarding Trailheads are located at:  Haller Park at 1100 West Avenue with restroom  Legion Park at 114 North Olympic with restroom 4 Eagle Trail/Stormwater Park Trail 1.7 This off-road trail network includes a portion developed by an Eagle Scout project and is located in the Old Town Business District 3 Subarea in Stormwater Wetland Park. The trail links with dirt trails around the perimeter of the site.  Dirt trail around wetland ponds  Dirt trails through the site from West Cox Street to Dike Road Arlington PRMP 51 5 Kruger-Portage Creek Trail 0.4 This off-road trail is located in the Kent Prairie Subarea on dedicated open space at 80th Avenue NE and 204th Street. The trail links Zimmerman Hill Climb to Portage Street and loops through the Jensen and Portage neighborhoods.  8-foot-wide paved trail suitable in some sections. 6 River Crest Trail 0.2 This off-road trail is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea at 6020 206th Street NE.  Benches  Off street parking 7 Zimmerman Hill Climb Trail 0.2 Crown Ridge Boulevard. Accesses woodland and riparian habitat along Portage Creek.  Benches  Wooden hill climb stairs and elevated walkway from Crown Ridge Boulevard north to 80th Avenue to 204th Street NE.  Bridge across Portage Creek Snohomish County 57.0 8 Centennial Trail (county portion) 30.0 This regional hiking, biking, and horse trail is located on the former Burlington Northern & Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad track corridor between Snohomish and Skagit County line. Trail construction began during Washington State’s Centennial and was so named accordingly. The 1890’s Machias Station railroad depot was replicated and serves as a trailhead and rental facility in Machias.  10-foot-wide multipurpose paved trail suitable for skating, skateboarding/longboarding  6-foot-wide natural surface parallel horse trail in most areas  Converted trail/railroad bridge over the Stillaguamish River  Picnic tables and benches  Picnic shelters at Machias Trailhead  Restrooms Trailheads at:  CT North Trailhead at 32328 SR-9 Nakashima Barn in Arlington  Bryant Trailhead at SR-9 and Stanwood Bryant Road in Arlington  Haller Park Trailhead at 1100 West Avenue in Arlington  Legion Park Trailhead at 114 North Olympic Avenue in Arlington  Armar Road Trailhead at 15333 67th Avenue NE in Arlington  Getchell Trailhead at 8318 Westlund Road in Arlington   Rhododendron Trailhead at 10911 54th Place NE in Lake Stevens  SR-92 Overpass Trailhead at 3651 127th Avenue NE in Lake Stevens  20th Street Trailhead at 13205 20th Street in Lake Stevens  Machias Park Trailhead at 1624 Virginia Street in Snohomish  Pilchuck Trailhead at 5801 South Machias Road in Snohomish 9 Whitehorse Trail 27.0 This regional hiking, biking, and horse trail is located on the former Burlington Northern & Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad track corridor between Arlington and Darrington through the Stillaguamish River Valley. The trail originates with a junction with the Centennial Regional Trail in Arlington then parallels SR-530 and the North Fork Stillaguamish River through the backcountry corridor. Current closures between the Centennial Trail and Trafton Trailhead, and 435th Avenue NE near Darrington are due to landslides and river washouts.  Trafton Trailhead Park at 115th Avenue NE near the red barn and blue silo  Miller Shingle Trailhead at 21021 SR-530 with equestrian parking  C-Post Road Trailhead at 29415 SR-530  Hazel Hole Trailhead at Mile Post 38.8 SR-530  Fortson Mill Trailhead at Fortson Mill Road  Darrington Price Street Trailhead 10 Portage Creek Wildlife Area This wildlife conservancy is located in Arlington Bluff at 20802 59th Avenue NE on the property previously owned by Gene Ammon for a peat farm.  Wetland and meadow trail network around and through site  Parking access from 59th Avenue NE on the northeast boundary Total existing multipurpose trail miles 66.2 52 Arlington PRMP Proposed multipurpose trail miles  Extend trail from Centennial Trail east to SR-9 Trail. 2 Airport Trail Extensions 2.6  Extend spurs to connect the Airport Trail to residential neighborhoods and employment centers on 1) 180th Street NE west to J Rudy York Memorial Park – 0.7 miles, 2) 173rd Place NE – 0.5 miles, 3) 43rd Avenue NE – 0.5 miles, 4) 51st Avenue NE, - 0.5 miles and 5) 59th Avenue NE – 0.4 miles.  Add airport observation site along trail 4 Stormwater Park Trail/Dike Road 1.6  Extend the perimeter trail west onto Dike Road north along the Stillaguamish River. 6 River Crest Trail Extension 1.4  Extend the trail west from SR-9 to Portage Creek Wildlife Area along Portage Creek. 7 Zimmerman Hill Extension 0.8  Extend the trail south alongside SR-9 to Pioneer Elementary School and a connection to 188th Street Connector Extension. 11 Riverfront Trail 0.5  Improve and extend trail from Country Charm Park along Stillaguamish River from Alcazar Avenue west under SR-530 to the Centennial Trail and Haller Park. 12 Post Middle School Trail 1.1  Develop trail from Eagle Creek Elementary School through Post Middle School then down the slope to the Stillaguamish River and north to connect with Country Charm Park Trail. 13 Gilman Avenue Trail 0.5  Develop trail from Centennial Trail east along Gilman Avenue to connect with Kruger-Portage Creek Trail at Terrace Park. 14 First Street/Haller Middle Trail 0.4  Develop trail from Centennial Trail at Legion Park east past Haller Middle School to Kruger-Portage Trail on Stillaguamish Avenue. 15 SR-531/172nd Street NE Trail 1.7  16 59th Avenue Trail 1.1  Develop trail from Dike Road south on 59th Road) to Portage Creek Wildlife Area trailhead. 17 Smokey Point Boulevard Trail 1.8  Develop trail from SR-530/Pioneer Highway south on Smokey Point Boulevard to 188th Street (Bjorn Road) then east to Airport Trail at Airport Boulevard. 18 63rd Avenue Trail 2.2  Develop trail from Cemetery Road south on 62nd Drive NE then 63rd Avenue NE extended south across SR-530/172nd Street NE into the employment district. 19 174th Avenue Trail 1.1  Develop trail from 204th Street NE south on 174th Avenue NE to 191st Place NE and 67th Avenue NE. 20 SR-9 Trail 2.8  Develop trail on SR-9 from Centennial Trail south to SR- 531/172nd Street NE. 21 89th Avenue Trail 1.0  Develop trail from SR-9 east to 182nd Street NE then south on 89th Avenue NE to 172nd Street and SR-531. 22 169th Street Trail 1.1  Develop trail from 43rd Avenue NE east on 169th Street NE through the employment district to 63rd Avenue Trail. Total proposed multipurpose trail miles 22.7 Arlington PRMP 53 54 Arlington PRMP Athletic parks Local or neighborhood parks – will be developed with playgrounds, basketball, volleyball, grass play fields, and other facilities that provide pickup games, youth sports, and leagues of interest to neighborhood children and families. These local park improvements will be combined with picnic shelters and tables, trail systems, natural areas, local schools, and other facilities to create an accessible neighborhood park system in Arlington. Local or neighborhood parks will be sited as independent properties or portions of other sites that include trail corridors, resource parks, multi-use indoor centers or other public facilities. Where practical, local or neighborhood playgrounds will be co-located with elementary schools. Where feasible and appropriate, neighborhood parks will be sited on lands that are owned and operated for other public purposes. Local or neighborhood parks will be located at sites serviced by trails and local bicycling routes that are within a 5-10-minute walk convenient to younger age neighborhood youth and families. Local or neighborhood parks will be developed to provide flexible play capabilities - typically providing 1 to 2 dirt or grass rectangular fields with portable goal and backstop stanchions to allow for varied age groups and activities. Community or regional parks – will be developed with competitive athletic court and field facilities to provide the highest quality competitive playing standards and requirements. The competitive regional athletic park complexes will include field activities that satisfy the largest number of organized and older age recreational league participants including skateboard, soccer, football, rugby, lacrosse, softball, and baseball facilities. Regional athletic parks will be developed for older youth and adult league tournaments and other peak competition days, events, and schedules thereby freeing fields located at elementary schools, neighborhood parks, and other local sites for younger age clinics, practices, neighborhood pickup play, and some youth league participant games. Regional recreational parks will be located on sites that can accommodate high traffic volumes, evening lighted field use, noise, and other activities without adversely impacting adjoining land uses. Regional competitive recreational areas will be developed to provide sustained, high-capacity play capabilities typically providing 3 to 5 full-size competition fields at a location. Most sites will be designed to provide high capacity, rectangular field configurations that include turf or all-weather fields with permanent soccer goals and baseball diamond backstops at the field ends with moveable perimeter fencing, spectator seating, and night-lighting systems. When practical and feasible, regional athletic parks will include middle or high school facilities, particularly where the facilities are located with other competition fields or when the facilities can be used for recreational league tournaments or special events. Local and regional athletic parks - will be improved with restrooms, concessions, and parking lots including grass overflow parking areas to accommodate peak events or schedules. Depending on the location, some sites will include tennis, basketball, volleyball courts, and other recreational facilities. Where appropriate, some regionally competitive recreational sites will also be furnished with group picnic shelters and possibly even recreational vehicle overnight campsite services to support tournament events. Vision Local or neighborhood athletic parks with playgrounds, courts, and fields will:  Provide flexible informal activity areas,  Suited to younger age and local neighborhood game activities,  In sites convenient to neighborhood youth and families,  At sites that may co-locate with elementary schools and facilities. Arlington PRMP 55 Regional athletic parks will:  Provide the highest quality competitive play athletic facilities,  Of the highest capacity facility improvement designs,  Within convenient proximity to organized adult and older age recreational league playing populations,  At sites that do not disrupt adjacent land uses,  At sites that may co-locate with schools and/or utilize other major public facilities,  To alleviate overcrowding on smaller, more local park and elementary school fields so local sites can be used for younger age league participant games, practice sessions, and neighborhood pickup games. Playgrounds Under the proposed plan, the city will develop playgrounds and play areas to provide access within a 5-minute walking distance of most residential areas in the city. The proposal will design age- appropriate features for young and older age children. The proposal will upgrade some existing playground equipment to meet ADA requirements, safety concerns, and new activity interests. Existing playgrounds/play areas The following covered and uncovered playground facilities and play areas include some school and HOA facilities may not be available for public use during school hours. Existing playground/play facilities Arlington 9 This community park is located in the MIC Subarea at 18501 59th Avenue.  Children’s playground for ages 5-12 2 Forest Trail Park 1 This neighborhood park is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 18005 Oxford Drive.  Children's play area for ages 5-12 3 Haller Park 1 This community park is located in the Old Town Business District 3 Subarea at 1100 West Avenue.  Playground for ages 2-12  Splash Pad 4 J Rudy York Memorial Park 1 3209 180th Street NE.  Play equipment for ages 2-12 5 Jensen Park 1 This neighborhood park is located in the Kent Prairie Subarea at 7801 Jensen Farm Lane.  Children’s play equipment for ages 2-12 6 Terrace Park 1 This community park is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 809 East Fifth Avenue.  Children's play area for ages 2-12 7 Waldo E Evans Memorial Park 1 Avenue.  Children’s play area - ages 5-12 8 Wedgewood Park 1 This neighborhood park is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 17510 Gleneagle Boulevard.  Children's play area for ages 5-12 9 Woodway Park 1 This neighborhood park is located in the Hilltop Subarea in the Woodway Heights Development at the intersection of 176th Place NE & 74th Drive NE and adjacent to Wedgewood Park.  Small playground equipment Arlington School District 9 This elementary school is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 1216 E 5th Street adjacent to Post Middle School.  Games on asphalt  1 small playground  1 large playground  Covered play shed 56 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 57 11 Kent Prairie Elementary School 2 This elementary school is located in the Kent Prairie Subarea at 8110 - 207th Street NE.  Games on asphalt  2 playgrounds  Covered play shed 12 Pioneer Elementary School 1 This elementary school is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 8213 Eaglefield Drive.  Games on asphalt  Playground 13 Presidents Elementary School 2 Subarea at 505 East 3rd Street.  Games on asphalt  2 playgrounds 14 Haller Middle School 1 at 600 East 1st Street.  Games on asphalt 15 Stillaguamish Valley Learning Center 1 This learning center is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 1215 East 5th Street.  Playground HOA 8 16 Aspen Wood Meadows 1 Place NE.  Playground 17 Crossing at Edgecomb Creek 2 1  Playground 18 Crown Ridge 3 1 Crown Ridge Boulevard under the powerlines.  Playground 19 Gleneagle – Whitehawk Tot Lot 1 This minipark is located in the Hilltop Subarea on Whitehawk Drive.  Playground 20 Heartland 2 These miniparks are located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea north of 46th Drive NE and 45th Avenue NE.  Playground north end of 46th Drive NE  Playground south end of 46th Drive NE 21 Smokey Point Meadows 1 Avenue NE below 176th Place NE.  Playground 22 Sweetwater 1 This minipark is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea on 206th Place NE.  Playground Total existing playgrounds 26 Proposed playground/play facilities  Children’s playground for ages 5-12 designed with natural materials to compliment the park’s attributes. 24 High Clover Park 1  Children's play area for ages 5-12 25 Smokey Point Park 2  Children's playground for ages 2-5  Children’s playground for ages 5-12 Total proposed playgrounds 4 Skateboard/pump tracks Existing skateboard court This special use facility is located in the MIC Subarea at 18501 59th Avenue.  Concrete contoured court with ramps, pipes, and terraces for skateboard and BMX Total existing skateboard court 1 58 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 59 Proposed skate dots and pump tracks Skate dots - single pieces of skateboard equipment such as quarter and half-pipes, rails, stairs, and concrete bowls will be distributed throughout city parks to provide skateboard activity for younger age groups within a convenient distance of residential neighborhood. Proposed skateboard dots Arlington 6  Install skate dot in park activity area  Install skate dot in park activity area 4 J Rudy Memorial Park 1  Install skate dot in park activity area 5 Jensen Park 1  6 Terrace Park 1  Install skate dot in park activity area 7 The Rockery Park 1  Install skate dot in park activity area Total proposed skate dots 6 Proposed pump track A pump track composed of mounds and jumps for manually pumped bicycles may be developed to support this growing recreational activity. Proposed pump track  Install skate dot in park activity area Total proposed pump tracks 1 Sports courts – basketball/volleyball/pickleball Sports or multi-use courts combine basketball, volleyball, pickleball, and tennis as well as a variety of other activities in half (25x50 feet) or full court (up to 50x100 feet) flexible layouts. The city will develop sports courts to provide multiuse basketball, pickleball, volleyball, and other activities within a 5-minute walking distance of most residential areas in the city. The proposal will upgrade some existing basketball courts to increase surface and equipment durability, meet safety concerns and accommodate new activity interests. Existing sports courts The following basketball, pickleball, volleyball, and tennis courts have been developed in the city to support local neighborhood recreational activities. Existing courts 1 Forest Trail Park 1.0 This neighborhood park is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 18005 Oxford Drive.  Sport court 2 J Rudy York Memorial Park 1.0 3209 180th Street NE.  Sport court with basketball hoop 3 Terrace Park 1.0 This community park is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 809 East Fifth Avenue.  Sport court with basketball hoop Arlington School District 12.0 4 Eagle Creek Elementary School 1.0 This elementary school is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 1216 E 5th Street adjacent to Post Middle School.  Covered play shed 5 Kent Prairie Elementary School 2.0 8110 - 207th Street NE.  Covered play shed  Basketball court 6 Haller Middle School 1.0 at 600 East 1st Street.  Basketball court 60 Arlington PRMP Skate dot in Seattle Arlington PRMP 61 Sport court – half-court basketball/pickleball/tennis Sport court – multiple basketball/tennis Rectangular field – soccer/2 baseball fields 62 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 63 7 Arlington High School 8.0 This high school is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 18821 Crown Ridge Blvd.  8 tennis courts HOA 7.0 8 Aspen Wood Meadows 1.0 This minipark is located in the West Arlington Subarea on 186th Place NE.  Sport court - basketball 9 Brickwood 1.0 181st Street NE.  Sport court - basketball 10 Crossing at Edgecomb Creek 1 2.0  2 tennis courts 11 Crown Ridge 3 1.0 Crown Ridge Boulevard under the powerlines.  Sport court - basketball 12 High Clover Division 2 1.0 These open spaces are located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea along High Clover Boulevard from 45th Avenue NE to 48th Avenue NE.  Basketball court 13 Point Riley 1.0 184th Place NE.  Sport court - basketball Total existing sport courts Total existing tennis courts 12 10 Proposed sport courts 14 Bill Quake Memorial Park 1  Install sport court in park activity area 15 High Clover Park 1  16 Jensen Park 1  Install sport court in park activity area 17 Wedgewood Park 1  Install sport court in park activity area Athletic fields – soccer and baseball Soccer fields Rectangular grass fields support regulation (330x360 feet), youth ages 12-13 (300x330 feet), youth ages 10-11 (180x240 feet), youth ages 8-9 (90x150 feet) and youth ages 6-7 (75x120 feet) soccer activities. The larger field areas can be subdivided to support younger age players’ practice and games. For example, a regulation field of 330x360 feet can be subdivided to support 12 age 6-7 fields of 75x120 feet. Consequently, while the fields are counted by regulation size the actual playing capacity of the fields can increase depending on the players age and field requirements. Baseball and softball fields Baseball and softball field dimensions vary considerably by age and league for baseline, infield, pitcher’s mound, and distance to left/right and center field fences. The field-defining dimension, however, is the distance to center field as the infield dimensions can be modified to fit the player’s ages and league for baseball and softball. Center field baseball distances for Pinto and Little League are 200- 250 feet, Bronco 250 feet, Pony 300 feet, and high school and college 350-400 feet. Softball center field distances are proportionately less for youth ages 10 and under are 175 feet, high school 225 feet, college and adult 220-250 feet, and adult slow pitch 315 feet. Baseball/softball fields may be dedicated with fixed skinned infield diamonds and outfield fences or located at the ends of rectangular fields where soccer fields can be overlaid with the grass outfield areas. The following athletic fields have been developed to support various age group leagues in the city. Some of the listed school facilities may not be suitable or available for public competitive game play during school or school team use. 64 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 65 Existing athletic fields This community park is located in the MIC Subarea at 18501 59th Avenue.  2 grass lighted Little League field with turf infields  1 grass Little League field  1 multipurpose soccer field 2 Waldo E Evans Memorial Park 1 Avenue.  1 grass lighted 300-foot baseball field Marysville 3 This community park is located at 6100 152nd Avenue Street NE southeast of Arlington city limits.  3 lighted soccer fields  Additional athletic fields proposed Marysville School District 4 4 Soccer Complex 4 This school property is located at 152nd Street NE and 51st Avenue NE south of Arlington city limits.  Small rectangular grass field divided into 2 junior soccer  Large rectangular grass field divided into 2 full size or multiple smaller size soccer Snohomish County 9 5 Twin Rivers Park 9 This regional park is located north across the Stillaguamish River from Arlington at 8003 SR-530 NE near the confluence of the North and South Forks of the Stillaguamish River.  3 grass unlighted 250-foot softball fields  Multipurpose grass unlighted field – 6 soccer fields Arlington School District 20 6 Eagle Creek Elementary School 2 This elementary school is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 1216 E 5th Street adjacent to Post Middle School.  Grass baseball field with backstop  Grass soccer field with standards 7 Kent Prairie Elementary School 1 This elementary school is located in the Kent Prairie Subarea at 8110 - 207th Street NE.  Grass baseball field with backstop 8 Pioneer Elementary School 3 This elementary school is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 8213 Eaglefield Drive.  Rectangular grass soccer field with 2 baseball diamonds with backstops and bleachers at the corners 9 Presidents Elementary School 2 This elementary school is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 505 East 3rd Street.  Rectangular grass soccer field with baseball backstop in corner 10 Haller Middle School 3 at 600 East 1st Street.  Rectangular grass soccer field with 2 baseball diamonds with backstops and bleachers in the corners 11 Post Middle School 2 at 1220 East 5th Street.  Grass baseball field with backstop  Grass multiuse soccer field with standards 12 Arlington High School 6 This high school is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 18821 Crown Ridge Blvd.  2 rectangular grass soccer fields  2 batting cages  1 grass 200-foot softball field with backstops and bleachers  1 grass 200-foot baseball field with backstops and bleachers  1 grass 250-foot baseball field with backstop and bleachers  1 grass 300-foot baseball field with backstop and bleachers 13 This alternative school is located in the MIC Subarea at 4407 - 172nd Street NE.  Rectangular grass soccer field Total existing youth soccer 75-180x120-240-foot Total existing competition soccer 300-330x360-foot Total existing youth baseball/softball 200-250-foot Total competition baseball 300-foot 7 15 17 2 66 Arlington PRMP Proposed athletic fields Arlington 15-19 3 Country Charm Park 15-19 This community park is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 604 East Gilman Street.  Multipurpose rectangular fields with baseball diamonds in corners Total proposed youth soccer 75-180x120-240-foot Total proposed competition soccer 300-330x360-foot Total proposed youth baseball/softball 200-250-foot Total proposed competition baseball 300-foot 6-10 3 6 0 Arlington PRMP 67 Community facilities Community centers provide indoor activities on a year-round basis centrally accessible to residents for day and evening use. The facilities may be developed within a market-oriented service concept that protects the specialized investments that have already been made in these facilities by school districts and private organizations. Community centers may not be developed where the using population will not be of sufficient size to realistically support an independent facility. In these circumstances, an existing center may be expanded within the next closest or supportable service area to provide facility requirements and programs. Indoor community or recreation facilities may provide space for swimming pools (including outdoor facilities), gymnasiums, physical conditioning, arts and crafts, class and instruction rooms, meeting facilities, kitchens and dining, daycare and latch key, teen and senior center, and special population resource activities. Community centers may also incorporate historic museums, interpretive nature exhibits, and other buildings or constructions. Independent community center buildings and sites may be developed to provide space and services for teen, adult, or senior center activities that occur during or conflict with school activities and sites. These facilities may provide space and services that are not suitably provided at school sites or that may not be duplicated by school facilities and programs. When community and recreation centers are developed independent of school facilities, the buildings may be independent properties or portions of other sites that include trail corridors, resource activities, athletic or other public facilities such as civic centers and libraries. Vision As described, the community and recreation center vision will:  Provide a variety of indoor activities,  Within a convenient proximity to using populations,  Within a facility and services concept that recognizes and supports the investments that have already made in existing city, county, and school facilities and programs, and  In cooperative ventures with other interested and participating public and private agencies. Assembly and meeting facilities Meeting facilities including conference rooms, classrooms, assembly rooms, and theaters support a variety of functions including nutrition and health programs, education classes, music and drama instruction, public presentations, and performances for youth, teens, seniors, adults, and other community members. The facilities may be dedicated spaces, as in theaters, or flexible and divisible spaces that can be subdivided for a variety of activities. The facilities may include kitchens or catering areas, dressing rooms, or audio/visual supporting equipment in multipurpose or independent buildings and ownerships. The inventory does not include school classrooms and assembly halls that may also be used for meeting activities after hours or after other school hosted events. Existing performance facilities Arlington School District 22,444 This nonprofit facility is part of the Arlington School District and is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 18821 Crown Ridge Blvd adjoining Arlington High School.  Proscenium opening 40 feet wide, and 17 feet, 7 inches high  Stage depth is 34 feet and width 80 feet  Orchestra pit is 7 feet from the front edge to apron edge  Rigging includes 27 single pipe battens, 4 double, 2 side curtain tabs, 6 side light ladders, and 3 overhead shells  Video projection screen is 15 feet, 8 inches  Dressing rooms for men and women  Greenroom area Total existing performance facility square footage 22,444 68 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 69 Existing meeting facilities This public facility is located in the Old Town Business District 1 Subarea on a 0.18-acre lot at 238 N Olympic Avenue adjoining the Police Station located at 110 East 3rd Street.  Council Chambers/public meeting room located in Police Station off public outside courtyard access 2 Public Works 600 Subarea on a 3.90-acre site at 154 West Cox Avenue across from Haller Park.  Stillaguamish Room – conference room available for public use Nonprofit 1,500 3 Arlington Boys & Girls Club 10,000 This nonprofit facility is located in the MIC Subarea at 18513 59th Avenue NE in Bill Quake Memorial Park.  Class and meeting rooms  Social activity areas  Teen Center 4 Stilly Valley Center 8,000 This nonprofit senior center is located in the West Arlington Subarea at 18308 Smokey Point Boulevard.  Main hall, side rooms, arts and crafts, conference, and commercial kitchen rentals for maximum 250 seating capacity 5 Stilly Valley Health Connections 2,000 This regional hospital facility (Public Hospital #District 3) is located in the West Arlington Subarea at 3405 173rd Place NE.  Birch Room  Classroom and meeting areas Private 600 6 Gleneagle Golf Course 600 Country Club Lane.  Family restaurant bar and grill with meeting room Total existing meeting facility square footage 3,600 Gymnasiums Indoor basketball courts vary in dimensions depending on the players age and league play where college courts are 50x94 feet, high school 50x84 feet, and middle school 42x74 feet not including team benches, referee and game clock tables, bleachers, lockers, showers, and restrooms. Gymnasium sizes can increase the overall interior size from 6,000 square feet or less in elementary schools to 8,400 to 14,100 square feet in middle and high schools depending on locker and shower accommodations. Middle school and older ages play on hardwood floors while elementary school students may play on a variety of surfaces in multipurpose assembly rooms or in middle or high school gymnasiums in subdivided courts with lowered backboards. Full size basketball courts can be subdivided to provide backboards along the sidelines to support 4 half courts for practice or for younger age groups including elementary school games. The courts can also be subdivided to support 1-2 volleyball (30x60 feet) or 4 badminton courts (20x44 feet). Existing gymnasiums Arlington School District 54,900 1 Eagle Creek Elementary School 6,000 Subarea at 1216 E 5th Street adjacent to Post Middle School.  Multipurpose hall 2 Kent Prairie Elementary School 6,000 This elementary school is located in the Kent Prairie Subarea at 8110 - 207th Street NE.  Multipurpose hall 3 Pioneer Elementary School 6,000 This elementary school is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 8213 Eaglefield Drive.  Multipurpose hall 4 Presidents Elementary School 6,000 Subarea at 505 East 3rd Street.  Multipurpose hall 5 Haller Middle School 8,400 This middle school is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 600 East 1st Street.  Gymnasium 70 Arlington PRMP 6 Post Middle School 8,400 This middle school is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 1220 East 5th Street.  Gymnasium 7 Arlington High School 14,100 This high school is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 18821 Crown Ridge Blvd.  2 gymnasiums Nonprofit 16,800 8 Arlington Boys & Girls Club 16,800 Avenue NE in Bill Quake Memorial Park.  Gymnasium with basketball court Total existing gymnasium square footage 71,700 Aquatic facilities An Olympic sized swimming pool is 164 feet or 50 meters long, at least 8-10 lanes 8 feet 2inches or 2.5 meters wide, and 6 feet 7 inches or 2.0 meters to 9 feet 10 inches or 3.0 meters deep. In addition, they are usually at least 2 meters deep and hold at least 500,000 gallons of water although they can hold up to an average of 660,000 gallons as well. If touch panels are used in competition, then the distance between touch panels should be either 25 or 50 meters to qualify for FINA recognition. This means that Olympic pools are generally oversized, to accommodate touch panels used in competition. The official dimensions of an Olympic swimming pool are defined by FINA, the international governing body for the sport of swimming. This version of the Olympic-sized swimming pool debuted in the 2008 Beijing Summer Olympics. Beforehand, the Summer Olympics featured a traditional 8-lane course with a depth of 7 feet, now the minimum depth requirement. The new Olympic-sized swimming pool increased the lane count from 8 to 10 to give swimmers a "buffer lane", helping to absorb waves generated by the swimmers' movements, allowing for less resistance against the swimmers. Increasing the depth of the pool gives swimmers another advantage, as the added depth assists the lane lines in dissipating water churn from the swimmers, creating less hydrodynamic drag. Professional lap pools have a length of about 82 feet or 25 meters. Apart from the gym, 40-foot-long pools are considered lap pools as well. Widths may vary from 15 to 20 feet depending on the number of lanes. Playground variations of aquatic facilities include splash pads where surface water features are designed for children to play. Existing splash pads This community park is located in the Old Town Business District 3 Subarea at 1100 West Avenue.  Splash Pad  Concessions  Restrooms Total existing splash pads 1 Existing swimming pools This 27,176 square foot private facility is located in the MIC Subarea at 4417 172nd St NE on city leased land.  Lap pool, hot tub, and dry sauna Total existing swimming pools 1 Arlington PRMP 71 Special use facilities Special use facilities may be acquired or developed to provide activities or events for the general population on a limited or special occasion and/or for special interest populations at appropriate sites throughout Arlington. Special use facilities may include plazas and streetscapes, arts centers, historical museums, and similar special interest services. Special use facilities may be independent properties or portions of other sites that include trail corridors, resource park activities, recreational areas or facilities, community facilities or centers or other public facilities. Special use facilities may be sited on other publicly owned lands or under lease agreements with private landowners or organizations or on purchased properties. Special events and landmarks Special event spaces and urban accents provide small and large gathering places for everyday as well as special festivals, art and farmers’ markets, and other activities. The spaces may be designed for small informal family or neighborhood gatherings, or larger for community-wide or even regional events. Improvements may be carried out entirely within the park site or be designed and managed to spill over onto adjacent streets and public facility parking lots. Existing special event spaces This neighborhood park is located in the Old Town Residential and Old Town Business District 2 Subarea at 200 block of Division Street.  Concrete walking path  Water fountain artwork depicting the Stillaguamish River and Valley 2 Lebanon Park 1 District 1 Subarea at 105 Lebanon Avenue.  3 Legion Park 1 Subarea at 114 North Olympic Avenue. The park is located in the center of downtown and the site for many of Arlington's events. The park is decorated for the winter holidays.  Public artworks  Veteran’s Memorial  Gazebo and stage  Visitor Information Center 4 Stormwater Wetland Park 1 Subarea at 1100 West Avenue.  Covered shelter suitable for picnics and special events 5 Terrace Park 1 This community park is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 809 East Fifth Avenue.  Amphitheater and stage Total existing special event spaces 5 Proposed special event spaces 6 Country Charm Park 1 This community park is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 604 East Gilman Street.  Develop large open fields suitable for major events 7 Smokey Point Park 1 Boulevard and 178th Place NE in the West Arlington Subarea.  Entry plaza with water fountains with shade trellis and seat walls  Gazebo/performance stage facing grass lawn  2 playgrounds for age 2-5 and 5-12  Synthetic turf play mounds  Concession and restrooms  31 on-street and 2 handicap stalls on 178th Place NE  6 off-street parking and 3 handicap stalls 72 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP 73 8 Food Truck Court 1 This proposed gathering place will be located in the MIC Subarea.  8-12 mobile food trucks  2,500 square foot event kitchen  30+ outdoor dining spaces  Precast concrete restroom facility  Playground area with aviation related play structures Total proposed special event spaces 3 Community gardens A community garden is a single piece of land gardened collectively by a group of people. Community gardens utilize individual or shared plots to produce vegetables, fruits, flowers, or other plants for the enjoyment of the gardeners including the option of selling the products at farmers’ and other markets. Community gardens increase the availability of nutritious foods, strengthen community ties, reduce environmental hazards, reduce food miles, and create a more sustainable system. Community gardens are part of the sharing economy making it possible for many people to enjoy a resource – in this case, land for gardening – that they could not afford on their own. Community gardens provide individual rentable garden plots typically 10x20-40 feet with compost bins, a shed for storing tools, irrigation hookups, a common gathering area sometimes covered with benches or picnic tables, and a perimeter fence to control wildlife. Existing community garden Arlington 1 The 0.5-acre community garden is located on Presidents Elementary School in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 505 East 3rd Street. The garden is located on school grounds and managed by the city.  41 6x18-foot plots  11 6x6-foot plots  2 potting or work benches   Trellis vegetable sales area Total existing community gardens 1 Proposed community garden Arlington 2 2 High Clover Park 1 This neighborhood park is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea at Cemetery Road and High Clover Boulevard NE.  Install pea path garden plots and supporting improvements 3 Country Charm Park 1 Subarea at 604 East Gilman Street.  Install larger garden plots and supporting improvements Total proposed community gardens 2 Dog parks A dog park is a park for small and large dogs to exercise and play off-leash in a controlled environment for small versus large dogs under the supervision of the owners. Dog parks have varying features, although they typically provide a 4 to 6-foot high fence, separate double-gated entry and exit points, sand or gravel or grass surface for adequate drainage and waste control, benches for humans, shade for hot days, parking, water, pooper-scooper to pick up and dispose of animal waste, and regular grounds maintenance and cleaning. Dog parks may also offer wheelchair access, a pond for swimming, and a variety of exercise equipment for small or large dogs. A public dog park is typically a 0.5-1.0-acre fenced outdoor area where people and small or large dogs can play together. Similarly, a dog run is a smaller fenced area, created for the same use, which is often located within an existing park. Unless well-lit, most public dog parks are open from dawn until dusk. Some public dog parks have vaccination requirements but are not typically staffed or enforced unless there is an incident that is reported to animal control. 74 Arlington PRMP Third Street Community Garden Arlington PRMP 75 Existing dog parks This 0.3-acre dog park is located in the Old Town Business District 3 Subarea at 1100 West Avenue.  Upgrade fenced area with separation for small and large dogs  Install water fountain, exercise equipment amenities for dogs  Install benches, covered seating area, water fountain, pooper- scooper for dog owners Marysville 1 2 Strawberry Fields Athletic Complex 1 southeast of Arlington city limits.  Fended area for small and large dog exercise Total existing dog parks 2 Proposed dog parks Arlington 1 1 Country Charm Park 1 This community park is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 604 East Gilman Street.  Designate open field for limited off-leash exercise area  Install fenced areas with separation for small and large dogs  Install splash pond, water fountain, exercise equipment amenities for dogs  Install benches, covered seating area, water fountain, pooper- scooper for dog owners Total proposed dog parks 1 Museums Museums collect, house, and exhibit artworks, manuscripts, photos, clothes, tools, equipment, vehicles, and other artifacts to illustrate, interpret, and educate the public about the history and culture of a place, town, city, or region. Museums may conserve and exhibit in or on the site of historic buildings or landmarks or in structures specifically built to collect, house, exhibit, and interpret artifacts. Existing museums Museum This nonprofit facility is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea at 20722 67th Ave NE. The complex includes a 6.72-acre site with wetlands and 4 buildings including:  Welcome Center pole building with carved totems of 783 sf  Old Pioneer Hall of 3,060 sf  3-story museum of 15,300 sf  Storage building of 4,500 Total existing museum square footage 23,643 Golf courses Golf is a club-and-ball sport in which players use various clubs to hit balls into a series of holes on a course in as few strokes as possible. Golf, unlike most ball games, cannot and does not utilize a standardized playing area, and coping with the varied terrains encountered on different courses is a key part of the game. The game at the usual level is played on a course with an arranged progression of 18 holes, though recreational courses can be smaller, often having 9 holes. Each hole on the course must contain a teeing ground to start from, and a putting green containing the actual hole or cup 4 inches in diameter. There are other standard forms of terrain in between, such as the fairway, rough, bunkers, and various hazards but each hole on a course is unique in its specific layout and arrangement. Golf courses may be improved with a variety of facilities including practice putting greens, driving ranges, pitch-n-put short golf courses, equipment stores, lockers and showers, restaurants, banquet rooms, and member lodges. 76 Arlington PRMP Existing golf courses holes This 138.2-acre private facility is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 7619 Country Club Lane. Gleneagle Golf Course was developed and opened in 1993.  18-hole, par 70, 6,150 yards with 5 tees per hold  Driving range  Pitching/chipping area  Putting green  Pro shop  Family restaurant bar and grill Total existing golf course holes 18 Support facilities Support facilities include maintenance yards, plant nurseries, and administrative activities necessary to support park, recreation, and open space programs and facilities. Support facilities may be independent properties or portions of other sites that include other administrative offices, maintenance yards and shops, as well as trail corridors, resource activities, athletic facilities, indoor recreation centers or other park and recreation facilities. Vision As described, the support facilities vision will:  Provide facilities necessary to service park, recreation, and open space programs and activities for the general population,  In a manner that is functional and cost effective. Administration offices/yard Existing facilities square footage 1 City Maintenance Shops & Offices 13,148 This public facility is located in the MIC Subarea off 188th Street NE and 63rd Avenue NE.  Shop/office building 1 – 6,840 sf  Storage building 2 – 1,104 sf  Equipment storage shed 3 – 2,832 sf  Storage building 4 – 2,372 sf Total existing facilities square footage 13,148 Arlington PRMP 77 Chapter 6: Park plan exhibits The following is an inventory of every public park, recreation, open space, and trail property within or adjacent to Arlington. Arlington Parks Bill Quake Memorial Park 78 High Clover Park 83 Stormwater Wetland Park 88 Waldo E Evans Memorial Park 90 Marysville Parks Strawberry Fields Athletic Complex 92 Marysville School District Soccer Complex 93 Snohomish County Parks Centennial Trail Park 94 Gissberg Twin Lakes 95 Twin Rivers Park 97 Whitehorse Trail 100 Nonprofit Arlington Boys & Girls Club 101 78 Arlington PRMP City of Arlington Bill Quake Memorial Park This 13.0-acre community park is located in the MIC Subarea at 18501 59th Avenue. Waldo E Evans Memorial Park (1) is located north across 59th Avenue and the Arlington Boys & Girls Club (2) is located in the south end of the Park under a lease agreement with the city beginning in 1992. Existing improvements:  Picnic tables  Children’s playground for ages 5-12  Skatepark with concrete bowl and full pipe  2 grass lighted fenced fields maintained by Little League  1 grass 250-foot baseball fields  1 small multipurpose soccer field  Restrooms  Off-street parking Potential improvements:  Playground upgraded for ADA  Athletic field lights upgraded  Athletic field grass replaced with synthetic turf  Sport court adjacent to skatepark  Skate dots for younger age users  Upgrade restrooms  2 1 Arlington PRMP 79 City of Arlington Centennial Park This 1.0-acre neighborhood park is located in the Old Town Residential and Old Town Business District 2 Subareas at the 200 block of Division Street. The Park was built in 1989 to celebrate Washington State's Centennial. The fountain was designed to depict the Stillaguamish River and valley. The Park features a tile wall designed by local school children. The Park is incorporated into the streetscape median (1) on East Division Street which adjoins the city’s portion of the Centennial Trail (2) at the intersection of East Division Street and West Avenue, and The Rockery (3) a landscape feature adjacent to the trail. Existing improvements:  Concrete walking path  Water fountain artwork depicting the Stillaguamish River and Valley  On-street parking Potential improvements  Sidewalk replacement 3 2 1 80 Arlington PRMP City of Arlington Country Charm Park This 89.0-acre community park is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 604 East Gilman Street along the Stillaguamish River. The property was a former dairy farm now harvested for hay by tenant farmers. The Park adjoins the Post Middle School open space to the south (1). Existing improvements:  Riparian habitat along South Fork Stillaguamish River  Extensive woodlands along river and south site  Extensive dirt trails along river and looped in the south portion  Large open fields suitable for major events  Storm retention pond for housing on Gilman Street  Underground natural gas pipeline through center of site Potential improvements  Master development plan  Shoreline access  Community garden with large plots  Perimeter hiking trails along Stillaguamish River and internal wetland features and through Post Middle School open space  Dog park and trails  Improved access road with parking  Group picnic facilities  Playground furnished with natural materials  Sport court – sand volleyball  Athletic fields – rectangular multiuse  Open field activity area for major events and festivals  Seasonal campground  Restrooms  Trail and park directories 1 Arlington PRMP 81 City of Arlington Forest Trail Park This 2.0-acre neighborhood park is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 18005 Oxford Drive. The Park adjoins the water tower (1) and Gleneagle Golf Course (2). Existing improvements:  Woodlands  Asphalt trail through park  Benches  Picnic tables  Children's play area for ages 5-12  Sport court  Drinking fountain  Off street parking Potential improvements  Playground upgraded for ADA 1 2 82 Arlington PRMP City of Arlington Haller Park This 3.0-acre community park is located in the Old Town Business District 3 Subarea at 1100 West Avenue. The Park hosts the 4th of July Festival. The Park adjoins the city (1) and county (2) portions of the Centennial Trail with access to Stormwater Wetland Park (3). Existing improvements  Beach access to the Stillaguamish River  Access to the Centennial and Whitehorse Trails  Boat launch adjacent to SR-9 bridge  Benches  Picnic tables  Picnic shelter  Playground for ages 2-12  Splash Pad  Concessions  Restrooms  Off street parking  Wellheads and buildings in north portion of site Potential improvements  Shade trees and shelters  Boat launch reconstruction for low water marks  Outdoor stage or performance area  Paved parking lot  Sidewalk replacement in north section 3 2 1 Arlington PRMP 83 City of Arlington High Clover Park This 2.0-acre neighborhood park is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea at Cemetery Road and High Clover Boulevard NE. The Park adjoins High Clover HOA open spaces (1) and the Snohomish County’s Portage Creek Wildlife Area (2) Existing improvements  Open grass area Potential improvements  Community garden  Group picnic facilities  Inclusive playground  Sport court  Skate dot  Restrooms  Off-street parking 2 1 1 84 Arlington PRMP ` City of Arlington J Rudy York Memorial Park This 2.0-acre neighborhood park is located in the West Arlington Subarea at 3209 180th Street NE. The Park adjoins Brickwood HOA minipark (1) that includes neighborhood trail access to Smokey Point Boulevard and a sport court for basketball. Existing improvements  Paths  Picnic tables  Play equipment for ages 2-12  Sport court with basketball hoop  Off-street parking Potential improvements  Playground upgrade for ADA  Sport court upgrade  Skate dot 1 Arlington PRMP 85 City of Arlington Jensen Park This 2.0-acre neighborhood park is located in the Kent Prairie Subarea at 7801 Jensen Farm Lane. The Park adjoins the city’s Kruger-Portage Creek Trail (1) along Portage Creek. Existing improvements  Large open grass play area  Picnic tables  Picnic shelter  Children’s play equipment for ages 2-12  Off and on street parking Proposed improvements  Undeveloped residential lot acquired on southeast corner (2)  Perimeter trail developed  Exercise equipment installed along path  Sport court  Skate dot  Pump track  Parking lot expanded  Restrooms 1 86 Arlington PRMP City of Arlington Lebanon Park This 0.5-acre neighborhood park is located in the Old Town Business District 1 Subarea on East Maple Street. The Park adjoins the city’s portion of the Centennial Trail (1), Legion Park (2), and BNSF Railroad tracks (3). Existing improvements  Access to Centennial Trail  Benches  Labyrinth artwork  Off street parking Potential improvements None proposed 2 3 1 Arlington PRMP 87 City of Arlington Legion Park This 1-acre community park is located in the Old Town Business District 1 Subarea at 114 North Olympic Avenue. The Park is located in the center of downtown next to the city’s portion of the Centennial Trail (1), Lebanon Park (2), the city’s Police Station and City Hall complex (3), and BNSF Railroad tracks (4). The Park is the host for many of Arlington's events and is decorated for the winter holidays. Existing improvements  Public artworks  Veteran’s Memorial  Benches  Picnic tables  Gazebo and stage  Visitor Information Center  Restrooms  Off and on street parking Potential improvements None proposed 3 2 1 4 88 Arlington PRMP City of Arlington Stormwater Wetlands Park This 10.0-acre community park is located in the Old Town Business District 3 Subarea at 1100 West Avenue. Access is provided from West Cox Street through Haller Park (1) under the SR-9 bridge and from SR-530 via Dike Road. Existing improvements  Riparian habitat along the Stillaguamish River  Wetland ponds and wildlife habitat  Trails through site and around ponds  4 picnic tables  Covered shelter suitable for picnics and special events  Fenced area used for dogs Potential improvements  Master plan developed  Group picnic facility installed in covered shelter  Improve fenced area for social dog park activities with dog owner shelter, water, and seating amenities  Residential building renovated for rental events and/or caretaker  Park and trail directories  Off-street parking lot from Dike Road 1 Arlington PRMP 89 City of Arlington Terrace Park This 4.0-acre community park is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 809 East Fifth Avenue. The Park was planted with evergreen trees in 1925. A natural amphitheater was created in the back of the park to host live performances and movies. Existing improvements  Woodlands – Douglas Fir planted in 1925  Asphalt path  Amphitheater and stage – 200-300 seating capacity  Benches  Picnic tables  Picnic shelter  Children's play area for ages 2-12  Sport court with basketball hoop  Restrooms – themed with birds and owls Potential improvements  Amphitheater terrace stabilized  Amphitheater lighting and sound upgraded  Asphalt paths repaved with tree root removal  Playground update for inclusiveness and ADA  Sport court improved for multiuse  Skate dot  Restroom upgrade  Park and trail directory  Electric lines undergrounded 90 Arlington PRMP City of Arlington Waldo E Evans Memorial Park This 6.0-acre community park is located in the MIC Subarea at 18813 59th Avenue. Bill Quake Memorial Park (1) and the Arlington Boys & Girls Club (2) are located south across 188th Street NE from the Park. Existing improvements  Benches  Picnic table  Children’s play area - ages 5-12  1 grass lighted fenced 300-foot baseball field  Restrooms  Off-street parking Potential improvements  Playground updated for ADA  Athletic field lights upgraded  Grass surface replaced with synthetic turf 2 Arlington PRMP 91 City of Arlington Wedgewood and Woodway Parks The 2.0-acre Wedgewood Park (1) is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 17510 Gleneagle Boulevard adjoining the 0.5-acre Woodway Park accessed from 176th Place NE and 74th Drive NE (2). The Parks adjoint the Gleneagle Division Phase 1 HOA open space (3).  Woodlands  Benches  Picnic tables  Children's play area for ages 5-12  Off street parking Potential improvements  Playground upgraded for ADA  Trail connection between the 2 park sites  Sport court 1 2 3 3 92 Arlington PRMP City of Marysville Strawberry Fields Athletic Complex This 72.0-acre community park is located at 6100 152nd Avenue Street NE southeast of Arlington city limits. Existing improvements  Quilceda Creek riparian habitat  Walking trails  Picnic areas  Picnic shelter  3 lighted soccer fields  Restrooms Proposed improvements  Additional athletic fields under consideration Arlington PRMP 93 Marysville School District Soccer Complex This school property is located at 152nd Street NE and 51st Avenue NE south of Arlington city limits. Existing improvements  Small rectangular grass field divided into 2 junior soccer  Large rectangular grass field divided into 2 full size or multiple smaller size soccer 94 Arlington PRMP Snohomish County Centennial Trail Park – Armar Road This 8.3-acre trailhead park is located along the Centennial Trail (1) at 15333 67th Avenue NE across from and provides access to the county’s North County Wildlife Area Park (2). Existing improvements  Scrub woodland  Paved access to Centennial Trail  Bench  2 picnic tables  19 parking spaces including 1 ADA  Sani-can 2 1 Arlington PRMP 95 Snohomish County Gissberg Twin Lakes Park This 54.0-acre regional park is located at 16324 Twin Lake Road at the southwest Arlington city limits. The Park was created from two gravel pits excavated for the construction of I-5. The Park includes the North Lake stocked by local fishing clubs and the South Lake stocked with rainbow trout by the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife. Existing improvements  Walking track  Fishing sites on North Lake (age 14 years and under)  Fishing sites on South Lake (age 15 years and up)  Wading area (no lifeguards)  Paddling  Hand carry boating  Model boat racing  Picnic tables  Restrooms/Sani-cans 96 Arlington PRMP Snohomish County River Meadows Park This 144.6-acre regional park is located at 20416 Jordan Road on the Stillaguamish River east of Arlington UGA. The Park was created by the Tveit and Hovde family homesteads established in the 1800s. Each August the Park hosts the Stillaguamish Tribe’s Festival of the River and Pow Wow. Existing improvements  Open meadows and woodlands available for rental for large gatherings  Fishing sites along the river  1.6-miles of walking trails throughout the park  6 rental 16 and 20-foot yurts (1 ADA accessible) with heat, electricity, and fire pits  14 rental campsites with water and firepits  Picnic tables  3 picnic shelters with water and electricity Arlington PRMP 97 Snohomish County Twin Rivers Park This 50.0-acre regional park is located north across the Stillaguamish River from Arlington at 8003 SR-530 NE near the confluence of the North and South Forks of the Stillaguamish River. The County contracted Arlington to maintain and operate the park until 2019 when Arlington transferred maintenance and operations back to County. The Park is across the Stillaguamish River from the city’s Country Charm Park (1), Haller Park (2), Stormwater Wetland Park (3), the city (4) and county (5) portions of the Centennial Trail, and county Whitehorse Trail (6). Existing improvements  Woodlands and riparian habitat along the river  Open meadows and fields  Picnic tables  Disc golf course sponsored by Arlington Rotary  3 grass unlighted 250-foot softball fields  Multipurpose grass unlighted field – 6 soccer field capacity  Soccer fields  Restrooms and Sani-cans Potential improvements  Group picnic shelters  Playground ADA for all ages 6 4 3 2 1 5 98 Arlington PRMP Snohomish County Portage Creek Wildlife Area This 187.4-acre wildlife conservancy is located in Arlington Bluff at 20802 59th Avenue NE on the property previously owned by Gene Ammon for a peat farm. Ammon restored the wetlands in the peat- mined areas and enhanced the extensive field and wetland habitat for deer, hawks, beaver, raccoons, mink, amphibians, and other small animals and waterfowl. He referred to the site as Amen’s Wildlife Sanctuary and hosted the public until 1995 when the County acquired the property with Conservation Futures funds. The County acquired an adjacent 137.0-acre dairy farm on the north boundary for additional conservancy. The Area adjoins the city’s Portage Creek Wildlife Area Access (1), the Bluff at Arlington Condo HOA (2), an undesignated open space along the county portion of Cemetery Road (3), High Clover Division 2 HOA (4), close to the city’s High Clover Park (5), and across Cemetery Road from the city’s Airport Trail trailhead (6). Existing improvements  My and Portage Creeks riparian habitat  Wetland and meadow trail network around and through site  Interpretive shelter  Picnic tables  Portable restrooms  Parking access from 59th Avenue NE on the northeast boundary  Parking access from Cemetery Road – closed for security 5 4 3 1 1 2 6 Arlington PRMP 99 Arlington & Snohomish County Centennial Trail This 30.0-mile regional hiking, biking, and horse trail is located on the former Burlington Northern & Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad track corridor between Snohomish and Skagit County line. Trail construction began during Washington State’s Centennial and was so named accordingly. The 1890’s Machias Station railroad depot was replicated and serves as a trailhead and rental facility in Machias. Existing improvements  10-foot-wide multipurpose paved trail suitable for skating, skateboarding/longboarding  6-foot-wide natural surface parallel horse trail in most areas  Converted trail/railroad bridge over the Stillaguamish River  Picnic tables and benches  Picnic shelters at Machias Trailhead  Restrooms Trailheads at:  CT North Trailhead at 32328 SR-9 Nakashima Barn in Arlington  Bryant Trailhead at SR-9 and Stanwood Bryant Road in Arlington  Haller Park Trailhead at 1100 West Avenue in Arlington  Legion Park Trailhead at 114 North Olympic Avenue in Arlington  Armar Road Trailhead at 15333 67th Avenue NE in Arlington  Getchell Trailhead at 8318 Westlund Road in Arlington  Lake Cassidy Trailhead at 6216 105th Avenue NE in Lake Stevens  Rhododendron Trailhead at 10911 54th Place NE in Lake Stevens  SR-92 Overpass Trailhead at 3651 127th Avenue NE in Lake Stevens  20th Street Trailhead at 13205 20th Street in Lake Stevens  Machias Park Trailhead at 1624 Virginia Street in Snohomish  Pilchuck Trailhead at 5801 South Machias Road in Snohomish 100 Arlington PRMP Snohomish County Whitehorse Trail This 27.0-mile regional hiking, biking, and horse trail is located on the former Burlington Northern & Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad track corridor between Arlington and Darrington through the Stillaguamish River Valley. The trail originates with a junction with the Centennial Regional Trail in Arlington then parallels SR-530 and the North Fork Stillaguamish River through the backcountry corridor. Current closures between the Centennial Trail and Trafton Trailhead, and 435th Avenue NE near Darrington due to landslides and river washouts. Trailheads  Trafton Trailhead Park at 115th Avenue NE near the red barn and blue silo  Miller Shingle Trailhead at 21021 SR-530 with equestrian parking  C-Post Road Trailhead at 29415 SR-530  Hazel Hole Trailhead at Mile Post 38.8 SR-530  Fortson Mill Trailhead at Fortson Mill Road  Darrington Price Street Trailhead Arlington PRMP 101 Nonprofit Arlington Boys & Girls Club This 28,286 square foot nonprofit facility is located in the MIC Subarea at 18513 59th Avenue NE in Bill Quake Memorial Park (1). The club facility was developed with a long lease agreement with the city in 1992. The club operates an extension site at Presidents Elementary School. The club provides a large variety of games, activities, educational programs, and sports throughout the year for kids in K-12th grade. Existing improvements  Class and meeting rooms  Social activity areas  2 gymnasiums with basketball courts  1 grass baseball field 1 Arlington PRMP | 102 Chapter 7: Implementation Following is a summary description of the major tasks determined to be necessary to effectively implement the Arlington Park & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP). The tasks represent the general priorities established by workshops, open houses, the survey of residents, and the survey of registered voters. As shown, a number of parties may be responsible for the leadership and management, participation, and supporting aspects of each action – as described in the following summaries. The tasks are grouped according to subject matter and not priority. Adopt plan Task 1: Adopt Arlington PRMP as GMA element Arlington City Council will by ordinance adopt the Arlington PRMP as a stand-alone planning document for compliance with the Washington State Recreation & Conservation Office (RCO) and as a complementary document of Arlington’s Comprehensive Plan in accordance with Growth Management Act (GMA) provisions. Participants – Arlington City Council with the assistance of the Arlington Planning Commission, and other stakeholders. Action Make Arlington PRMP available on the Arlington website – and distribute copies to appropriate public agencies and interested public and private parties in accordance with GMA adoption provisions. Arlington Planning Commission reviews Arlington PRMP – as necessary as part of Arlington annual comprehensive plan update and provides for public hearing in conformance with GMA. Arlington adopts Arlington PRMP – as a component of the Arlington Comprehensive Plan. Arlington adopts the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) integrating the PRMP – as an element of the Arlington comprehensive plan, thereby implementing the CIP in accordance with GMA provisions. Adopt program finance strategies Task 2: Expand clearinghouse function Arlington will continue development and operation of its website which provides recreation program offerings that include a wide variety of activities accommodating the interests of city residents regardless of age, skill level, income – or program provider. The Arlington website will provide information related to recreation program activities providing health, education, social, recreational, and other welfare activities for youth, teens, adults, seniors, and special populations. The website will also provide other park provider information pertinent to the community as resources allow. Depending on budget considerations, Arlington staff or contractors may conduct park and recreational programs. However, depending on demand, cost, and feasibility, and when practical and consistent with Arlington’s mission statements, Arlington may also coordinate with programs conducted by other public, nonprofit, or for-profit organizations and vendors. Arlington program offerings will include activities that will be conducted in Arlington parks, facilities, and trails. However, depending on demand, Arlington may also conduct programs in schools and other public facilities across the city, as well as in nonprofit and other facilities. Participants – Arlington, Arlington School District, YMCA, Arlington Athletic Leagues and Clubs, and other nonprofit and private organizations. Arlington PRMP | 103 Action Continue to operate an Arlington clearinghouse website - for recreational activities. Task 3: Monitor user fee schedules Arlington staff will assess criteria for all prospective program offerings. If the program is consistent with Arlington’s mission and level-of-service proposals shown in this plan, and if resources exist, Arlington will offer the program under its recreational cost benefit policy that establishes a benefit scale under one of the following cost recovery scenarios: Full cost recovery programs - will recover all direct costs (including full and part-time staff, supplies, materials, maintenance, and utilities) and indirect costs (including department overhead for staff benefits). Merit pricing (partial cost recovery) programs – will partially recover direct and indirect costs based on a policy decision about the degree to which each program provides public versus private goods or benefits. Merit pricing programs may also include the providing of scholarships to eligible user individuals or user groups that would prevent the program from realizing full cost recovery. Subsidy (no or very low-cost recovery) programs – will not attempt to recover costs as a fee, although it may ask for donations or grants from using individuals, groups, or organizations who benefit or are likely sponsors. Participants – Arlington, Arlington School District, and non- profit and for-profit organizations. Action Monitor user fee schedules to maintain a benefits scale for recreation activities – collect user fees under a full, merit, or subsidy-based cost recovery policy for recreation programs. Task 4: Recruit program vendors Arlington will assess the mission criteria for all prospective program offerings. If programs are not consistent with Arlington’s mission and level-of-service proposals shown in this plan, Arlington will not offer the program, but may consider a partnership with other providers. This could include offering scholarships or other services or publishing the program offering. Depending on the program activity, other vendors may include: Other jurisdictions – including Snohomish County, Arlington School District, and Washington State. Nonprofit organizations – such as the YMCA, Boys & Girls Clubs, Boy and Girl Scouts, Campfire USA, Lions, Rotary, and Kiwanis Clubs, among others. Private for-profit entities and vendors – such as Stillaguamish Athletic Club, among others. Participants – Arlington, Arlington School District, Snohomish County, and non-profit and for-profit organizations. Action Work in conjunction with other sponsors and vendors - to provide recreation activities as appropriate. Adopt project finance strategies Task 5: Allocate capital facility funds as specified in the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) Arlington City Council will allocate an appropriate amount of the monies received from dedicated park, recreation, open space, and trails-oriented revenue programs to provide funds for PRMP acquisition and development projects that reflect the objectives of these programs. The revenue programs to be coordinated may include Arlington property and sales tax fund proceeds, Arlington Real Estate Excise Taxes (REET), and grant applications to the Washington State Recreation & Conservation Office (RCO), among others. Arlington PMRP | 104 Action Allocate a proportional amount from existing park, recreation, open space, and trail-oriented revenue programs to fund the acquisition and development of PRMP projects – designating monies from Arlington property tax levy, sales tax proceeds, Arlington Real Estate Excise Taxes (REET), and RCO grants. Task 6: Update GMA park impact fees Arlington City Council will adopt a coordinated GMA park impact fee system on a citywide basis for citywide facility acquisition and development. The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) allows Arlington to impose a park impact fee on proposed residential, commercial, and industrial developments in the city as a means of maintaining existing park, recreation, and open space levels-of- service (ELOS). The adopted ordinance for impact fees estimates the impact each development project has on parks, recreation, and open space facilities within a project benefit zone and makes provisions for setting aside the resources, including lands or monies, necessary to offset a project’s citywide impacts. The dollar value of a project's park, recreation, and open space impact may be offset by the project developer of an amount equal to the combined facility acquisition and development costs that Arlington and/or another providing agency would incur to maintain the same existing level-of-service (ELOS). A developer may be allowed to choose any combination of land or cash mitigation measures including credit for any park or recreation facilities to be included within a project development. The park impact fee ordinance considers the following when determining the types of mitigation measures or development credits to be made available to the developer: Will the facility - be available to the public, Will it have a designated owner - responsible for continuing operation and maintenance (the owner may be a common property owner's association or other agency), and, Will it correspond to and not exceed or vary from - the types of park, recreation, and open space facilities that are being impacted (a developer could provide but should not be able to take full credit value for facilities for which there is no shortage, impact or local interest). Land contributions can be accepted in lieu of monies if the lands will be suitable sites for future facilities. Under GMA provisions, land and monies accumulated under the proposed ordinance must be invested within a reasonable time or returned to the contributing developer. Arlington can conduct periodic program reviews with residents, user groups, the school district, and other agencies to decide the most efficient way to deliver the facilities mitigated by the ordinance. Alternative delivery methods could include: Acquisition of suitable sites – upon agreement with Arlington or in conjunction with other public or school facilities (including title transfer if other public or school agencies enter into special agreements assuming development, operation, and maintenance responsibilities). Development of facilities - on other public or school sites (if other public or school agencies enter into agreements assuming future operation and maintenance responsibilities and costs). Or Any other alternative - including development, operation or maintenance proposals by user groups or private concessionaires or non-profit organizations or, developers that provide a viable facility in accordance with park, recreation, and open space strategies. Participants – Arlington City Council and Planning Commission with the assistance of Arlington School District and non-profit and for-profit organizations. Action Continue with the GMA park impact fee on a citywide basis –collecting a proportional fee based on the value of community facilities regardless of facility ownership and allocating the fees for citywide acquisition and development in accordance with this plan regardless of agency sponsor. Arlington PRMP | 105 Task 7: Seek a citywide capital facility and O&M park levy Arlington City Council may place a limited duration property tax levy proposal for voter approval on a citywide basis for the acquisition, development, and operation of parks, recreation, and open space facilities throughout the city. The funds collected from the levy will be allocated to the appropriate sponsoring agency, which may include the city, school districts, or non-profit organization, for the realization of park, recreation, and open space facilities identified within this plan. Under Washington State enabling acts, Arlington may levy a property tax for general governmental purposes at a rate not to exceed $3.60 per $1,000 of the assessed value of all taxable property within the city. The total of all property taxes for all taxing authorities cannot exceed 1.0% of assessed valuation, or $10.00 per $1,000 of value. If the taxes of all districts exceed 1.0% or $10.00 amount, each is proportionately reduced until the total is at or below the 1.0% limit. In 2001, Washington State law was amended by Proposition 747, a statutory provision limiting the growth of the regular property tax levy to 1.0% per year, after adjustments for new construction. Any proposed increases over this amount are subject to a referendum vote. The statute was intended to control local governmental spending by controlling the annual rate of growth of property taxes. In practice, however, the statute can reduce the effective property tax yield to an annual level far below a city's levy authorization, particularly when property values are increasing rapidly. Proposition 747, the statutory provision limiting the growth of regular property taxes to 1.0% per year, can be waived by referendum approval of a simple (50%) majority of Arlington’s registered voters. Arlington voters may be asked to approve a resetting of the property tax levy rate that will adjust the amount of revenue the city can generate. (The new total revenue that will be generated by a resetting of the rate will be subject to the same 1.0% limitation, however, and the total amount of revenue and the resulting property tax rate will start to decline again in accordance with the Proposition.) The adjusted rate and revenue will be used to finance the PROS facility proposals in this plan – or the projects and programs from this plan that involve construction, maintenance, and operations aspects that a majority of the voters are willing to pay for under the adjusted rate. Arlington voters may be asked to reset the rate on a permanent basis with the new differential rate dedicated to citywide PRMP proposals, subject to the provisions of Proposition 747. Or Arlington voters may be asked to reset the rate on a temporary basis, where the rate is adjusted until a specific amount of revenue has been generated to finance a specified number of PROS projects or programs – whereupon the rate reverts to the original or a specified amount defined in the referendum. Participants – Arlington City Council with the assistance of the Arlington Parks & Recreation Department, and other potential providers. Action Submit and approve a limited duration property tax levy or a property tax levy rate adjustment (on permanent or temporary basis) to acquire, develop, operate, and maintain facilities – allocating the additional revenues for acquisition, development, and operation in accordance with this plan regardless of agency sponsor. Initiate PRMP projects Task 8: Protect open space and conservancies As appropriate, using funds generated from adjusted program fees and schedules, possible impact fees, and the possible limited duration levy or levy lid lift, Arlington will acquire fee or use agreements and conserve significant wildlife, forestland, and open spaces indicated within this PRMP. Where appropriate, monies will be allocated to and/or combined with monies provided by the county, state agencies, and non-profit organizations for significant projects. Depending on schedules and availabilities, initial acquisitions of development rights or fee title may include riverfront, community garden, on and off-road trails, dog parks, playgrounds, picnic sites and tables, group picnic shelters and parks, soccer fields, community facility upgrades, and others indicated in this PRMP. Participants – Arlington City Council, and the participation of other public and non-profit organizations. Action Initiate the acquisition of fee title or use agreements and conservancy of significant open space and conservancy sites – allocating revenues for significant properties in accordance with this Arlington PRMP regardless of agency sponsor. Task 9: Acquire/develop parks Using funds generated from adjusted program fees and schedules, possible impact fees, and possible limited duration levy, or levy lid lift, Arlington City Council will acquire, develop, maintain, and operate parks indicated within this plan. Where appropriate, monies will be allocated and/or combined with monies provided by the school districts, county, state agencies, and non-profit organizations. Depending on schedules and availability, initial acquisitions and developments may include waterfront access, community gardens, off-road trails, dog parks, playgrounds, picnic tables and Arlington PMRP | 106 shelters, athletic field improvements, and recreation/community center upgrades to be distributed across the city. Participants – Arlington City Council, and the participation of other public and non-profit organizations. Action Initiate the acquisition, development, maintenance, and operation of parks – allocating revenues in accordance with this Arlington PRMP regardless of agency sponsor. Task 10: Acquire/develop trail systems As appropriate, using funds generated from adjusted program fees and schedules, possible impact fees, the possible limited duration levy, or levy lid lift, Arlington City Council will acquire, develop, maintain, and operate the significant on and off-road trail systems indicated within this Arlington PRMP. Where appropriate, monies will be allocated to and/or combined with monies provided by the county, state agencies, and non- profit organizations for significant projects. Generally, Arlington Public Works Department will develop and maintain non- motorized trail connections within public road rights-of-way. Depending on schedules and availability, initial acquisitions and developments may include off-road hiking, biking, and multipurpose trails extending within and between environmental areas, parks, schools, community facilities, and neighborhoods across the city. Participants – Arlington City Council, Public Works Department, other public and non-profit organizations, and property owners. Action Initiate the acquisition, development, maintenance, and operation of significant corridors and on and off-road trail systems – allocating revenues for significant projects in accordance with this PRMP regardless of agency sponsor. Arlington PRMP | 107 Task 11: Conserve/designate historic and cultural resources in parks As appropriate, Arlington City Council will designate, and conserve significant historic and cultural resources indicated within this PRMP where such landmarks are located within park properties. Where appropriate, wayfinding and historic signage, artworks, and streetscape development monies will be allocated to and/or combined with monies provided by county and state agencies as well as private developers for significant projects. Depending on schedules and availability, initial designations may include the Arlington downtown district, streetscapes, and gateways, among others. Participants – Arlington City Council with the assistance of the Public Works Department and the participation of the Stillaguamish Valley Pioneer Association. Action Initiate the designation, management, acquisition, development, maintenance, and operation of significant historic and cultural resources – allocating revenues for significant projects in accordance with this plan regardless of agency sponsor. Task 12: Support recreation/community centers Continue leasing the south portion of Bill Quake Memorial Park for the Arlington Boys & Girls Club recreation/community center in order to provide activities, educational programs, and sports throughout the year for kids in K-12th grade in a facility that includes class and meeting rooms, a social activity area, teen center, and gymnasium with basketball court. Participants – Arlington City Council, Arlington Boys & Girls Club, and other public agencies as well as private and non-profit organizations. Action Redevelop and purchase and development of multi- generational recreation/community center facilities – allocating revenues for lease-to-own or purchase and development projects in accordance with this Arlington PRMP regardless of agency sponsor. Monitor progress Task 13: Conduct progress assessments Arlington and other public agencies will conduct progress assessments reviewing action on the projects and programs identified above and improve methods, assign responsibilities, or take other measures necessary to ensure effective implementation. Participants – Arlington City Council, Arlington Planning Commission, Public Works Department, Arlington School District, Snohomish County, Washington State, public and non-profit organizations, private vendors, and citizens at large. Action Adjust parks, recreation, and open space vision, strategies, and implementing measures – based on the results of the follow- up assessments. Arlington PRMP Plan A-1 Appendix A: Setting Arlington is located at Latitude: 48.18 North, Longitude: 122.14 West with a land area of 9.26 square miles of which 0.01 square miles is water. Arlington's city limits are generally defined to the south by Marysville at SR-531/172nd Street NE and roughly 165th Street NE, to the west by Interstate 5, to the north by the Stillaguamish River, and to the east by the Cascade Range foothills. Arlington’s urban growth area (UGA) includes 10.3 square miles within and outside of city limits. Climate Washington State's climate is strongly influenced by moisture-laden air masses created in the Pacific Ocean. The air masses may move into the region any time of the year, but particularly during fall, winter, and spring seasons. The air flowing from the Pacific Ocean is interrupted first by the Olympic Mountains and then significantly by the Cascade Mountains. As a result of the mountain ranges, the west or windward sides of the Cascades receive moderate to heavy rainfall and the east or leeward side of the state located in the "rain shadow" of the Cascades receive a light to moderate amount of precipitation. The Cascades also affect temperature ranges in the state. The west or windward side is influenced by maritime air masses generally milder than those that sweep down from the Canadian Rocky Mountains on the east or leeward side of the state. Consequently, eastern Washington usually has colder winters and hotter summers, while western Washington is milder and more frost-free. Arlington’s climate is similar to most of the Puget Sound lowlands, with dry summers and mild, rainy winters. Arlington averages 181 days of precipitation per year. Arlington's location in the foothills brings additional precipitation compared to nearby communities, with 46 inches annually compared to 33 inches in Everett. Arlington rarely receives significant snowfall, with an average of 7 inches per year since 1922. July is Arlington's warmest month, with average high temperatures of 73.6 °F while January is the coolest, at an average high of 44.5 °F. The highest recorded temperature, 103 °F, occurred on June 28, 2021, amid a regional heat wave, and the lowest, 7 °F, occurred on January 1, 1979. According to the Köppen climate classification system Arlington has a warm-summer Mediterranean climate. Earth Washington is divided into three principal physiographic divisions - the Pacific Mountain System, the Rocky Mountain System, and the Intermontane Plateaus. Pacific Mountain System - is defined by the Olympic Peninsula (the Pacific Border province) and the Cascade Mountain range and includes all counties that contain portions of the Cascade Mountains (the Cascade Mountain province). Northern Rocky Mountain System - is defined by the foothills of the Rocky Mountain ranges and includes all counties that are located north of the Columbia River and east of the Cascade Mountain system. Intermontane Plateau - is defined by the high plateaus created by the uplift between the Cascade and Rocky Mountain ranges and includes all counties that are located along the southern drainage basins of the Columbia River. The mountains were in turn, subject to the action of periodic glacial intrusions - the most recent being the Pleistocene glacial period more than 15,000 years ago. The Pleistocene glacial intrusion gradually carved and flooded Puget Sound, the lowland areas, and other valleys alongside the Cascade foothills. A-2 Arlington PRMP Plan Arlington PRMP Plan A-3 A-4 Arlington PRMP Plan Arlington is located within the eastern edge of the Puget Trough section of the Cascade Mountain province of the Pacific Mountain System. The Cascade Mountains were created by continuous volcanic activity along the border of the underlying continental plates. The Stillaguamish River valley and floodplain, including Arlington, lies in a lahar hazard zone 60 miles downstream from Glacier Peak, an active stratovolcano in the eastern part of the county. During an eruption 13,000 years ago, several eruption-generated lahars deposited more than 7 feet of sediment on modern-day Arlington. Arlington lies on a glacial terrace formed during the Pleistocene epoch by the recession of the Cordilleran Ice Sheet. Arlington covers a series of hills at an elevation of 100 to 200 feet above sea level. Downtown Arlington is situated on a bluff above the confluence of the Stillaguamish River and its North and South Forks. Soil regions Washington State soils were created by a combination of elements including the nature of the parent material or rock type, climate, and the characteristics of the local terrain. These combined processes created 11 principal soil regions in the state ranging from deposits with high concentrations of organic matter created by glacial and marine actions along Puget Sound to deposits with very low organic matter located in the eastern arid portions of the state. Water The Arlington UGA spans four major sub-basins - the Portage Creek sub-basin, the Quilceda Creek sub-basin, the Eagle Creek sub-basin, and the March Creek sub-basin. These are in turn comprised of many minor basins such as the Prairie Creek and Kruger Creek sub- basins. The Edgecomb Creek sub-basin drains into the Quilceda Creek sub-basin of the Snohomish River system. A small tributary locally referred to as Indian Creek drains into the Eagle creek sub- basin. The remnant portions of March creek that remain exist outside of the UGA down in the Stillaguamish floodplain. All waters within the UGA eventually drain into Puget Sound, either draining directly into the Stillaguamish River or via Quilceda Creek then into the Snohomish River Estuary. The Stillaguamish River – is an important regional habitat for various piscine, mammalian, reptilian, amphibian, and avian fauna and aquatic flora. The Stillaguamish River and its conditions are directly linked to the upland uses that modify the historic hydrological cycles. The river is also very important to the economic vitality of the city through associated outdoor recreation activities. The river is used by boaters and fisherman throughout the year who utilize the entire Stillaguamish Valley, with Arlington being a key hub for those activities. Other important bodies of water include - Portage Creek, Prairie Creek, Kruger Creek, Quilceda Creek, Eagle Creek, and March Creek. There are also bodies of water outside of the UGA but with which the city is concerned as land uses in their vicinity may have impacts on the UGA. These include upstream and downstream reaches of the tributaries listed above and their associated drainage basins and wetlands. There are also numerous perennial and seasonal wetlands in the UGA. The surface water quality and quantity of riverine and riparian habitats in Arlington are in a state of recovery. Nevertheless, it is of importance that the river and other waterways be protected and managed to improve listed species population status and recover their functionality. Hazards Volcanic explosion/debris flow Glacier Peak, at 10,541 feet, is located roughly 45 air miles east of Arlington. Its most recent rumblings were about 6,000 years ago. During its most eruptive periods between 6,000 - 13,000 years ago, the debris caused by the eruptions flowed down the Stillaguamish channel to at least Arlington and I-5. Its biggest explosion was about 12,500 years ago, when it discharged debris 4 to 5 times as massive as the Mount St. Helens eruption in 1980. A volcanic explosion on Glacier Peak could send a huge mudflow/flood (lahar) Arlington PRMP Plan A-5 down the Stillaguamish Valley. A debris dam created by the first eruption caused the White Chuck and Suiattle Rivers to change course from the Stillaguamish to the Sauk at Darington. Flood hazards The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) show only one 100-year flood plain within Arlington, along the Stillaguamish River and defined by the toe of the slope of the plateau surrounding the Stillaguamish Valley (though there are some areas of the valley that are high enough to be out of the floodplain. Only small portions of the city limits extend into this area, as they are parts of parcels on the upper plateau. There is a large 110-acre portion referred to as Island Crossing that is in the 100-year floodplain. Not being listed on the FIRM does not mean that some of the smaller creeks running through the city also could not experience flooding during 100-year (or lesser or greater) storm events. Geologically hazardous areas Arlington contains areas of steep slopes, most notably along the two steps rising from the Stillaguamish floodplain. There are areas also subject to liquefaction including everything within the floodplain of the Stillaguamish River (including Island Crossing) rated as high potential, and everything on the second geologic tier (on which the airport and most of Arlington sits) rated as moderate potential. Arlington-area historical earthquake activity is significantly above Washington state average and 1157% greater than the overall US average. Tsunamis The potentially flooded areas would be most of the land below the 70-foot elevation contour line based on projections from both NOAA and Washington State Department of Natural Resources. The inundation zone would essentially be all the Stillaguamish Valley downstream of Arlington and the northern part of downtown Arlington. However, this estimate is now considered excessive and would most likely not be as severe as originally projected. Wildlife habitat Wildlife habitats are generally classified as marine, estuarine, freshwater, and terrestrial categories. Many wildlife species rely upon most, even all, of these habitat categories for survival. Arlington has 2 categories of wildlife habitat. Freshwater habitat Freshwater habitat include slakes, rivers, creeks, wetlands, riparian areas, and all other types of water bodies not included in estuaries or marine habitat that have a low ocean salt content. Freshwater habitats support different wildlife than saltwater systems, particularly species that depend on wetland vegetation. However, 87% of all wildlife and fish species are estimated to depend on streams, wetlands, or other freshwater bodies during some part of the species life cycle for drinking water, foraging, nesting, and migratory movements. Riparian areas - are the wooded or vegetated corridors located along rivers, streams, and springs. Riparian corridors possess free flowing water or moist conditions that support high water tables, certain soil characteristics, and vegetation that are transitional between freshwater and terrestrial habitat zones. The transitional edges are usually defined by a change in plant composition, relative plant abundance, and the end of high soil moisture content. Riparian corridors transport water, soil, plant seeds, and nutrients to downstream areas - and thereby serve as important migration routes for many wildlife species. Riparian areas, though small in overall size, are one of the most important sources of wildlife biodiversity in the landscape. Freshwater wetland habitats are water bodies less than 20 acres in size or less than 6 feet in depth and include marshes, swamps, bogs, seeps, wet meadows, shallow ponds, and lakes. A-6 Arlington PRMP Plan Like riparian areas, wetlands support species in great diversities, densities, and productivity. The wooded areas that are located adjacent to wetlands provide nesting areas, forage, and other cover that is critical to wetland-dependent species like most waterfowl or small mammals like beaver. Wetlands - there are 2 principal wetland types within Arlington:  Scrub/shrub wetlands - with seasonal flooding, characterized by hardhack, willow, red alder or red osier dogwood, and  Shallow marsh - deep marsh, and open water wetlands. Riparian and wetland vegetation provides significant food and cover for wildlife habitat. Generally, riparian zones and wetlands provide substantially more important wildlife habitat than forested areas. Riparian zones are also passageways for wildlife migrating between or around developed areas. Riparian vegetation also helps maintain optimum fish spawning conditions by providing shade, bank stabilization, a breeding ground for insects, and a source of organic material for the stream. Riparian zones are located along the undeveloped shoreline of the numerous creeks in Arlington, the numerous tributary streams within their drainage corridors, and the numerous ponds and wetlands. These areas are covered with riparian vegetation and should be considered important wildlife corridors. Wildlife species - freshwater zones support terrestrial and aquatic insects and resident and migratory fish species. Anadromous fish species include coho, chinook, chum salmon, and steelhead. Naturally occurring or established species include largemouth bass, brown bullheads, bluegill, and black crappie. Freshwater zones also support a variety of birds and mammals including salamanders, frogs, osprey, ducks, river otter, and beaver. Riparian and wetland vegetation provide significant food and cover for wildlife habitat. Generally, riparian zones and wetlands provide substantially more important wildlife habitat than forested areas. Riparian zones are also passageways for wildlife migrating between or around developed areas. Riparian vegetation also helps maintain optimum fish spawning conditions by providing shade, bank stabilization, a breeding ground for insects, and a source of organic material for the stream. Urban and agricultural developments have substantially reduced wildlife habitat through the years. However, valuable habitat qualities may remain in the undeveloped, large native vegetation tracts and around the remaining wetlands and riparian (streamside) forests of Portage, Prairie, Kruger, Quilceda, Eagle, and March Creeks, the numerous tributary streams within their drainage corridors, and the numerous ponds and wetlands. Wetlands and riparian zones may support muskrat, mink, otter, beaver, raccoon, and weasel. Water bodies, wetlands, and adjacent fields also provide suitable nesting and feeding habitat for mallard ducks, American widgeons, green-wing teal, common coot, common merganser, blue-wing teals and great blue heron, and lesser and greater Canadian goose. Fisheries – the lower reaches of some Arlington creeks that have not been affected by culverts and farmland drainage channels may provide freshwater habitat for species of anadromous fish, including steelhead, walleye, and salmon species, that live in saltwater but return to spawn in freshwater. These fish species have evolved over time to fit the specific characteristics of their stream of origin - and are uniquely imprinted compared with other members of the same species. Portage, Prairie, Kruger, Quilceda, Eagle, and March Creeks contain important habitat for several salmonid species. Fish use in the creek includes large numbers of early chum salmon, including an early-returning stock that the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) considers to be rare. In addition, the creeks Arlington PRMP Plan A-7 support significant numbers of late returning chum, coho salmon, and steelhead, sea run cutthroat trout, and resident cutthroat. Anadromous fish require cool, uncontaminated water with healthy streambeds and insect populations. Vegetated riparian areas maintain stream habitats by stabilizing water temperature, producing an insect supply, controlling erosion, and providing woody debris. These species spawn and rear in medium sized gravel beds that are provided medium velocity water flow along creek channels, swamps, marshes, perennial, and seasonal streams. Factors that have caused the diminishment of the wild runs include:  Forest clear-cutting and land developments - that create sediment loads increasing water turbidity and silting in gravel spawning beds.  Clear-cutting tree stands in riparian areas – that remove natural shading increasing water temperatures; and  Water diversions – including dams and dikes, that restrict access from the upper reaches and spawning areas of stream and river runs. The Washington Department of Fisheries & Wildlife (WDFW) and various Tribal Governments supplement the natural stocks to maintain river runs for most of these species. Terrestrial habitat Terrestrial habitat are the upland lands located above freshwater, estuarine, and marine water zones. The zones may extend from the level lowlands that border marsh or creek banks to the tops of the bluffs, hills, or foothills located around the Cascade Mountain range. Plants - natural plant communities are described in terms of broad patterns called vegetation zones. Washington plant communities are divided into 3 major vegetation groupings including:  Forests,  Grasslands and shrub/grass communities,  Timberline and alpine areas. The plateaus overlooking the Stillaguamish River include some forested vegetation zones. The zones are defined by the different climates created by different elevations and the distinctive vegetation type that becomes dominant in a climax forest after the forest has progressed through successive stages of natural development. The dominant species defined by the zone usually reproduces to maintain dominance until some disturbance, such as fire, alters the zone's environment. Deciduous tree species such as red alder (Alnus rubra) or big leaf maple (Acer macrophyllum) or golden chinkapin are generally dominant on the lands that have been cleared for urban and agriculture uses. Black cottonwood and Oregon ash, along with red alder and big-leaf maple, tend to grow along major water corridors. Portions of Arlington, particularly the wooded hillsides and ravines include several second growth lowland forested cover types including coniferous, deciduous, and mixed coniferous/deciduous forests. This forest type has marginal value as commercial timber or as unique vegetation. Most commercially important timber resources have been harvested, usually along with associated residential land development. Grasses, agricultural crops, and riparian vegetation cover the lowland areas of the creek drainage corridors - the latter prevalent along creek floodplains and at the edge of wetlands or open bodies of water. Deciduous hardwood trees including red alder, cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), Oregon Ash (Fraxinus latifolia), willow (Salix sp.), and associated understory species are dominant within the wetland areas. Species - terrestrial zones support a variety of insects, amphibians, reptiles, lowland and upland birds, large, and small mammals. Some species, such as eagles, osprey, and murrelets, forage in other habitats but nest in upland locations in wooded areas in or near riparian zones. A-8 Arlington PRMP Plan Other species may forage in all the zones, particularly during the winter months, but retreat for night and seasonal cover into the upland wooded areas. Examples include a variety of game species such as pigeon, grouse, rabbit, and deer within the lowlands, and even bear and cougar in the Cascade foothills that occasionally migrate into the urban areas. Mature forested areas provide thermal cover during winter months allowing larger game mammals to forage up to 3,000 feet in elevation during normal winter season or 2,000 feet during especially harsh winters. Animals - urban and agricultural developments within the Arlington area have substantially reduced wildlife habitat through the years. However, valuable habitat qualities remain in undeveloped, large native vegetation tracts along the hillsides, and around the remaining wetlands and riparian (streamside) forests along Portage, Prairie, Kruger, Quilceda, Eagle, and March Creeks corridors. Wooded areas support a wide variety of large and small mammals, birds, reptiles, and amphibians. The most common mammals within the wooded areas include chipmunks, rabbits, marmots, skunks, and raccoons. A small number of larger mammals including black-tailed deer, coyote, and cougar likely occur at the edge of the upper reaches of the Cascade foothills where large contiguous forested areas remain though they can also migrate into the urban areas on occasion. Crows, jays, nuthatches, woodpeckers, sparrows, winter wrens, ruffled grouse, blue grouse, quail, band-tailed pigeon, turtle dove, pheasant, partridge, Merriam's turkey, owls, hawks, Osprey, and eagles can find suitable habitat for feeding and nesting in the upland forested areas, creek, and stream corridors. Many of these species can tolerate adjacent urban development so long as some habitat and connecting migration corridors remain undisturbed. Portions of Portage, Prairie, Kruger, Quilceda, Eagle, and March Creeks drainage corridors, the bottomlands, and other low-lying areas are now devoted to pastures and meadows with some woody vegetation, grasses, and wildflowers. These materials provide food for migratory waterfowl and deer, habitat for rodents and other small animals, and prey for predators like garter snakes, barn owls, red-tailed hawk, and fox. Large and rural contiguous parcels of land provide habitat for wildlife that compete successfully with other species in deeper cover, like birds and larger mammals like deer, bobcat, and possibly even bear at the upper most edges of the Cascade foothills. Important terrestrial habitat elements for these species include tall trees along the shoreline, mature forests with snags and fallen trees, and undisturbed mature forest near or surrounding wetlands. These habitat elements are primarily important to bird species that nest and perch in the trees, and to small mammals like beaver and river otter that rely upon an interface between the undisturbed terrestrial and aquatic areas. Other important habitats - migratory songbirds rely on the habitat provided by large, wooded areas. These species do not adapt well where clear-cutting practices or urban land developments have fragmented the forest habitat. Smaller wooded tracts are suitable for many plant and animal communities and may provide temporary cover for some species for foraging or migratory movement. Large parks and open spaces can serve as wildlife refuges in urban areas – including Country Charm Park. However, the number and diversity of species declines in direct relation to the size of the habitat and where the habitat has been isolated from other natural areas. The size and extent of the terrestrial habitat can be improved where natural migration corridors connect small tracts and large reserves. Natural migratory corridors enable species to colonize new areas, forage for food, find mates, and exchange genes with neighboring populations. Ideally, according to studies, successful wildlife migratory corridors should be at least 100 feet wide along streams with additional buffers about severe slopes and extensive wetland areas. Arlington PRMP Plan A-9 Wildlife habitat concerns Freshwater habitat Freshwater courses, particularly the Portage, Prairie, Kruger, Quilceda, Eagle, and March Creeks drainage tributary streams and Stillaguamish River bottomlands, have been altered by landfill or piped diversions, dikes, and channeling. Past development actions adjacent to urban areas, particularly the shorelines and waterfronts have filled valuable wetland habitat areas. The greatest risks to freshwater zones are contaminants that may enter the stormwater runoff from agriculture, septic failures, and other urban land uses. Water quality risks are also dramatically increased where land development or timber clear-cutting increases erosion and silt and/or clear vegetation within the riparian buffer along the freshwater corridor. Development activities most adversely affect the quality of freshwater habitat by removing vegetation, increasing silt, organic debris, and other stormwater contaminants that enter the natural drainage system. Generally, studies have determined that the hydrological balance of a stream begins to decline when 12% of the watershed becomes impervious. Terrestrial habitat Lands cleared for agriculture and urban land development have permanently lost considerable terrestrial habitat. Commercial forest management practices have replanted timber clear cuts with single species reducing wildlife diversity and isolating habitat and migration corridors, particularly along riparian areas. Fire-fighting practices, particularly of wildfires that would otherwise occur from natural forces, have reduced the amount and varying availability of meadowlands and other open areas necessary for foraging activities. The greatest risk to the terrestrial habitat, however, is the continued pace of commercial logging and urban land conversions - particularly land development patterns that block or demolish migration corridors, log timbered areas, remove riparian cover, erode productive topsoil, and introduce urban activities - potentially including intense recreational uses - into wildlife areas. Careless logging practices have often led to serious soil erosion and the degradation of slopes. As the most important habitats are isolated, the wildlife species declines in diversity and number. Urban tolerant species, like raccoons and crows, invade the remaining habitat from the urban edges, supplanting and driving out remaining native species. Unique and threatened species Endangered species (listed under the Endangered Species Act), Threatened and other notable species that are known to exist in the Arlington UGA include: Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus) – (federal and state threatened) Formerly an Endangered Species, the Bald Eagle was removed from the ESA threatened list in 2007. It is still protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act which does not create a land use restriction but prohibits possession or harm to it. Nests are known to exist at various locations on the main south fork and north fork Stillaguamish River. Several are found along the north shore of the Stillaguamish River near Dike Road. The Department of Wildlife has developed Bald Eagle Site Management Guidelines for use when reviewing proposed development projects. Property owners are responsible for preparing and implementing a habitat and nest management plan when a project falls within a management area. Bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) – a federally listed threatened species under the Endangered Species Act, bull trout have been identified using Arlington’s streams. These streams are identified on the Snohomish County ESA maps as “presumed habitat.” The presumed use would be only rearing or refuge, as Bull trout spawning is believed to occur in the upper reaches of the Stillaguamish watershed in the cooler headwater streams. Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tschawytscha) – are considered to use the Stillaguamish River, larger streams, side channels and A-10 Arlington PRMP Plan riverine wetlands rather than the smaller streams traveling through Arlington. Therefore, the areas of town that lay alongside the main stem and south fork Stillaguamish River are considered areas of Chinook usage. The majority of Chinook spawning occurs in the upstream areas but there are normally occasional redds found in lower areas of the river. A majority of the juvenile population travel downriver during the spring high flows to spend time growing in the highly productive estuary. A small percentage (5-8%) of the juveniles are considered riverine and will over-winter to head for the estuary as a one-year-old smolt. The current population of Chinook is around 1,400. Steelhead (Oncorhynchus mykiss) – May 7, 2007, Puget Sound Steelhead were listed as Threatened under the Endangered Species Act. Steelhead are considered to use the Stillaguamish River, larger streams, side channels and potentially the streams in Arlington’s city limits. The National Marine Fisheries Service is beginning the development of a Steelhead Recovery Plan that will provide guidance to jurisdictions on how to participate in the recovery of the species. Steelhead are different than salmon in that they can return multiple times to spawn and move from freshwater to saltwater multiple times throughout their life span. A steelhead is like a bull trout due to physical ability and habits and may travel anywhere a coho salmon will travel. Land use implications Freshwater and terrestrial habitats contribute to the overall biological diversity of the region and provide a number of additional environmental functions and values of interest to Arlington residents. Many species depend on the constant interaction of all habitat systems for food, cover, nesting, and other survival requirements. Some plant, fish, and wildlife habitat have irretrievably been lost as the Arlington area developed and as the pace of development continues. These impacts can be minimized, however, by sensitive land use patterns, innovative design concepts, and performance- oriented development standards that:  Replant - native vegetation along Arlington creek shorelines and along tributary stream drainage corridors,  Remove - artificial shoreline constructions and freshwater impoundment or diversions,  Control - stormwater runoff content and quality that enters the natural drainage system and within the watershed in natural impoundment on-site where pollutants can be separated from natural drainage,  Cultivate - berry or fruit plants that support and retain native species, and  Cluster – roadways and other improvements to preserve natural shorelines and contiguous open spaces as common lands. Portions of the most critical remaining habitat, like mature shoreline trees, snags, and downed logs, if retained, can sometimes allow wildlife species to coexist in urban areas. The most effective preservation strategies, however, separate the most intense urban activities from the most sensitive habitats by creating woodland conservancies, open space corridors, and other protected areas. Where appropriate, the park, recreation, and open space plan should preserve and enhance the most critical and unique habitat areas by purchasing development rights or title for resource conservancy parks along Portage, Prairie, Kruger, Quilceda, Eagle, and March Creeks and the Stillaguamish River. Historical development Prehistoric setting The arrival of Indian groups in the Pacific Northwest cannot be dated with great precision. However, archaeological investigations at the Manis mastodon site near Sequim on the Olympic Peninsula indicate man was in the area as early as 12,000 years ago. Sea level rises approximately 5,000 years ago, however, may have inundated even older sites. Known sites have been grouped into the following broad time periods and cultural sequences: Arlington PRMP Plan A-11  Paleoindian - approximately 11,000+ BC consisting of highly mobile, small groups that subsisted on marine, shoreline, and terrestrial resources with stone, bone, antler, and perishable technological materials illustrated by Clovis points.  Archaic – 10,500-4,400 BC consisting of highly mobile small groups subsisting on marine, shoreline, and terrestrial resources with stone, bone, antler, and perishable technological materials illustrated by Olcott points.  Early Pacific – 4,400-1,800 BC consisting of increased sedentism in seasonal villages subsisting on shoreline resources, expanded marine resources harvesting camas and shellfish with an increase in ground stone, bone, antler, and perishable technological materials illustrated by Cascade points.  Middle Pacific – 1,800 BC - 500 AD consisting of winter villages of plank houses and seasonal camps subsisting on marine and riverine resources with food storage technologies with a decrease in stone tools, diversification of tools of bone, antler, perishable technological materials and canoes.  Late Pacific – 500 – 1775 AD consisting of large permanent villages and special use camps subsisting on specialized marine, riverine, and terrestrial resources with extensive food storage with very little stone tools. There are more than 5,000 Native American sites on record in the state, only a few of which have been professionally evaluated. Generally, sites are located at river conjunctions within valleys and along the shoreline. Native American history A large number of different Indian tribes and bands inhabited the Pacific Northwest region with varied lifestyles and different languages, dress, ceremonies, and adornments. Tribal characteristics are generally distinguished between the coastal tribes of western Washington and those of the interior. In general, the coastal tribes depended on the rivers and tidal waters for staple foods whereas the interior tribes relied more heavily upon plants and berries, as well as game and other animals. Native peoples are believed to have lived in the Puget Sound region some 6,000 years ago, their way of life essentially unchanged for hundreds of generations. The Puget Sound native peoples, including the Duwamish, Nisqually, Suquamish, and other tribes, were of the Coast Salish language group, part of the highly developed Northwest Coast Indians, one of the most sophisticated nonagricultural societies in the world. In contrast to nearly every other native group in North America, these people enjoyed freedom from want with:  An abundance and variety of food, including salmon, other fish, and shellfish.  Limitless quantities of building materials (principally cedar, which they were highly adept at fashioning into canoes, longhouses, and hundreds of other items).  Easily caught fur-bearing animals (providing skins for winter clothing).  A mild climate.  Ample leisure time.  Remarkable and enduring artwork.  Development of a status-based culture that included the distribution of surplus wealth (the "potlatch" ceremony) and the owning of slaves. The single most important source of sustenance—physical, spiritual, and artistic—for the Indians of Puget Sound was the salmon. Each year these fish return to Puget Sound rivers and streams by the millions to spawn and die at the source of their birth. The Indians took advantage of the spawning runs of several different species of salmon, devising ingenious methods of catching and drying these fish. Stillaguamish and Sauk-Suiattle Tribes Stillaguamish stems from the word meaning “river people”. The tribe lived in 29 villages, which were mainly on the Stillaguamish River but also on branches of the Skagit River to the north and the Snohomish River to the south. The Stillaguamish are closely related to the Snohomish, Sauk-Suiattles, and the Skagit. A-12 Arlington PRMP Plan The Stillaguamish hunted goats and traded the skins with other Indians in Victoria on lower Vancouver Island. They ate salmon and other seafoods, roots, and berries, Dogs, which they kept for their hair, were the measure of a woman’s wealth. The Sauk-Suiattles are descendants of peoples of the upper Skagit River. Because their homelands were near the Cascade Mountains along the Suiattle River, a tributary of the Sauk (which is a tributary of the Skagit), their subsistence patterns and dialect are different from those of the other Skagit peoples of the lower Skagit River and Puget Sound. They occupied 5 winter houses from the mouth of Sauk River upstream to Sauk Prairie, an important gathering place of several tribes. In summer, they lived further upstream. They hunted elk and traded with tribes from east of the Cascades. The Stillaguamish and Sauk peoples had prominent camps at the confluence of the two forks of the Stillaguamish River when they followed fish runs; the Stillaguamish named the campsite Skabalko. Arlington was later developed at this site. They also had a major village at Chuck-Kol-Che upriver near modern-day Trafton. Early settlement American exploration of the area began in 1851, when prospector Samuel Hancock was led by Indian guides on a canoe up the Stillaguamish River.  The area was opened to logging after the signing of the Treaty of Point Elliott in 1855 between the United States government and the Stillaguamish tribe, who were relocated to trust lands and the Tulalip Indian Reservation. The US Army built a military road connecting Fort Steilacoom to Fort Bellingham, crossing the Stillaguamish River near the confluence. In the 1880s, wagon roads were constructed to this area from the towns of Marysville to the south and Silvana to the west, bringing entrepreneurs to the logging camps, informally named "The Forks". Two settlements were established on the south side of the confluence in anticipation of the Seattle, Lake Shore and Eastern Railway building a track through the area. G. Morris Haller, son of Colonel Granville O. Haller, founded a settlement on the banks of the Stillaguamish River in 1883, naming it "Haller City". The Seattle, Lake Shore & Eastern (SLS&E) Railroad chose to build its depot on higher ground to the south of Haller City, leading contractors Earl & McLeod to establish a new town at the depot on March 15, 1890. The new town was named "Arlington" after Lord Henry Arlington, member of the cabinet of King Charles II of England. Arlington and Haller City were platted within a month of each other in 1890, quickly developing a rivalry that would continue for several years. Arlington and Haller City grew rapidly in their first years, reaching a combined population of 500 by 1893, relying on agriculture, dairy farming, and the manufacturing of wood shingles as the main sources of income. Both towns established schools, post offices, saloons, general stores, churches, social clubs, and hotels. The two towns were separated by a 40-acre tract claimed by two settlers in 1891, preventing either town from fully absorbing the other. During the late 1890s, the claim dispute was settled, and merchants began moving to the larger, more prosperous Arlington, signaling the end for Haller City. Today, Haller City is memorialized in the name of a park in downtown Arlington, as well as a middle school operated by the Arlington School District. Arlington was incorporated as a fourth-class city on May 20, 1903, including the remnants of Haller City (located north of modern-day Division Street). In the years following incorporation, Arlington gained a local bank, a cooperative creamery, a city park, a library, electricity, and telephone service. During the early 20th century, Arlington's largest employers remained shingle mills and sawmills. Other industries, including dairy processing, mechanical shops, stores, and factories, became prominent after World War I, during a period of growth for the city. The Great Depression of the 1930s forced all but one of the mills to close, causing unemployment to rise in Arlington and neighboring cities. Arlington PRMP Plan A-13 The federal government established a Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) camp near Darington to create temporary jobs; the young men built structures and conducted firefighting in the Mount Baker National Forest.  The Works Progress Administration (WPA) and Civil Works Administration (CWA) funded the construction of the city's sidewalks, a high school, and a municipal airport that opened in 1934. The entry of the United States into World War II brought the US Navy to Arlington, resulting in the conversion of the municipal airport into a naval air station in 1943. The Navy constructed new runways and hangars and, beginning in 1946, the municipal government was allowed to operate civilian and commercial services. Ownership of the airport was formally transferred from the federal government back to the city of Arlington in 1959. Current development Among the largest employers of Arlington residents are the Boeing Everett Factory and Naval Station Everett. The expansion of the aerospace industry in the Seattle region led Arlington to develop its municipal airport into an aerospace job center, which includes a high concentration of Boeing subcontractors. As of 2012, the airport had 130 on-site businesses that employed 590 people, with an annual economic output of $94,500,000. Aircraft manufacturer Glasair Aviation is based in Arlington, and Eviation Aircraft uses its Arlington hangars for assembly and testing of the Eviation Alice, an electric prototype model. Arlington plans on increasing the number of jobs within the city to over 20,000 by 2035, bolstered by the designation of the Cascade Industrial Center by the Puget Sound Regional Council in 2019. The industrial center, located between Marysville and Arlington near Smokey Point, already includes major distribution centers and other light industry. A 5-story Amazon distribution center is planned to be constructed near the airport at a cost of $355,000,000. Source: Wikipedia and A Guide to the Indian Tribes of the Pacific Northwest by Robert H Ruby, John A Brown, and Cary C Collins A-14 Arlington PRMP Plan Arlington PRMP B-1 Appendix B: Existing facilities Arlington, Marysville, Snohomish County, Washington State, Arlington and Marysville School Districts, Homeowner Associations (HOA), and other public and private agencies have assembled a significant amount of land within and directly adjacent to the city. These lands provide a variety of park, recreation, and open space activities including wildlife conservancies, waterfronts, picnic facilities, multipurpose trail corridors, athletic fields, playgrounds, community centers, and related park supporting administrative and maintenance facilities. Arlington The city has assembled the following developed parks and undeveloped properties and open spaces with future park development potential. Arlington Parks Acres 1 Bill Quake Memorial Park 13.0 Avenue.  Picnic tables  Children’s playground for ages 5-12  Skatepark with concrete bowl and full pipe  2 grass lighted Little League field with turf infields  1 grass Little League field  1 multipurpose soccer field  Restrooms  Off-street parking 2 Centennial Park 1.0 This neighborhood park is located in the Old Town Residential and Old Town Business District 2 Subareas at 200 block of Division Street. The park was built in 1989 to celebrate Washington State's Centennial. The fountain was designed to depict the Stillaguamish River and valley. The park features a tile wall designed by local school children.  Concrete walking path  Valley  On-street parking 3 Country Charm Park 89.0 This community park is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 604 East Gilman Street.  Riparian habitat along South Fork Stillaguamish River  Extensive woodlands along river and south site  Extensive dirt trails along river and looped in the south portion  Large open fields suitable for major events 4 Forest Trail Park 2.0 Oxford Drive.  Landscaping and trees  Asphalt trail through park  Benches  Picnic tables  Children's play area for ages 5-12  Sport court  Drinking fountain  Off street parking 5 Haller Park 3.0 This community park is located in the Old Town Business District 3 Subarea at 1100 West Avenue. The park is used during the 4th of July Festival.  Beach access to the Stillaguamish River  Access to the Centennial and Whitehorse Trails  Boat launch adjacent to SR-9 bridge  Benches  Picnic tables  Picnic shelter  Playground for ages 2-12  Splash Pad  Concessions  Restrooms  Off street parking B-2 Arlington PRMP Arlington PRMP B-3 6 High Clover Park 2.0 This neighborhood park is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea at Cemetery Road and High Clover Boulevard NE.  Open grass area 7 J Rudy York Memorial Park 2.0 This neighborhood park is located in the West Arlington Subarea at 3209 180th Street NE.  Paths  Picnic tables  Play equipment for ages 2-12  Sport court with basketball hoop  Off-street parking 8 Jensen Park 2.0 Jensen Farm Lane. This neighborhood park is close to Kruger and Portage Creeks and within walking distance of Kent Prairie Elementary.  Large open grass play area  Picnic tables  Picnic shelter  Children’s play equipment for ages 2-12  Off and on street parking 9 Lebanon Park 0.5 This neighborhood park is located in the Old Town Business District 1 Subarea at 105 Lebanon Avenue.  Adjacent to Centennial Trail  Benches  Labyrinth artwork  Off street parking 10 Legion Park 1.0 Subarea at 114 North Olympic Avenue. The park is located in the center of downtown and the site for many of Arlington's events. The park is decorated for the winter holidays.  Public artworks  Veteran’s Memorial  Benches  Picnic tables  Gazebo and stage  Visitor Information Center   Off and on street parking 11 Stormwater Wetland Park 10.0 Subarea at 1100 West Avenue. Access from West Cox Street through Haller Park and under SR-9 bridge.  Riparian habitat along the Stillaguamish River  Wetland ponds and wildlife habitat  Trails through site and around ponds  4 picnic tables  Covered shelter suitable for picnics and special events  Fenced area used for dog park 12 Terrace Park 4.0 This community park is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 809 East Fifth Avenue. The park was planted with evergreen trees in 1925. The natural amphitheater in the back of the park.  Asphalt path  Amphitheater and stage  Benches  Picnic tables  Picnic shelter  Children's play area for ages 2-12  Sport court with basketball hoop  Restrooms 13 Waldo E Evans Memorial Park 6.0 This community park is located in the MIC Subarea at 18813 59th Avenue.  Benches  Picnic table  Children’s play area - ages 5-12  1 grass lighted 300-foot baseball field  Restrooms  Off-street parking 14 Wedgewood Park 2.0 This neighborhood park is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 17510 Gleneagle Boulevard.  Benches  Picnic tables  Children's play area for ages 5-12  Off street parking B-4 Arlington PRMP 15 Woodway Park 0.5 This neighborhood park is located in the Hilltop Subarea in the Crossings Development at 17510 Gleneagle Boulevard adjacent to Wedgewood Park.  Small playground equipment Total acres 138.0 Arlington Trails Miles This off-road trail is located in the MIC Subarea on the northwest boundary of the airport.  Connects the north segment of the Airport Trail using 188th Street NE right of way to Centennial Trail 2 Airport Trail 6.5 complete airport property. Trail access is provided by parking lots located at:  Cemetery Road  Airport Office  Bill Quake Memorial Park  Weston High School  North County Fire Station #48 3 Centennial Trail (city portion) 2.7 Old Town Residential, and Old Town Business District 1, 2 & 3 Subareas. This regional trail is located on the former Burlington Northern & Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad track corridor between Snohomish and Skagit County line.  10-foot-wide multipurpose paved trail suitable for skating, skateboarding/longboarding Trailheads are located at:  Haller Park at 1100 West Avenue with restroom  Legion Park at 114 North Olympic with restroom 4 Eagle Trail/Stormwater Park Trail 1.7 Eagle Scout project and is located in the Old Town Business District 3 Subarea in Stormwater Wetland Park. The trail links with dirt trails around the perimeter of the site.  Dirt trail around wetland ponds  Dirt trails through the site from West Cox Street to Dike Road 5 Kruger-Portage Creek Trail 0.4 dedicated open space at 80th Avenue NE and 204th Street. The trail links Zimmerman Hill Climb to Portage Street and loops through the Jensen and Portage neighborhoods.  8-foot-wide paved trail suitable in some sections. 6 River Crest Trail 0.2 206th Street NE.  Benches  Off street parking 7 Zimmerman Hill Climb Trail 0.2 This off-road trail is located in the Hilltop/Kent Prairie Subarea at Crown Ridge Boulevard. Accesses woodland and riparian habitat along Portage Creek.  Benches  Wooden hill climb stairs and elevated walkway from Crown Ridge Boulevard north to 201st Street NE  Bridge across Portage Creek Total miles 12.2 These 4 open space parcels are located in Hilltop Subarea along 67th Avenue NE at Cemetery Road.  Triangular parcel located along the west edge of 67th Avenue south from Cemetery Road  Wooded lot at the end of Hillside Court  Large wooded parcel located along 67th Avenue  Wooded lot located on the southeast corner of Highland View Drive and 67th Avenue 2 Crown Ridge 5 10.8 the Crown Ridge Estates Subdivision.  Riparian habitat along Portage Creek  Improved with Kruger/Portage Creek Trail 3 Old Burn Road 4.0 Burn Road below Kent Prairie Elementary School.  Heavily wooded site Arlington PRMP B-5 4 Portage Creek Wildlife Area Access 5.0 This open space is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea off 206th Street NE adjoining Portage Creek Wildlife Area. The city open space adjoins Belmont PAC Holdings and the trail access developed between the parcels from 206th Street.  Wooded ravine  Trail improvement from Belmont PAC Holdings and 206th Street Total acres 25.8 This public facility is located in the Old Town Business District 1 Subarea on a 0.18-acre lot at 238 N Olympic Avenue adjoining the Police Station located at 110 East 3rd Street.  2-story historic City Hall includes 750 sf basement, 3,905 sf first floor, and 3,905 second floor or total of 8,560 sf  2-story Police annex includes 13,126 sf first floor and 13,126 second floor or total of 26,252 sf  Council Chambers/public meeting room located in Police Station off public outside courtyard access 2 Public Works 7,591 This public facility is located in the Old Town Business District 3 Subarea on a 3.90-acre site at 154 West Cox Avenue directly across from Haller Park.  Stillaguamish Room – conference room available for public use 3 City Maintenance Shops & Offices 13,148 and 63rd Avenue NE.  Shop/office building 1 – 6,840 sf  Storage building 2 – 1,104 sf  Equipment storage shed 3 – 2,832 sf  Storage building 4 – 2,372 sf Total square feet 55,551 Marysville This community park is located at 6100 152nd Avenue Street NE southeast of Arlington city limits.  Quilceda Creek riparian habitat  Walking trails  Dog park  Picnic areas  Picnic shelter  3 lighted soccer fields  Restrooms  Additional athletic fields proposed Total acres 72.0 Marysville open space Acres 1 Smokey Point Boulevard 50.9 156th Street NE adjacent to Arlington city limits.  Extensive wetlands Total acres 50.9 Snohomish County Snohomish County parks Acres 1 Centennial Trail Park 8.32 This trailhead park is located along the Centennial Trail on 67th Avenue NE across from and provides access to North County Wildlife Area Park.  Scrub woodland  Paved access to Centennial Trail  Bench  2 picnic tables  19 parking spaces including 1 ADA  Sani can 2 Gissberg Twin Lakes 54.0 southwest Arlington city limits. The park was created from two gravel pits excavated for the construction of I-5. The park includes B-6 Arlington PRMP the North Lake stocked by local fishing clubs and the South Lake stocked with rainbow trout by the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife.  Walking track  Fishing sites on North Lake (age 14 years and under)  Fishing sites on South Lake (age 15 years and up)  Wading area (no lifeguards)  Paddling  Hand carry boating  Model boat racing  Picnic tables  Restrooms/Sani cans 3 River Meadows 144.6 This regional park is located at 20416 Jordan Road on the Stillaguamish River east of Arlington UGA. The park was created by the Tveit and Hovde family homesteads established in the 1800s. Ancient Olcott artifacts have been found on the park grounds indicating the site was a trading and settlement destination along with traces of an early farmhouse, apple trees, and ornamental plants typical of a farmhouse yard. Each August the park hosts the Stillaguamish Tribe’s Festival of the River and Pow Wow.  Open meadows and woodlands available for rental for large gatherings  Fishing sites along the river  1.6-miles of walking trails throughout the park  6 rental 16 and 20-foot yurts (1 ADA accessible) with heat, electricity, and fire pits  14 rental campsites with water and firepits  Picnic tables  3 picnic shelters with water and electricity 4 Twin Rivers Park 50.0 This regional park is located north across the Stillaguamish River from Arlington at 8003 SR-530 NE near the confluence of the North and South Forks of the Stillaguamish River. The County contracted Arlington to maintain and operate the park until 2019 when Arlington transferred maintenance and operations back to County.  Woodlands and riparian habitat along the river  Open meadows and fields  Picnic tables  Disc golf course sponsored by Arlington Rotary  3 grass unlighted 250-foot softball fields   Soccer fields  Restrooms and Sani cans Total acres 256.9 Snohomish County Trails Miles 1 Centennial Trail (county portion) 30.0 Burlington Northern & Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad track corridor between Snohomish and Skagit County line. Trail construction began during Washington State’s Centennial and was so named accordingly. The 1890’s Machias Station railroad depot was replicated and serves as a trailhead and rental facility in Machias.  10-foot-wide multipurpose paved trail suitable for skating, skateboarding/longboarding  6-foot-wide natural surface parallel horse trail in most areas  Converted trail/railroad bridge over the Stillaguamish River  Picnic tables and benches  Picnic shelters at Machias Trailhead  Restrooms Trailheads at:  CT North Trailhead at 32328 SR-9 Nakashima Barn in Arlington  Bryant Trailhead at SR-9 and Stanwood Bryant Road in Arlington  Haller Park Trailhead at 110 West Avenue in Arlington  Legion Park Trailhead at 114 North Olympic in Arlington  Armar Road Trailhead at 15333 67th Avenue NE in Arlington  Getchell Trailhead at 8318 Westlund Road in Arlington  Lake Cassidy Trailhead at 6216 105th Avenue NE in Lake Stevens  Rhododendron Trailhead at 10911 54th Place NE in Lake Stevens  SR-92 Overpass Trailhead at 3651 127th Avenue NE in Lake Stevens  20th Street Trailhead at 13205 20th Street in Lake Stevens  Machias Park Trailhead at 1624 Virginia Street in Snohomish  Pilchuck Trailhead at 5801 South Machias Road in Snohomish 2 Whitehorse Trail 27.0 Burlington Northern & Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad track corridor between Arlington and Darrington through the Stillaguamish River Valley. The trail originates with a junction with the Centennial Regional Trail in Arlington then parallels SR-530 and the North Fork Arlington PRMP B-7 Stillaguamish River through the backcountry corridor. Current closures between the Centennial Trail and Trafton Trailhead, and 435th Avenue NE near Darrington due to landslides and river washouts.  Trafton Trailhead Park at 115th Avenue NE near the red barn and blue silo  Miller Shingle Trailhead at 21021 SR-530 with equestrian parking  C-Post Road Trailhead at 29415 SR-530  Hazel Hole Trailhead at Mile Post 38.8 SR-530  Fortson Mill Trailhead at Fortson Mill Road  Darrington Price Street Trailhead Total miles 57.0 Snohomish County open spaces Acres 1 Centennial Trail Open Space 3.31 This open space is located along the Centennial Trail south between 162nd Street NE and 67th Avenue NE.  Open field 2 North County Wildlife Area Park 47.8 This wildlife conservancy is located along the Centennial Trail south of 155th Street NE. The heavily wooded undeveloped site is bordered on the south by an unnamed creek that drains westward into Marysville’s Strawberry Fields Athletic Complex.  Woodland habitat  Riparian habitat along unnamed creek  Walk-in access from the Armar Trailhead to Centennial Trail 3 Portage Creek Wildlife Area 187.4 Avenue NE on the property previously owned by Gene Ammon for a peat farm. Ammon restored the wetlands in the peat-mined areas and enhanced the extensive field and wetland habitat for deer, hawks, beaver, raccoons, mink, amphibians, and other small animals and waterfowl. He referred to the site as Amen’s Wildlife Sanctuary and hosted the public until 1995 when the County acquired the property with Conservation Futures funds. The County acquired an adjacent 137.0-acre dairy farm on the north boundary for additional conservancy.  My and Portage Creeks riparian habitat  Wetland and meadow trail network around and through site   Picnic tables  Portable restrooms  Parking access from 59th Avenue NE on the northeast boundary Total acres 235.2 Washington State Department of Natural Resources Washington State DNR Acres 1 SR-9 238.2 This timber trust property is located across SR-9 south of 158th Street NE.  Heavily wooded parcels on both sides of SR-9 Total acres 238.2 Arlington School District Arlington Schools Acres 1 Eagle Creek Elementary School 8.4 This elementary school is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 1216 E 5th Street adjacent to Post Middle School.  Games on asphalt  1 small playground  1 large playground  Covered play shed  Grass baseball field with backstop  Grass soccer field with standards  Multipurpose hall 2 Kent Prairie Elementary School 5.4 8110 - 207th Street NE.  Games on asphalt  2 playgrounds  Covered play shed  Basketball court  Grass baseball field with backstop  Multipurpose hall B-8 Arlington PRMP 3 Pioneer Elementary School 3.3 This elementary school is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 8213 Eaglefield Drive.  Games on asphalt  Playground  Rectangular grass soccer field with 2 baseball diamonds with backstops and bleachers at the corners  Multipurpose hall 4 Presidents Elementary School 6.5 Subarea at 505 East 3rd Street.  Games on asphalt  2 playgrounds  Rectangular grass soccer field with baseball backstop in corner  Multipurpose hall 5 Haller Middle School 11.0 This middle school is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 600 East 1st Street.  Games on asphalt  Basketball court  Rectangular grass soccer filed with 2 baseball diamonds with backstops and bleachers in the corners  Grass lighted football field with bleachers  Dirt surface track and field  Gymnasium 6 Post Middle School 8.2 at 1220 East 5th Street.  Grass baseball field with backstop  Grass multiuse soccer field with standards  Rubber surface track and grass field  Gymnasium 7 Arlington High School 16.5 This high school is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 18821 Crown Ridge Blvd.  8 tennis courts  2 rectangular grass soccer fields  2 batting cages  1 grass 200-foot softball field with backstops and bleachers  1 grass 200-foot baseball field with backstops and bleachers  1 grass 250-foot baseball field with backstop and bleachers   1 turf football field with lights and stadium  1 rubber surface 8-lane field track  Gymnasium with bleachers 8 Weston High School 16.5 172nd Street NE.  Grass area 9 Stillaguamish Valley Learning Center 16.5 This learning center is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea at 1215 East 5th Street.  Playground Total acres 69.8 40% recreation use Arlington School District open space Acres 1 Post Middle School Open Space 58.4 This Arlington School District site is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea adjacent and east of Post Middle School and adjacent to the south boundary of Country Charm Park.  Wooded riparian habitat along South Fork Stillaguamish River  Open fields 2 Pioneer School Environmental Area 17.3 This Arlington School District site is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 8213 Eaglefield Drive adjoining Pioneer Elementary School.  Extensive woodlands  Wetlands  Nature trails and exhibits Total acres 75.7 Arlington PRMP B-9 B-10 Arlington PRMP Marysville School District Marysville School District property Acres 1 Soccer Complex 34.4 NE south of Arlington city limits.  Small rectangular grass field divided into 2 junior soccer  Large rectangular grass field divided into 2 full size or multiple smaller size soccer Total acres 34.4 Homeowner Associations (HOA) Parks HOA miniparks Acres 1 Aspen Wood Meadows 0.25 Place NE.  Path  Picnic table  Playground  Sport court - basketball 2 Brickwood 1.87 These 2 miniparks are located in the West Arlington Subarea off 181st Street NE on the north boundary of J Rudy York Memorial Park.  Paved trail to Smokey Point Boulevard  Sport court - basketball 3 Crossing at Edgecomb Creek 1 2.48 This minipark is located in the Hilltop Subarea off 172nd Avenue NE.  Wooded open space  2 tennis courts 4 Crossing at Edgecomb Creek 2 0.29  Paved trail  Playground 5 Crown Ridge 3 3.55 This minipark is located in the Hilltop Subarea from Knoll Drive to Crown Ridge Boulevard under the powerlines.  Dirt paths  2 benches  Playground  Sport court - basketball 6 Crown Ridge 1 3.93 This minipark is located in the Hilltop Subarea between Valley View Drive and Crown Ridge Boulevard.  Paved trail  4 benches  6 picnic tables 7 Gleneagle – Whitehawk Tot Lot 0.09 This minipark is located in the Hilltop Subarea on Whitehawk Drive.  Playground 8 Heartland 0.56 These miniparks are located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea north of 46th Drive NE and 45th Avenue NE. The miniparks are part of a larger 37.17-acre property that extends east of the housing development on 45th Drive NE and below the bluff into farmland.  Playground north end of 46th Drive NE  Playground south end of 46th Drive NE  Wooded lot between 45th Drive NE and 191st Place NE 9 High Clover Division 2 6.73 High Clover Boulevard from 45th Avenue NE to 48th Avenue NE.  Open grass areas  2 picnic tables  Basketball court 10 Point Riley 0.26 184th Place NE.  Sport court - basketball 11 Smokey Point Meadows 0.80 This minipark is located in the West Arlington Subarea off 43rd Avenue NE below 176th Place NE.  Access path  Playground Arlington PRMP B-11 B-12 Arlington PRMP 12 Sweetwater 1.32 This minipark is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea on 206th Place NE.  Woodland  Access paths  Playground 13 Trellis Court 0.14 Place NE.  Grass area  2 benches  Tetherball court Total acres 22.27 HOA open spaces Acres 14 Bovee Acres 0.56 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea on the corner of Bovee Lane and 67th Avenue NE.  Grass lot 15 Carola Addition 0.49 access from 34th Drive NE to 180th Street NE.  Grass corridor 16 Claridge Court 0.13 These open spaces are co-located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea in Tracts 996, 997, and 995 off 189th Place NE, 43rd Drive NE, and 44th Avenue NE.  Grass lots 17 Country Manor 1 6.93 perimeter open space from 168th Place NE to 165th Place NE.  Natural open space perimeter 18 Country Manor 2 0.09 This open space is located in the West Arlington Subarea as perimeter open space around 42nd Avenue NE.  Natural open space perimeter 19 Crown Ridge 5A 0.31 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea from Crown Ridge Boulevard North.  Woodland corridor 20 Crown Ridge 5B 13.80 Ridge Boulevard and SR-9 south of Vista Drive and adjacent to Arlington High School.  Natural perimeter  Wetland  Stormwater pond 21 Dogwood Meadows / Magnolia Meadows 1.83 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea at the end of 81st Drive NE adjacent to Middle Fork Quilceda Creek  Natural Perimeter  Wetland  Stormwater Pond 22 Eagle Creek Place 2.11 This open space is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea between the powerlines and houses located along 87th Avenue NE adjoining the south boundary of Eagle Creek Elementary School.  Wooded corridor on the west  Open grass area adjacent to 87th Avenue NE 23 Eagle Heights 1 5.61  This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea between 179th Place NE and 176th Place NE adjoining SR-9.  Woodland corridor  Stormwater pond at the end of 175th Street NE 24 Eagle Heights 2 2.71 NE south across 172nd Place NE to 172nd Street NE.  Wooded corridor 25 Gleneagle Division Phase 1 4.67 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea extending south from Gleneagle Golf Course across West Country Club Drive adjoining Wedgewood Park south across Gleneagle Boulevard to Condor Drive.  Wooded corridor  Stormwater pond 26 Gleneagle Division Phase 3 0.84 Troon Court.  Stormwater retention pond Arlington PRMP B-13 27 Gleneagle Sector 3B 0.27 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea at the corner of Inverness Drive and Ballantrae Drive adjoining the powerlines and paved trail to Gleneagle Golf Course.  Dirt path access 28 Gregory Park 10.31 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea between SR-9 and 89th Avenue NE.  Woodland  Stormwater retention pond 29 High Clover 10.12 This open space is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea as the perimeter open space extending from High Clover Park north above Portage Creek Wildlife Area to 200th Street NE.  Woodland corridor 30 Highland View Estates 0.61 Hillside Court.  Wooded lot 31 Kona Crest 3.15 This open space is located in the Old Town Residential Subarea between Joann Lane and BNSF Railroad tracks along SR-9.  Wooded corridor 32 Magnolia Estates 2.24 NE/172nd Place NE and 172nd Street NE/SR-530.  Grass open area  Fences and alley access  2 parking stalls 33 Meadowbrook 8.04 around the housing cluster on 89th Avenue NE off Tveit Road.  Woodlands  Grass area under powerlines 34 River Crest Estates 1.01 This open space is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea off 206th Street NE providing access to Portage Creek Wildlife Area.  Wooded corridor  Access trail 35 Smokey Point 1.20 interior of Smokey Point Drive behind Smokey Point Transit Center.  Wooded area 36 Stoneway 0.27 This open space is located in the West Arlington Subarea at the east end of 174th Place NE.  Woodland 37 Terah/Marie 3.37 Drive NE and 195th Place NE.  Woodland 38 The Bluff at Arlington Condo 3.21 Bluff Drive bordering the Portage Creek Wildlife Area.  Woodland 39 The Colony Division – Rosecreek 1 5.92 This open space is located in the Kent Prairie Subarea off 207th Street NE under the powerlines.  Grass area under powerlines 40 The Colony Division – Twin Ponds 9.96 Stillaguamish Avenue north of 207th Street NE.  2 large wetland ponds 41 The Colony Division – Rosecreek 2 6.09 powerlines off Tveit Road.  Grass area under powerlines 42 Woodlands Sector 12.51 These open spaces are located in the Hilltop Subarea off Woodlands Way, Woodbine Drive, and Silverleaf Place.  Woodland corridors 43 Walnut Ridge 0.83 Drive NE north of 191st Place NE.  Woodland area 44 Wedgewood at Gleneagle 1.69 This open space is located in the Hilltop Subarea at the corner of Gleneagle Boulevard and 172nd Street NE/SR-531.  Natural open space perimeter B-14 Arlington PRMP 45 Whispering Breezes 0.61 This open space is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea in an interior lot off 35th Avenue NE north of 186th Place NE.  Woodland  Grass area Total acres 121.49 Private/nonprofit parks This private facility is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 7619 Country Club Lane. Gleneagle Golf Course was developed and opened in 1993.  18-hole, par 70, 6,150 yards with 5 tees per hold  Driving range  Pitching/chipping area  Putting green  Pro shop  Family restaurant bar and grill 2 Stilly Valley Pioneer Park 6.7 This nonprofit park is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea at 20722 67th Ave NE. The site includes the 4 buildings of the Stillaguamish Pioneer Historical Museum.  2 large wetland ponds  Wooded areas  Path and footbridge access and viewpoints of ponds Total acres 144,9 Private/nonprofit facilities This nonprofit facility is located in the MIC Subarea at 18513 59th Avenue NE in Bill Quake Memorial Park. The club facility was developed with a long lease agreement with the city in 1992. The club operates an extension site at Presidents Elementary School. The club provides a large variety of games, activities, educational programs, and sports throughout the year for kids in K-12th grade.  Before and after school care   Class and meeting rooms  Social activity areas  Teen Center  Gymnasium with basketball court 2 Byrnes Performing Arts Center 22,444 located in the Hilltop Subarea at 18821 Crown Ridge Blvd adjoining Arlington High School. The facilities, which are available for rent include:  Proscenium opening 40 feet wide, and 17 feet, 7 inches high  Stage depth is 34 feet and width 80 feet  Orchestra pit is 7 feet from the front edge to apron edge  Rigging includes 27 single pipe battens, 4 double, 2 side curtain tabs, 6 side light ladders, and 3 overhead shells  Video projection screen is 15 feet, 8 inches  Dressing rooms for men and women  Greenroom area 3 Stillaguamish Pioneer Historical Museum This nonprofit facility is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea at 20722 67th Ave NE. The complex includes a 6.72-acre site with wetlands and 4 buildings including:  Welcome Center pole building with carved totems of 783 sf  Old Pioneer Hall of 3,060 sf  3-story museum of 15,300 sf  Storage building of 4,500 4 Stillaguamish Athletic Club 27,176 NE on city leased land. The membership facility provides aerobic classes, personal training, specialty group training, and swimming classes.  Aerobics equipment and training rooms with mats  Lap pool, hot tub, and dry sauna  Social activity area Arlington PRMP B-15 B-16 Arlington PRMP 5 Stilly Valley Center 25,858 This nonprofit senior center is located in the West Arlington Subarea at 18308 Smokey Point Boulevard. The 16,738 square foot senior center complex of buildings provides activities, classes, entertainment, health and social, and caretaker services as well as housing referrals for senior and low-income households. A separate 9,120 square foot thrift shop is located 2 lots south of the center.  Main hall, side rooms, arts and crafts, conference, and commercial kitchen rentals for maximum 250 seating capacity 6 Stilly Valley Health Connections 2,000 This regional hospital facility (Public Hospital #District 3) is located in the West Arlington Subarea at 3405 173rd Place NE. The district provides mental health, health and wellness, drug and alcohol awareness and abuse prevention reservices to the residents of Arlington and Darrington.  Birch Room  Classroom and meeting areas Total square footage 129,407 Inventory implications  Arlington, Marysville, Snohomish County, Arlington and Marysville School Districts, Homeowner Associations (HOA), and other public and private agencies have amassed an impressive amount of acreage - that includes every conceivable kind of parkland within or directly adjacent to Arlington city limits including nature conservancies, wildlife corridors and habitats, trail systems, athletic sites, and indoor facilities.  Almost every kind of park, recreation, and open space activity - is presently provided by these public and private agencies combined within or directly adjacent to Arlington city limits including picnicking, hiking and multipurpose trails, youth and adult recreational courts and fields, indoor swimming pool, community centers, and meeting rooms.  A significant portion of the inventory are regional facilities - that are used by populations who reside inside and outside of Arlington though the maintenance and operation of these sites has and is being financed by local agencies.  However, not all of these facilities are available for public use or jointly scheduled - between the cities, county, school districts to meet city, school, and league requirements. Interlocal agreements need to resolve equitable allocations with all potential users. The agreements could share use, operation, maintenance, and development funds. Arlington PRMP Plan C-1 Appendix C: Opportunities A valuable park, recreation, and open space system includes lands that may not be suitable for built uses and developed recreational facilities. These sites can typically provide unique preserves, habitats, cultural, and historical associations. A strategic approach may also include lands that are owned for other purposes, but that under some conditions may be used for park, recreation, and open space activities. Federal, state, county, utility, school, land trusts, private homeowner associations, and private commercial operators, for example, own or control a variety of strategically important sites with many kinds of physical and socially valuable parks, recreation, and open space characteristics. The following inventory defines other possible public and privately owned properties that could provide park, recreation, and open space opportunities. Environmental resources In 1990, the Washington State legislature adopted the Growth Management Act (GMA - Chapter 36.70A of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW)). The GMA defined critical environmental areas and resource lands to be lands or soils with characteristics that are not suitable for urban development, and in some instances, to any alteration without potential risk to the environment, ecology, public safety or other issues. GMA, and subsequent minimum guidelines published by the Washington State Department of Community, Trade, & Economic Development (WACTED), defined critical areas to include:  Wetlands,  Critical recharge zones for aquifers used for potable water,  Fish and wildlife habitat conservation areas,  Frequently flooded areas, and  Geologically hazardous areas. In addition, GMA/WACTED guidelines identified resource lands that were to be provided special consideration including productive and/or unique:  Agricultural lands,  Forests, and  Mineral lands. Critical area ordinances GMA required local jurisdictions that were affected by rapid population growth (including Arlington) to identify and adopt regulations to protect such areas. In accordance with the act's requirements, Snohomish County and subsequently the Arlington Community Development Department completed comprehensive inventories and analyses of critical areas in Arlington’s urban growth area. Subsequent city critical area ordinances and comprehensive plans define and locate lands and soils that are subject to environmental hazards. Implementing critical areas and zoning ordinances further define the land use and design or development performance standards that are appropriate to each type of risk condition thereby protecting sensitive environments. Environmental protection measures conserve sensitive environmental areas in conditions that are appropriate to the land or soil's character. For example, the protecting measures retain, enhance, and sometimes expand wetland functions and flood plains. Likewise, environmental protection measures conserve steep slopes in a wooded natural state, particularly slopes with hazardous seismic combinations of erodible soil, underlying bedrock, and subsurface drainage features. Open space potentials Environmentally sensitive lands or critical areas are not capable or suitable of being developed for urban and even some rural uses. These properties remain in private ownership, however, even though the critical environmental features are appropriately conserved. C-2 Arlington PRMP Plan Arlington PRMP Plan C-3 Most of these sites are privately owned - usually as productive properties providing buffer, aesthetic, passive, or other benefits to the developed parcels. Private property owners may develop suitable lands that adjoin sensitive environmental features for urban or other intensive land uses. Therefore, although these privately owned properties conserve permanent natural areas as open space features, the lands are frequently not accessible for public use. Critical areas constitute private but significant open spaces, wildlife habitats, conservation preserves, and scenic overlooks. These lands can enhance and should be incorporated as integral, but passive components of the land use pattern and public park system as greenways, greenbelts, and urban separators. Under some conditions, these private sites may be accessed with trails, exhibits, picnic facilities, water trails, and other suitable and more active park pursuits where the use benefits the property owner and/or where public access agreements can be negotiated. Other public facilities Various public agencies own a considerable number of facilities in the city. These facilities may be available for public use if a park and recreation activity does not interfere with the agency’s primary use of the facility. Arlington public facilities Sq ft 1 City Hall & Police Station 34,812 This public facility is located in the Old Town Business District 1 on a 0.18-acre lot at 238 N Olympic Avenue adjoining the Police Station located at 110 East 3rd Street.  2-story historic City Hall includes 750 sf basement, 3,905 sf first floor, and 3,905 second floor or total of 8,560 sf  2-story Police annex includes 13,126 sf first floor and 13,126 second floor or total of 26,252 sf  Council Chambers/public meeting room located in Police Station off public outside courtyard access 2 Public Works 7,591 a 3.90-acre site at 154 West Cox Avenue directly across from Haller Park.  Stillaguamish Room – conference room available for public use 3 City Maintenance Shops & Offices 13,148 and 63rd Avenue NE.  Shop/office building 1 – 6,840 sf  Storage building 2 – 1,104 sf  Equipment storage shed 3 – 2,832 sf  Storage building 4 – 2,372 sf Total square feet 55,551 Other public/nonprofit facilities Various public/nonprofit agencies own a considerable number of facilities in the city. Other public and nonprofit parks Acres 1 Stilly Valley Pioneer Park 6.7 20722 67th Ave NE. The site includes the 4 buildings of the Stillaguamish Pioneer Historical Museum.  2 large wetland ponds  Wooded areas  Path and footbridge access and viewpoints of ponds Total acres 6.7 Other public and nonprofit facilities Sq ft 2 Arlington Boys & Girls Club 28,286 Avenue NE in Bill Quake Memorial Park. The club facility was developed with a long lease agreement with the city in 1992. The club operates an extension site at Presidents Elementary School. The club provides a large variety of games, activities, educational programs, and sports throughout the year for kids in K-12th grade.  Before and after school care  Sports, day, and summer camps  Class and meeting rooms  Social activity areas  Teen Center  Gymnasium with basketball court C-4 Arlington PRMP Plan 3 Byrnes Performing Arts Center 22,444 This nonprofit facility is part of the Arlington School District and is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 18821 Crown Ridge Blvd adjoining Arlington High School. The facilities, which are available for rent include:  Proscenium opening 40 feet wide, and 17 feet, 7 inches high  Stage depth is 34 feet and width 80 feet  Orchestra pit is 7 feet from the front edge to apron edge  Rigging includes 27 single pipe battens, 4 double, 2 side curtain tabs, 6 side light ladders, and 3 overhead shells  Video projection screen is 15 feet, 8 inches  Dressing rooms for men and women  Greenroom area 4 Stillaguamish Pioneer Historical Museum 23,643 This nonprofit facility is located in the Arlington Bluff Subarea at 20722 67th Ave NE. The complex includes a 6.72-acre site with wetlands and 4 buildings including:  Welcome Center pole building with carved totems of 783 sf  Old Pioneer Hall of 3,060 sf  3-story museum of 15,300 sf  Storage building of 4,500 5 Stilly Valley Center 25,858 Subarea at 18308 Smokey Point Boulevard. The 16,738 square foot senior center complex of buildings provides activities, classes, entertainment, health and social, and caretaker services as well as housing referrals for senior and low-income households. A separate 9,120 square foot thrift shop is located 2 lots south of the center.  Main hall, side rooms, arts and crafts, conference, and commercial kitchen rentals for maximum 250 seating capacity 6 Stilly Valley Health Connections 2,000 in the West Arlington Subarea at 3405 173rd Place NE. The district provides mental health, health and wellness, drug and alcohol awareness and abuse prevention reservices to the residents of Arlington and Darrington.  Birch Room  Classroom and meeting areas Total square footage 102,231 Private facilities Various private agencies own a considerable number of facilities in the city that should be considered for purchase in the event they become available. Private parks Acres 1 Gleneagle Golf Course 138.2 This private facility is located in the Hilltop Subarea at 7619 Country Club Lane. Gleneagle Golf Course was developed and opened in 1993.  18-hole, par 70, 6,150 yards with 5 tees per hold  Driving range  Pitching/chipping area  Putting green  Pro shop  Family restaurant bar and grill Total acres 138.2 Private facilities Sq ft 2 Stillaguamish Athletic Club 27,176 This private facility is located in the MIC Subarea at 4417 172nd St NE on city leased land. The membership facility provides aerobic classes, personal training, specialty group training, and swimming classes.  Aerobics equipment and training rooms with mats  Lap pool, hot tub, and dry sauna  Social activity area Total square feet 27,176 Arlington PRMP Plan C-5 Conclusions  A valuable park, recreation, and open space system includes lands that may not be suitable for built uses – and developed recreational facilities, but which can provide unique preserves, habitats, cultural, and historical associations. These combined social and physical attributes provide a balanced dimension to the park and recreation experience.  Strategically important sites – are owned or controlled by nonprofit and private facility operators with most kinds of physical and socially valuable parks, recreational, and open space characteristics.  A quality park and recreation system does not have to be implemented strictly by public monies or purchase – but by the creative interplay of public and private market resources using a variety of techniques including leases, easements, tax incentives, design and development innovations, and enlightened private property interests. Future parks, recreation, and open space acquisition strategies may use traditional purchase options as well as cost effective alternatives. Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 1 / 50 Q1 How often do you utilize the following Arlington parks shown in the preceding graphic? Answered: 286 Skipped: 2 4%4% 4% 3%3% 3% 4%4% 4% 2%2% 2% 6%6% 6% 4%4% 4% 1%1% 1% 6%6% 6% 16%16% 16% 3%3% 3% 22%22% 22% 3%3% 3% 6%6% 6% 7%7% 7% 22%22% 22% 6%6% 6% 8%8% 8% 3%3% 3% 4%4% 4% 12%12% 12% 26%26% 26% 12%12% 12% 10%10% 10% 37%37% 37% 5%5% 5% 12%12% 12% 13%13% 13% 36%36% 36% 10%10% 10% 19%19% 19% 4%4% 4% 5%5% 5% 4%4% 4% 6%6% 6% 24%24% 24% 21%21% 21% 16%16% 16% 18%18% 18% 28%28% 28% 10%10% 10% 23%23% 23% 12%12% 12% 20%20% 20% 17%17% 17% 27%27% 27% 10%10% 10% 12%12% 12% 8%8% 8% 12%12% 12% 55%55% 55% 34%34% 34% 66%66% 66% 67%67% 67% 12%12% 12% 80%80% 80% 58%58% 58% 67%67% 67% 17%17% 17% 66%66% 66% 42%42% 42% 83%83% 83% 79%79% 79% 85%85% 85% 77%77% 77% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Never Yearly Monthly Weekly Daily 1. Bill Quake Memorial Park 2. Centennial Park 3. Country Charm Park 4. Forest Trail Park 5. Haller Park 6. High Clover Park 7. Jensen Park 8. Lebanon Park 9. Legion Park 10. Stormwater Wetland Park 11. Terrace Park 12. Waldo E Evans Memori... 13. Wedgewood Park 14. Woodway Park 15. York Memorial Park Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 2 / 50 55% 152 24% 66 12% 32 6% 18 4% 10 278 1.81 34% 96 21% 60 26% 73 16% 44 3% 8 281 2.32 66% 181 16% 44 12% 34 2% 5 4% 10 274 1.61 67% 186 18% 51 10% 28 3% 9 1% 4 278 1.54 12% 33 28% 78 37% 104 22% 62 2% 6 283 2.75 80% 223 10% 27 5% 15 3% 8 2% 5 278 1.36 58% 163 23% 63 12% 33 6% 18 1% 3 280 1.70 67% 183 12% 33 13% 36 7% 19 1% 4 275 1.65 17% 47 20% 55 36% 100 22% 63 6% 16 281 2.81 66% 183 17% 48 10% 28 6% 18 1% 2 279 1.59 42% 117 27% 74 19% 54 8% 22 4% 10 277 2.04 83% 227 10% 27 4% 10 3% 9 1% 2 275 1.30 79% 221 12% 32 5% 14 3% 7 1% 4 278 1.35 85% 235 8% 21 4% 11 3% 8 0% 1 276 1.26 77% 213 12% 32 6% 16 4% 10 2% 6 277 1.43 NEVER YEARLY MONTHLY WEEKLY DAILY TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE 1. Bill Quake Memorial Park 2. Centennial Park 3. Country Charm Park 4. Forest Trail Park 5. Haller Park 6. High Clover Park 7. Jensen Park 8. Lebanon Park 9. Legion Park 10. Stormwater Wetland Park 11. Terrace Park 12.Waldo E Evans Memorial Park 13. Wedgewood Park 14. Woodway Park 15. York Memorial Park Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 3 / 50 Q2 How often do you utilize the following Snohomish County parks shown in the preceding graphic? Answered: 285 Skipped: 3 53% 148 29% 81 14% 38 3% 7 2% 6 280 1.72 26% 73 42% 120 22% 61 8% 23 2% 6 283 2.18 2%2% 2% 3%3% 3% 8%8% 8% 14%14% 14% 22%22% 22% 29%29% 29% 42%42% 42% 53%53% 53% 26%26% 26% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Never Yearly Monthly Weekly Daily 17. Portage Creek Wildli... 18. Twins Rivers Park NEVER YEARLY MONTHLY WEEKLY DAILY TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE 17. Portage Creek Wildlife Area 18. Twins Rivers Park Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 4 / 50 Q3 There is an extensive inventory of mini-parks owned, developed, and maintained by Homeowner Associations (HOAs) in Arlington. Only residents of Homeowner Associations (HOAs) can use private HOA parks. If you are a HOA resident, how often do you utilize your HOA parks? Answered: 265 Skipped: 23 Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 5 / 50 8%8% 8%11%11% 11%7%7% 7%6%6% 6%9%9% 9%60%60% 60% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Not HOA re …Never Yearly Monthly Weekly Daily Use HOA parks Channing Park HOA Crofton Hills HOA Glennwood HOA Maple Creek HOA Maple Hills HOA Morgans Creek HOA Parke Meadows HOA Pearl Jones HOA Pioneer Ridge (High Point)... Rainier Vista HOA Savana HOA Tamarack HOA The Reserve HOA Timberlane Estates HOA Wingfield HOA Winterwood Estates HOA Wood Crest HOA Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 6 / 50 60% 158 9% 23 6% 16 7% 19 11% 29 8% 20 265 1.24 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 NOT HOA RESIDENT NEVER YEARLY MONTHLY WEEKLY DAILY TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Use HOA parks Channing Park HOA Crofton Hills HOA Glennwood HOA Maple Creek HOA Maple Hills HOA Morgans Creek HOA Parke Meadows HOA Pearl Jones HOA Pioneer Ridge (High Point) HOA Rainier Vista HOA Savana HOA Tamarack HOA The Reserve HOA Timberlane Estates HOA Wingfield HOA Winterwood Estates HOA Wood Crest HOA Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 7 / 50 Q4 How often do you utilize the following off-road trails in Arlington shown in the preceding graphic? Answered: 283 Skipped: 5 8%8% 8% 11%11% 11% 4%4% 4% 7%7% 7% 18%18% 18% 30%30% 30% 4%4% 4% 5%5% 5% 3%3% 3% 2%2% 2% 2%2% 2% 17%17% 17% 4%4% 4% 8%8% 8% 23%23% 23% 29%29% 29% 11%11% 11% 13%13% 13% 9%9% 9% 6%6% 6% 6%6% 6% 35%35% 35% 10%10% 10% 13%13% 13% 23%23% 23% 17%17% 17% 15%15% 15% 14%14% 14% 16%16% 16% 8%8% 8% 9%9% 9% 22%22% 22% 15%15% 15% 26%26% 26% 28%28% 28% 13%13% 13% 66%66% 66% 67%67% 67% 70%70% 70% 83%83% 83% 82%82% 82% 19%19% 19% 71%71% 71% 53%53% 53% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Never Yearly Monthly Weekly Daily 1. Airport Trail 2. Centennial Trail - City... 3. Country Charm Trail 4. Eagle/Stormw... 5. Portage/Krug... 6. Rivercrest Trail 7. Zimmerman Trail Climb 8. Centennial Trail - Coun... 9. Portage Creek Trail 10. Whitehorse Trail Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 8 / 50 28% 80 23% 64 23% 64 18% 51 8% 22 281 2.54 13% 36 17% 49 29% 82 30% 84 11% 32 283 3.10 66% 182 15% 41 11% 31 4% 11 4% 10 275 1.64 67% 184 14% 39 13% 35 5% 14 1% 3 275 1.59 70% 190 16% 44 9% 25 3% 9 1% 4 272 1.50 83% 225 8% 22 6% 16 2% 5 1% 3 271 1.30 82% 219 9% 23 6% 15 2% 6 1% 3 266 1.31 19% 53 22% 61 35% 96 17% 48 7% 18 276 2.70 71% 193 15% 40 10% 27 4% 10 1% 3 273 1.50 53% 146 26% 72 13% 35 8% 22 1% 2 277 1.78 NEVER YEARLY MONTHLY WEEKLY DAILY TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE 1. Airport Trail 2. Centennial Trail - City Portion 3. Country Charm Trail 4. Eagle/Stormwater Park Trail 5. Portage/Kruger Creek Trail 6. Rivercrest Trail 7. Zimmerman Trail Climb 8. Centennial Trail - County Portion 9. Portage Creek Trail 10. Whitehorse Trail Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 9 / 50 Q5 What priority would you give to increasing or adding the following types of outdoor facilities in Arlington? Answered: 286 Skipped: 2 29%29% 29% 9%9% 9% 18%18% 18% 10%10% 10% 9%9% 9% 15%15% 15% 12%12% 12% 10%10% 10% 12%12% 12% 17%17% 17% 30%30% 30% 34%34% 34% 36%36% 36% 30%30% 30% 15%15% 15% 23%23% 23% 27%27% 27% 27%27% 27% 31%31% 31% 24%24% 24% 33%33% 33% 40%40% 40% 36%36% 36% 29%29% 29% 38%38% 38% 32%32% 32% 40%40% 40% 42%42% 42% 32%32% 32% 32%32% 32% 6%6% 6% 13%13% 13% 7%7% 7% 18%18% 18% 20%20% 20% 16%16% 16% 14%14% 14% 13%13% 13% 16%16% 16% 14%14% 14% 3%3% 3% 4%4% 4% 4%4% 4% 13%13% 13% 18%18% 18% 14%14% 14% 8%8% 8% 9%9% 9% 10%10% 10% 13%13% 13% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Lowest Low Average High Highest Trails and open spaces Picnic facilities a... Playgrounds and play areas Spray and splash parks Skate parks Bike park/pump track Basketball, tennis, and... Soccer, baseball, an... Community gardens Dog parks Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 10 / 50 3% 9 6% 16 33% 91 30% 83 29% 81 280 3.75 4% 12 13% 37 40% 111 34% 96 9% 25 281 3.30 4% 10 7% 19 36% 102 36% 100 18% 49 280 3.57 13% 37 18% 51 29% 80 30% 84 10% 27 279 3.05 18% 52 20% 57 38% 106 15% 41 9% 26 282 2.76 14% 39 16% 45 32% 90 23% 65 15% 43 282 3.10 8% 22 14% 39 40% 112 27% 76 12% 33 282 3.21 9% 24 13% 37 42% 119 27% 75 10% 27 282 3.16 10% 27 16% 45 32% 89 31% 86 12% 34 281 3.20 13% 37 14% 40 32% 90 24% 69 17% 47 283 3.17 #OTHER, PLEASE SPECIFY DATE 1 Turf sports facilities specifically 12/6/2021 8:38 PM 2 Skate park within walking distance of middle and high school 12/4/2021 6:42 PM 3 Dogs not being leashed/muzzeled is why we do not go to all the parks, trails, campgrounds, shop in town and parades 12/4/2021 5:22 PM 4 Special needs facility for kids and adults 12/2/2021 11:06 PM 5 make playgrpunds that are more than a slide. forest park playground could be much larger and attract more kids from young to old. add workout circuits. 12/1/2021 10:48 PM 6 Pool please!!!!12/1/2021 6:09 AM 7 Outdoor exercise park 11/30/2021 7:23 PM 8 Asphalt pump track and some jump lines would be cool 11/29/2021 10:53 AM 9 We should improve the tee pads at twin rivers disc golf course. We have one of the nicest courses in the county right here in Arlington and the only thing holding it back from being one of the top courses in the state is the crummy tee pads. 11/26/2021 5:45 PM 10 Monuments or more art with seating and covering for outdoor events 11/26/2021 3:15 PM 11 The skate park really need some work done to it and some some beginner transition such as mini ramp and some small quarter pipes so the street section could have a bit more flow to it. 11/26/2021 1:51 PM 12 Pickle ball 11/26/2021 4:11 AM 13 I use River Meadows County Park weekly due to its proximity to our home and it’s size for my dogs. 11/25/2021 8:43 AM 14 Community Swimming Pool is needed.11/24/2021 6:10 AM 15 Off leash dog area 11/22/2021 6:55 AM 16 You should really check out the parks on okinawa japan. They are some of the most well kept 11/19/2021 8:19 PM LOWEST LOW AVERAGE HIGH HIGHEST TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Trails and open spaces Picnic facilities and shelters Playgrounds and play areas Spray and splash parks Skate parks Bike park/pump track Basketball, tennis, and volleyball courts Soccer, baseball, and softball fields Community gardens Dog parks Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 11 / 50 and interesting parks i have ever seen. 17 Pickleball & Outdoor Swimming Pool 11/19/2021 8:17 PM 18 Off road trail system 11/19/2021 3:20 PM 19 Indoor swimming venue....PLEASE!11/19/2021 10:27 AM 20 Just more beautiful trails and open spaces please. These work well for all ages! We need more places to picnic that aren't crowded. Also, please increase easy-to-access trails for those with disabilities. 11/9/2021 9:53 AM 21 Trails, Trails, Trails!10/27/2021 9:43 AM 22 it would be nice not to have to go outside of town for a pump track - an outdoor or indoor would be great. We are lucky to have a skateboard park but update or covered area would be great. I also have to leave to swim but I understand this is expensive. 10/21/2021 10:52 AM 23 Recreation center with swimming pool 10/15/2021 9:11 AM 24 Outdoor concert venues 10/14/2021 4:02 PM 25 The items marked "Average" were rated so because I think we already do a wonderful job of creating and maintaining these activities, not because I don't see the as important. Community gardens seems especially important right now although I think they speak to a small minority of the community. I really want to see Arlington move forward with more and more activities that support teens having fun in a healthy way. 10/12/2021 12:11 PM 26 As a parent our focus should also be shifted to reducing homelessness around our most vulnerable population - our children. 10/11/2021 6:10 PM 27 I live in the Smokey Point area and utilize the Airport trail 5-6 times a week and would love to have something in the area that would be similar to Jennings Park in marysville. We are being inundated with large construction using up the natural state of our area and yet nothing seems to be set aside for just simple family outings. I am very concerned that the area behind the Stillaguamish Athletic Club is going to be eliminated and could/would make a lovely area to allow families, workers, visitors to slip away into a natural setting. It would be an added feature for the Fly-ins and the draw that our airport has to others from other areas. Mostly, I just really think that all the construction needs to be balanced out with spaces set aside for outdoor activity. 10/11/2021 4:19 PM 28 Community Pool 10/11/2021 1:51 PM 29 Community Pool 10/11/2021 12:59 PM 30 Pickleball courts 10/11/2021 10:22 AM 31 YMCA 10/10/2021 8:31 PM 32 Covered play areas please (it rains a lot here).10/9/2021 1:11 PM 33 art in parks 10/9/2021 12:58 PM 34 Outdoor exercise equipment like the type in downtown Everett 10/7/2021 9:20 PM 35 Adding trash cans and more benches along Centennial Trail 10/7/2021 1:33 AM 36 There needs to be more parks/playgrounds in the Smokey Pointe/Airport Trail area.10/5/2021 5:37 PM 37 Municipal RV park 10/5/2021 1:40 PM 38 Adding any of these types of outdoor facilities would be great. The big problem with the existing ones (which I presume would end up being equally true for new facilities) is security. I have stopped going to any of these places because of the sketchy people that I see hanging out there who are panhandling (sometimes too aggressively) and/or using drugs. Additionally, you take your chances if you leave your car in the parking lot to go enjoy the park. One only has to visit the Arlington Facebook community pages to know that many people get their vehicles vandalized or stolen while they are enjoying the park. That’s sort of sucks the fun out of enjoying any sort of outdoor spaces. 10/5/2021 12:48 PM 39 Pools 10/4/2021 10:37 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 12 / 50 40 Access to trails from neighborhoods. Especially pedestrian and biking access to the Centennial down 172nd 10/4/2021 9:31 PM 41 beach trails 10/4/2021 6:36 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 13 / 50 Q6 What priority would you give to increasing or adding the following types of indoor facilities in Arlington? Answered: 284 Skipped: 4 12%12% 12% 15%15% 15% 20%20% 20% 25%25% 25% 16%16% 16% 16%16% 16% 14%14% 14% 13%13% 13% 22%22% 22% 32%32% 32% 12%12% 12% 3%3% 3% 4%4% 4% 10%10% 10% 4%4% 4% 8%8% 8% 5%5% 5% 3%3% 3% 23%23% 23% 33%33% 33% 32%32% 32% 40%40% 40% 34%34% 34% 25%25% 25% 24%24% 24% 26%26% 26% 32%32% 32% 34%34% 34% 25%25% 25% 14%14% 14% 16%16% 16% 26%26% 26% 21%21% 21% 22%22% 22% 16%16% 16% 11%11% 11% 38%38% 38% 32%32% 32% 27%27% 27% 26%26% 26% 35%35% 35% 37%37% 37% 40%40% 40% 31%31% 31% 26%26% 26% 19%19% 19% 29%29% 29% 40%40% 40% 38%38% 38% 42%42% 42% 41%41% 41% 41%41% 41% 41%41% 41% 38%38% 38% 14%14% 14% 13%13% 13% 13%13% 13% 6%6% 6% 10%10% 10% 14%14% 14% 15%15% 15% 19%19% 19% 14%14% 14% 9%9% 9% 19%19% 19% 26%26% 26% 24%24% 24% 14%14% 14% 20%20% 20% 15%15% 15% 21%21% 21% 26%26% 26% 13%13% 13% 8%8% 8% 8%8% 8% 4%4% 4% 5%5% 5% 9%9% 9% 7%7% 7% 10%10% 10% 7%7% 7% 6%6% 6% 15%15% 15% 17%17% 17% 18%18% 18% 8%8% 8% 15%15% 15% 13%13% 13% 17%17% 17% 22%22% 22% Childcare Indoor playground Children's museum Youth activity center Indoor gymnasium... Fitness facility... Climbing wall or structure Indoor walking / running track Lap swimming pool Leisure swimming pool Spray / splash feature Small-medium meeting room... Large event rooms and... Classrooms (yoga, pilat... Computer / IT / media... Commercial kitchen... Nonprofit space (city... Nonprofit space (lease... Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 14 / 50 13% 34 14% 39 38% 104 23% 62 12% 32 271 3.07 8% 21 13% 36 32% 87 33% 91 15% 40 275 3.34 8% 22 13% 36 27% 76 32% 89 20% 55 278 3.43 4% 10 6% 16 26% 73 40% 111 25% 69 279 3.76 5% 14 10% 29 35% 96 34% 94 16% 45 278 3.46 9% 24 14% 38 37% 103 25% 69 16% 46 280 3.27 7% 19 15% 42 40% 111 24% 68 14% 39 279 3.24 10% 29 19% 54 31% 87 26% 71 13% 37 278 3.12 7% 20 14% 37 26% 70 32% 88 22% 59 274 3.47 6% 18 9% 24 19% 54 34% 93 32% 88 277 3.75 15% 42 19% 51 29% 78 25% 68 12% 34 273 3.00 17% 47 26% 71 40% 108 14% 38 3% 9 273 2.60 18% 50 24% 65 38% 105 16% 44 4% 12 276 2.65 8% 23 14% 39 42% 116 26% 72 10% 28 278 3.15 15% 41 20% 55 41% 113 21% 58 4% 10 277 2.79 13% 36 15% 42 41% 113 22% 61 8% 22 274 2.97 17% 47 21% 57 41% 112 16% 44 5% 14 274 2.71 22% 60 26% 71 38% 105 11% 30 3% 9 275 2.48 25% 68 26% 70 37% 100 10% 26 3% 9 273 2.41 3%3% 3%10%10% 10%37%37% 37%26%26% 26%25%25% 25% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Lowest Low Average High Highest Rental/lease space (busin... LOWEST LOW AVERAGE HIGH HIGHEST TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Childcare Indoor playground Children's museum Youth activity center Indoor gymnasium (basketball, volleyball, etc.) Fitness facility (weights, aerobic, other) Climbing wall or structure Indoor walking / running track Lap swimming pool Leisure swimming pool Spray / splash feature Small-medium meeting rooms and rental space Large event rooms and rental space Classrooms (yoga, pilates, tai chi, exercise, karate, other) Computer / IT / media classroom Commercial kitchen (cooking classes and event rental) Nonprofit space (city sponsored option) Nonprofit space (leased option) Rental/lease space (business revenue generating) Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 15 / 50 #OTHER, PLEASE SPECIFY DATE 1 Indoor/covered skate park. We have a decent skate park but it can only be used a few months out of the year. 12/7/2021 7:04 AM 2 Love an indoor walking track, and indoor pool.12/4/2021 5:22 PM 3 Summer camps, swim lessons 11/30/2021 7:23 PM 4 In door skatepark or a covered mini ramp for all season use 11/26/2021 1:51 PM 5 The rivers are not always the safest space for cooling in our hot summer months. And indoor recreational pool is a much needed addition to our community. 11/25/2021 8:43 AM 6 We need a community center and a community pool.11/24/2021 6:10 AM 7 YMCA Building would be a great addition 11/19/2021 8:17 PM 8 Indoor racketball court, pickleball court. We need a YMCA!!!11/19/2021 10:27 AM 9 Would love to see the old Haggen's on Hwy 9 turned into a community rec center for the city. Other cities have done this by buying Walmarts or other large buildings and converting them. The city really needs a community rec center. 11/7/2021 6:23 AM 10 How do we get the drug users/homeless off the streets and parks!10/27/2021 9:43 AM 11 These would all improve our community and seem essential.10/12/2021 7:18 PM 12 All great ideas above. Our community has a lot of outdoor options, it’s the indoor activities that are lacking during the winter/rainy months. Therefore parents go elsewhere. To other surrounding cities 10/11/2021 6:10 PM 13 As stated in previous comment, I would love to see a multi function, activity park that would have small meeting spaces, community garden, short walking paths, playground, picnic tables, etc. Something that could be enjoyed by a variety of individuals or groups. Like for all the businesses that are being built could take a short walk on a break or enjoy lunch outside at a table or where small celebrations of 50 or so people could be held with outdoor activity to be enjoyed as well. Again, something like Jennings Park is needed in Smokey Point. We are being swallowed up by concrete and businesses. The little York Park is sweet but how about expanding even that little park with the home next door for use, etc. 10/11/2021 4:19 PM 14 Community Pool 10/11/2021 1:51 PM 15 Community Pool 10/11/2021 12:59 PM 16 Sauna; childcare offered in conjunction with adult fitness spaces/classes—yoga with onsite childcare would be my ideal 10/8/2021 4:58 PM 17 Outdoor tennis court, pickle ball 10/5/2021 10:26 PM 18 plenty of private gyms/opportunities. A community pool with meeting rooms/rentals would be awesome. 10/4/2021 9:31 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 16 / 50 Q7 Which recreational groups or programs have you participated in? Answered: 281 Skipped: 7 3%3% 3% 8%8% 8% 3%3% 3% 4%4% 4% 0%0% 0% 9%9% 9% 12%12% 12% 4%4% 4% 6%6% 6% 4%4% 4% 6%6% 6% 9%9% 9% 10%10% 10% 11%11% 11% 12%12% 12% 12%12% 12% 23%23% 23% 16%16% 16% 8%8% 8% 13%13% 13% 9%9% 9% 9%9% 9% 13%13% 13% 4%4% 4% 12%12% 12% 12%12% 12% 5%5% 5% 36%36% 36% 29%29% 29% 35%35% 35% 17%17% 17% 16%16% 16% 21%21% 21% 13%13% 13% 18%18% 18% 16%16% 16% 14%14% 14% 40%40% 40% 58%58% 58% 46%46% 46% 57%57% 57% 63%63% 63% 51%51% 51% 79%79% 79% 49%49% 49% 47%47% 47% 55%55% 55% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Never Yearly Monthly Weekly Daily Arlington Parks &... Marysville Parks &... Snohomish County Parks... Independent sports group... Nonprofit club organization... Nonprofit club organization... Senior Center Private specialized... School programs or... Church groups Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 17 / 50 40% 111 36% 98 16% 44 6% 16 3% 7 276 1.95 58% 160 29% 81 8% 22 4% 11 1% 2 276 1.60 46% 126 35% 95 13% 34 6% 15 1% 2 272 1.79 57% 156 17% 47 9% 24 9% 26 8% 22 275 1.95 63% 169 16% 42 9% 25 10% 26 3% 8 270 1.75 51% 140 21% 57 13% 36 11% 31 4% 11 275 1.97 79% 220 13% 36 4% 11 4% 10 0% 1 278 1.33 49% 135 18% 51 12% 33 12% 34 9% 25 278 2.15 47% 130 16% 44 12% 33 12% 33 12% 34 274 2.26 55% 152 14% 38 5% 13 23% 62 4% 10 275 2.05 #OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE 1 We used to go to parks, trails, campgrounds, downtown shopping, community activities, but with people bringing their unmuzzled dogs we cannot enjoy any of it anymore. People unleash their dogs on the trails and down at the river with zero thought of others 12/4/2021 5:22 PM 2 Evergreen Mountain Bike Alliance 11/28/2021 12:41 PM 3 Mostly an unofficial collective of adult skateboards where we meet up at the skatepark on any nice day. 11/26/2021 1:51 PM 4 My daughters play sports for AHS.11/25/2021 8:43 AM 5 Please consider the needs of our growing community and create a community swimming pool and community center. 11/24/2021 6:10 AM 6 Veterans & Law Enforcement Families Groups 11/19/2021 8:17 PM 7 anything Nature!10/27/2021 9:43 AM 8 Was a very frequent Everett Parks and Rec participant year round. Its a great disappointment that they have ceased to exist. 10/12/2021 7:18 PM 9 Our children are raised but we were members of the Stillaguamish athletic club and Boys and Girls club as well as other youth organizations. Our children were homeschooled so our sports were enjoyed via community programs. We have enjoyed the airport trail for 26 years and are concerned that the portion near the newest construction on 172nd is going to be destroyed. Honestly even the lot on the corner of 172nd and 43 could be a great community garden area or a new library or...Quite honestly what benefits have we received for being incorporated into Arlington? Not much. I take my grand children to York Park and for walks and rides on the trail but the Smokey Point Library is a huge disappointment and we could have so much more that would balance out our community. 10/11/2021 4:19 PM 10 Community Pool 10/11/2021 12:59 PM 11 Edmonds parks and rec 10/11/2021 10:22 AM NEVER YEARLY MONTHLY WEEKLY DAILY TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Arlington Parks & Recreation Marysville Parks & Recreation Snohomish County Parks & Recreation Independent sports group or league not affiliated with a city Nonprofit club organization - YMCA Nonprofit club organization - Boys & Girls, Scouts, other Senior Center Private specialized centers (aquatic, fitness, other) School programs or sports Church groups Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 18 / 50 12 arts council activities 10/9/2021 12:58 PM 13 Arlington Arts Council 10/7/2021 10:20 AM 14 many great non profit, exercise and church opportunities to be inclusive in Arlington for living, work and play. 10/4/2021 9:31 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 19 / 50 Q8 What priority would you give to the addition of the following recreation programs provided in Arlington (by age group)? Answered: 281 Skipped: 7 5% 14 6% 17 29% 81 36% 98 24% 65 275 3.67 4% 10 2% 5 18% 49 42% 116 35% 98 278 4.03 7% 20 14% 39 42% 116 25% 69 12% 32 276 3.20 9% 24 14% 38 46% 126 19% 53 13% 35 276 3.13 6% 16 10% 27 39% 106 31% 85 15% 41 275 3.39 7% 20 9% 26 37% 103 27% 75 20% 55 279 3.43 3% 7 3% 8 37% 104 35% 98 22% 61 278 3.71 24%24% 24% 35%35% 35% 12%12% 12% 13%13% 13% 15%15% 15% 20%20% 20% 22%22% 22% 36%36% 36% 42%42% 42% 25%25% 25% 19%19% 19% 31%31% 31% 27%27% 27% 35%35% 35% 29%29% 29% 18%18% 18% 42%42% 42% 46%46% 46% 39%39% 39% 37%37% 37% 37%37% 37% 6%6% 6% 14%14% 14% 14%14% 14% 10%10% 10% 9%9% 9% 3%3% 3% 5%5% 5% 4%4% 4% 7%7% 7% 9%9% 9% 6%6% 6% 7%7% 7% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Lowest Low Average High Highest Youth programs (0-11) Teen-young adult progra... Young adult programs... Adult programs (30-55) Senior programs... Elder programs (70+) Programs for those with... LOWEST LOW AVERAGE HIGH HIGHEST TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Youth programs (0-11) Teen-young adult programs (11-21) Young adult programs (21-30) Adult programs (30-55) Senior programs (55-70) Elder programs (70+) Programs for those with disabilities Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 20 / 50 Q9 What priority would you give to the addition of the following types of recreation programs in Arlington? Answered: 282 Skipped: 6 13%13% 13% 17%17% 17% 9%9% 9% 14%14% 14% 12%12% 12% 11%11% 11% 9%9% 9% 13%13% 13% 16%16% 16% 25%25% 25% 11%11% 11% 25%25% 25% 13%13% 13% 25%25% 25% 44%44% 44% 32%32% 32% 33%33% 33% 32%32% 32% 26%26% 26% 25%25% 25% 33%33% 33% 31%31% 31% 32%32% 32% 22%22% 22% 34%34% 34% 20%20% 20% 39%39% 39% 30%30% 30% 37%37% 37% 37%37% 37% 36%36% 36% 40%40% 40% 46%46% 46% 40%40% 40% 35%35% 35% 30%30% 30% 41%41% 41% 31%31% 31% 39%39% 39% 12%12% 12% 5%5% 5% 16%16% 16% 12%12% 12% 13%13% 13% 16%16% 16% 14%14% 14% 9%9% 9% 12%12% 12% 8%8% 8% 18%18% 18% 7%7% 7% 17%17% 17% 12%12% 12% 5%5% 5% 6%6% 6% 4%4% 4% 7%7% 7% 7%7% 7% 6%6% 6% 5%5% 5% 6%6% 6% 6%6% 6% 9%9% 9% 3%3% 3% 10%10% 10% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Lowest Low Average High Highest Preschool childcare After-school programs Fitness (aerobics,... Health, wellness, an... Dance, music, or drama Art or textile Education and media Athletics (non-school ... Sports league or competiti... Aquatics classes /... Fitness (aerobics,... Outdoor recreation... Travel (local trips to... Environmental (park and tr... Landscape and gardening... Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 21 / 50 12% 32 12% 32 39% 107 25% 69 13% 36 276 3.16 5% 13 5% 13 30% 84 44% 122 17% 46 278 3.63 6% 16 16% 44 37% 103 32% 90 9% 26 279 3.24 4% 11 12% 34 37% 104 33% 92 14% 38 279 3.40 7% 19 13% 36 36% 102 32% 89 12% 35 281 3.30 7% 20 16% 45 40% 111 26% 72 11% 31 279 3.18 6% 16 14% 38 46% 127 25% 68 9% 26 275 3.18 5% 15 9% 24 40% 109 33% 91 13% 35 274 3.39 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 6% 17 12% 33 35% 98 31% 87 16% 45 280 3.39 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0 0.00 6% 16 8% 23 30% 83 32% 89 25% 69 280 3.61 9% 24 18% 49 41% 113 22% 61 11% 32 279 3.10 3% 8 7% 19 31% 86 34% 95 25% 70 278 3.72 10% 29 17% 48 39% 109 20% 55 13% 37 278 3.08 #OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE 1 Im for recreational programs for all ages, however it should be a mixed blend of those in charge so it doesnt get biased, or political 12/4/2021 5:22 PM 2 pre k at elementary schools 12/1/2021 10:48 PM 3 Adult softball 11/29/2021 9:10 AM 4 Our children need more places to learn to swim.11/24/2021 6:10 AM 5 How do we engage people to be stewards of their community and environment and be educated and productive! 10/27/2021 9:43 AM 6 A community center that offers dance, music drama at a community level would be wonderful as well a education center with a kitchen that could be used to teach simple skills, etc. 10/11/2021 4:19 PM 7 Community Pool 10/11/2021 1:51 PM 8 Community Pool 10/11/2021 12:59 PM 9 Season edible plants would be an amazing feature!10/5/2021 10:11 PM LOWEST LOW AVERAGE HIGH HIGHEST TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Preschool childcare After-school programs Fitness (aerobics, pilate, etc.) Health, wellness, and nutrition Dance, music, or drama Art or textile Education and media Athletics (non-school and sports leagues) Sports league or competition play Aquatics classes / programs Fitness (aerobics, cross-fit, weight lifting, personal training, etc.) Outdoor recreation (skiing, hiking, camping, rafting, golf, etc.) Travel (local trips to museums, exhibitions, parks, etc.) Environmental (park and trail maintenance, habitat restoration, etc.) Landscape and gardening classes or botanical arrangement Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 22 / 50 10 youth programs (sports or otherwise) are covered by school opportunities. if people want tech, travel, environmental or other classes, they take them online or go to Everett. 10/4/2021 9:31 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 23 / 50 Q10 What priority would you give to the addition of the following types of indoor programs in Arlington? Answered: 277 Skipped: 11 16%16% 16% 20%20% 20% 14%14% 14% 11%11% 11% 11%11% 11% 12%12% 12% 11%11% 11% 7%7% 7% 20%20% 20% 28%28% 28% 40%40% 40% 31%31% 31% 27%27% 27% 32%32% 32% 29%29% 29% 25%25% 25% 13%13% 13% 28%28% 28% 31%31% 31% 30%30% 30% 45%45% 45% 42%42% 42% 42%42% 42% 40%40% 40% 41%41% 41% 49%49% 49% 41%41% 41% 14%14% 14% 6%6% 6% 6%6% 6% 15%15% 15% 10%10% 10% 12%12% 12% 14%14% 14% 21%21% 21% 7%7% 7% 11%11% 11% 4%4% 4% 4%4% 4% 5%5% 5% 4%4% 4% 6%6% 6% 9%9% 9% 12%12% 12% 4%4% 4% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Lowest Low Average High Highest Preschool childcare After-school programs Athletics (basketball,... Fitness (yoga, pilate,... Health, wellness, an... Dance, music, or drama Art or textile Media Education Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 24 / 50 11% 29 14% 39 31% 85 28% 75 16% 44 272 3.24 4% 12 6% 16 30% 83 40% 108 20% 54 273 3.64 4% 11 6% 17 45% 124 31% 85 14% 37 274 3.44 5% 15 15% 41 42% 116 27% 73 11% 30 275 3.23 4% 12 10% 28 42% 115 32% 88 11% 31 274 3.36 6% 17 12% 34 40% 112 29% 80 12% 34 277 3.29 9% 24 14% 40 41% 114 25% 68 11% 30 276 3.14 12% 32 21% 56 49% 132 13% 34 7% 18 272 2.82 4% 11 7% 19 41% 111 28% 76 20% 54 271 3.53 #OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE 1 Summer programs 11/30/2021 7:23 PM 2 Take care of the children! So drugs don't become an issue!10/27/2021 9:43 AM 3 Any additional indoor programs would be beneficial. Per age category.10/11/2021 6:10 PM 4 community/commercial kitchen for community gardens or for teaching skills like canning, bread baking, christmas cookie exchanges, knitting, crocheting, etc. 10/11/2021 4:19 PM 5 Community Pool 10/11/2021 1:51 PM 6 Community Pool 10/11/2021 12:59 PM 7 all this seems to focus on youth. Why not get kids to participate in the amazing programs already established within our great school system. If youth want to learn net sports, dance, music, drama etc., they can take the class in the high school. 10/4/2021 9:31 PM LOWEST LOW AVERAGE HIGH HIGHEST TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Preschool childcare After-school programs Athletics (basketball, handball, volleyball, etc.) Fitness (yoga, pilate, aerobics, etc.) Health, wellness, and nutrition Dance, music, or drama Art or textile Media Education Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 25 / 50 Q11 What priority would you give to attending the following types of events in Arlington? Answered: 283 Skipped: 5 10% 28 17% 48 39% 109 24% 67 10% 27 279 3.06 3% 9 7% 21 30% 84 38% 106 22% 62 282 3.68 2% 6 3% 8 23% 65 45% 126 27% 77 282 3.92 8% 23 12% 33 28% 79 32% 88 20% 56 279 3.43 22% 61 20% 57 25% 70 21% 60 12% 33 281 2.81 2% 5 3% 9 28% 77 32% 90 35% 97 278 3.95 #OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE 1 More seasonal events 12/7/2021 8:59 AM 2 If dogs had to be leashed and soft muzzled (it is a law in everett) we would attend ALL...currently my family goes to auctions, parades, etc without myself, and mom (after being attacked by a dog) I feel the city has gotten to lax 12/4/2021 5:22 PM 10%10% 10% 22%22% 22% 27%27% 27% 20%20% 20% 12%12% 12% 35%35% 35% 24%24% 24% 38%38% 38% 45%45% 45% 32%32% 32% 21%21% 21% 32%32% 32% 39%39% 39% 30%30% 30% 23%23% 23% 28%28% 28% 25%25% 25% 28%28% 28% 17%17% 17% 7%7% 7% 3%3% 3% 12%12% 12% 20%20% 20% 3%3% 3% 10%10% 10% 3%3% 3% 8%8% 8% 22%22% 22% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Lowest Low Average High Highest Walking and running events Music concerts and... Festivals Children events Events with alcohol (age... Farmers' markets and... LOWEST LOW AVERAGE HIGH HIGHEST TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Walking and running events Music concerts and performances Festivals Children events Events with alcohol (age 21+) Farmers' markets and craft bazars Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 26 / 50 3 Parades 11/19/2021 8:17 PM 4 During Covid, I do not tend to go to big group gatherings.11/9/2021 9:53 AM 5 I work 6 days a week but others would enjoy!10/27/2021 9:43 AM 6 Love the idea of more community events, more togetherness, especially focusing on health.10/11/2021 6:10 PM 7 Farm to table events within a farmers' market or community garden would be wonderful. we used to have a easter egg hunt in the field next to the Stillaquamish Athletic club but that is gone now... 10/11/2021 4:19 PM 8 I enjoy The Farmers Market. I miss The Music in the Park 10/10/2021 8:31 PM 9 We go to every farmers market!! Love these events!10/7/2021 12:39 PM 10 walking and running events that are locally owned and benefit our community. Big races take all the profits. Why not the city partner with the Arlington Runners Club, the resource center, the b & g club, Eagle Wings or other great local organizations and get that info published and out to families . Use tax dollars to support the great things going on already by people who are already trying to do it, rather than reinvent the wheel with new programs. 10/4/2021 9:31 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 27 / 50 Q12 If you have not attended any special events in Arlington what are the reasons? Answered: 247 Skipped: 41 18% 43 54% 131 28% 68 242 1.10 42% 101 50% 118 8% 19 238 0.66 22% 54 44% 108 33% 81 243 1.11 62% 149 32% 77 6% 14 240 0.44 81% 194 14% 33 5% 13 240 0.25 #OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE 1 Unmuzzled, unleashed dogs (for the record we love dogs, we have two small dogs, but dogs running around unleased and unmuzzled (both) have become a serious problem (city and country). 12/4/2021 5:22 PM 2 Just moved here recently 12/1/2021 1:28 PM 3 Busy caregiving 11/28/2021 7:04 AM 4 Never enough parking, refuse public transportation 11/26/2021 8:08 AM 5 Covid crap 11/21/2021 4:50 PM 6 Covid - Can't count on other people to distance and mask effectively, unfortunately 11/9/2021 9:53 AM 28%28% 28% 8%8% 8% 33%33% 33% 6%6% 6% 5%5% 5% 54%54% 54% 50%50% 50% 44%44% 44% 32%32% 32% 14%14% 14% 18%18% 18% 42%42% 42% 22%22% 22% 62%62% 62% 81%81% 81% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Not at all Minor Major Unaware of events Not interested in events Schedule conflicts/to... Cost of attending Transportation to event NOT AT ALL MINOR MAJOR TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Unaware of events Not interested in events Schedule conflicts/too busy Cost of attending Transportation to event Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 28 / 50 7 clicking, I always like events that make you feel welcome even if you aren't in a group or really don't want to chit chat whole time. 10/27/2021 9:43 AM 8 I have attended, but sometimes not aware of all the events 10/17/2021 8:58 PM 9 not very well advertised. I often hear too close to or after the event 10/14/2021 4:02 PM 10 covid 10/13/2021 8:23 PM 11 The Smokey Point and Arlington communities are not connected they are autonomous and so it would be nice to have more of a community feel in Smokey Point. Smokey Point is not a part of the Arlington School district which generally is a great if not the best way to learn of community activities. 10/11/2021 4:19 PM 12 I am within walking distance 10/10/2021 8:31 PM 13 Covid-19 restrictions 10/10/2021 1:10 PM 14 I have attended 10/9/2021 12:24 PM 15 I have not attended any events in Arlington in nearly two years due to lack of enforcement of covid safety precautions. I and my family/friends 10/7/2021 8:24 PM 16 I am a new resident. I need to look at the Arlington website rather than depending on postcard/flyer in mailbox. 10/7/2021 9:11 AM 17 NA 10/7/2021 1:33 AM 18 I don't drive at night 10/6/2021 9:10 AM 19 We just moved here.10/5/2021 7:20 PM 20 New to city of Arlington 10/5/2021 5:03 PM 21 City of Arlington is not that great about communicating what is going on before it actually happens and we always read about it after the fact in the N. Cty Outlook. So sad. Even the Covid vaccines available at the airport was a MESS. Every time I was running on the trail I was stopped by lost people and the signs and directions (communications) were terrible. 10/4/2021 9:31 PM 22 I currently am working two jobs.10/4/2021 6:36 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 29 / 50 Q13 How did you find out about this survey? Answered: 283 Skipped: 5 48% 127 52% 138 265 0.00 83% 192 17% 39 231 0.00 85% 189 15% 33 222 0.00 88% 197 12% 26 223 0.00 46% 108 54% 125 233 0.00 #OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE 1 Facebook 12/1/2021 6:09 AM 2 Japanese gulch mountain bikers facebook 11/29/2021 10:53 AM 3 City Facebook post was shared on another groups page.Shared on mounts 11/28/2021 1:16 PM 4 Social media 11/28/2021 8:14 AM 5 Though the adult skateboarder group chat 11/26/2021 1:51 PM 6 A friend shared the survey on FB. Otherwise did not know about it.11/25/2021 8:43 AM 7 I had been thinking for about 2 months that I needed to attend a city council meeting to share my concerns for the need to have a true big park presence in Smokey Point so I was thrilled to receive the postcard. 10/11/2021 4:19 PM 52%52% 52% 17%17% 17% 15%15% 15% 12%12% 12% 54%54% 54% 48%48% 48% 83%83% 83% 85%85% 85% 88%88% 88% 46%46% 46% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% No Yes Postcard Email Word of mouth City website City Facebook NO YES TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Postcard Email Word of mouth City website City Facebook Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 30 / 50 8 Instagram 10/7/2021 6:36 PM 9 FB is a criminal organization censoring free speech. Please move your social media to a free speech platform. 10/7/2021 1:33 AM 10 Newsletter 10/6/2021 9:48 AM 11 Mayor's Newsletter (maybe)10/5/2021 1:40 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 31 / 50 Q14 Which of the following methods is the best way to communicate with you? Answered: 280 Skipped: 8 15% 39 24% 64 62% 165 268 1.47 55% 140 35% 89 11% 27 256 0.56 34% 88 27% 72 39% 102 262 1.05 24% 65 32% 87 43% 117 269 1.19 #OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE 1 Maybe text message 12/9/2021 7:09 AM 2 I think having something to hold in my hand and hang onto so it doesn't get forgotten is ideal. I would also state that maybe there could be council meetings that were focused just on the Smokey Point region. For instance, it would have been really nice to have had input on the development in our area especially as it pertains to open spaces as well as congestion and the need for road improvement BEFORE commercial development. I guarantee you that if you all lived in Smokey Point these issues might have been dealt with a little differently. 10/11/2021 4:19 PM 3 public meetings 10/9/2021 12:58 PM 4 Some posts on Facebook need comments turned off and just left as an announcement.10/7/2021 3:29 PM 5 Putting information on several sites like the website and FB are a good idea, but you are 10/4/2021 9:31 PM 62%62% 62% 11%11% 11% 39%39% 39% 43%43% 43% 24%24% 24% 35%35% 35% 27%27% 27% 32%32% 32% 15%15% 15% 55%55% 55% 34%34% 34% 24%24% 24% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% No Somewhat Definitely Email City website City Facebook Mailer or newsletter NO SOMEWHAT DEFINITELY TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Email City website City Facebook Mailer or newsletter Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 32 / 50 expecting people to come to you to find something. You need to get information into their hands, and then they MIGHT come to your site. Usually they won't, they'll get the info and click a link or look it up on social media. Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 33 / 50 21%59 15%41 25%69 25%69 15%42 Q15 Where do you live in Arlington? (see above map)? Answered: 280 Skipped: 8 TOTAL 280 15%15% 15%25%25% 25%25%25% 25%15%15% 15%21%21% 21% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Not city res… ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Not city resident Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 34 / 50 11%31 19%52 16%46 9%26 45%126 Q16 How many years have you lived in the Arlington area? Answered: 281 Skipped: 7 TOTAL 281 45%45% 45%9%9% 9%16%16% 16%19%19% 19%11%11% 11% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% 0-2 2-5 6-10 11-15 16+ ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES 0-2 2-5 6-10 11-15 16+ Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 35 / 50 10%27 25%70 14%39 29%80 14%38 5%15 4%11 Q17 How many people are in your household? Answered: 280 Skipped: 8 TOTAL 280 4%4% 4%5%5% 5%14%14% 14%29%29% 29%14%14% 14%25%25% 25%10%10% 10% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7+ ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES 1 2 3 4 5 6 7+ Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 36 / 50 0%0 0%0 3%7 40%112 33%93 10%29 14%39 Q18 What age group are you in? Answered: 280 Skipped: 8 TOTAL 280 14%14% 14%10%10% 10%33%33% 33%40%40% 40%3%3% 3% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% 10-14 15-18 19-25 26-40 41-55 56-65 65+ ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES 10-14 15-18 19-25 26-40 41-55 56-65 65+ Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 37 / 50 Q19 How many members in your household are in the following age groups? Answered: 280 Skipped: 8 1%1% 1% 1%1% 1% 1%1% 1% 0%0% 0% 8%8% 8% 9%9% 9% 9%9% 9% 5%5% 5% 6%6% 6% 38%38% 38% 30%30% 30% 9%9% 9% 11%11% 11% 20%20% 20% 22%22% 22% 18%18% 18% 26%26% 26% 22%22% 22% 21%21% 21% 23%23% 23% 20%20% 20% 20%20% 20% 71%71% 71% 69%69% 69% 72%72% 72% 69%69% 69% 70%70% 70% 39%39% 39% 47%47% 47% 70%70% 70% 69%69% 69% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% 0 1 2 3 4 5+ 0-5 6-10 11-14 15-18 19-25 26-40 41-55 56-65 65+ Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 38 / 50 71% 166 20% 46 8% 18 1% 3 0% 0 0% 0 233 0.39 69% 150 22% 49 9% 19 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 218 0.40 72% 151 18% 37 9% 18 1% 3 0% 0 0% 0 209 0.39 69% 138 26% 51 5% 10 1% 1 0% 0 0% 0 200 0.37 70% 131 22% 42 6% 12 2% 3 0% 0 0% 0 188 0.40 39% 84 21% 46 38% 82 1% 3 0% 0 0% 0 215 1.02 47% 95 23% 46 30% 60 0% 1 0% 0 0% 0 202 0.84 70% 127 20% 37 9% 17 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 181 0.39 69% 122 20% 35 11% 19 1% 1 0% 0 1% 1 178 0.46 0 1 2 3 4 5+TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE 0-5 6-10 11-14 15-18 19-25 26-40 41-55 56-65 65+ Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 39 / 50 98%274 0%1 0%0 0%0 0%0 0%0 0%0 0%0 1%4 Q20 What language do the members of your household speak at home? Answered: 279 Skipped: 9 TOTAL 279 #OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY)DATE 1 Doesn’t matter 12/7/2021 8:03 PM 2 Tagalog 11/26/2021 9:45 AM 3 Malay 10/9/2021 12:58 PM 4 both english and spanish 10/6/2021 9:10 PM 1%1% 1%98%98% 98% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% English Spanish Russian Vietnamese Chinese Japanese Korean Other Paci… Other (plea… ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES English Spanish Russian Vietnamese Chinese Japanese Korean Other Pacific Island Other (please specify) Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 40 / 50 27%77 67%190 0%1 5%14 Q21 What is your gender? Answered: 282 Skipped: 6 TOTAL 282 5%5% 5%67%67% 67%27%27% 27% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Male Female Other Prefer not t… ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Male Female Other Prefer not to answer Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 41 / 50 80%225 20%55 1%2 Q22 What is your current housing situation? Answered: 282 Skipped: 6 TOTAL 282 1%1% 1%20%20% 20%80%80% 80% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Own Rent Other ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Own Rent Other Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 42 / 50 Q23 Do you have any suggestions or recommendations concerning the development of parks, recreation, and open space in Arlington? Answered: 139 Skipped: 149 #RESPONSES DATE 1 Mountain biking has become more and more popular. A pump track paved or dirt would benefit the youth in the area that don’t have the means to get out to the trails. Maybe a small single track. A good place where kids, people of all ages can hone their skills. This will attract people of all ages. 1/17/2022 6:12 PM 2 Yes, I would really like to see safety light telling cars their are pedestrians crossing road on centinal trial in town and especially the one by galleria park 12/9/2021 7:09 AM 3 I love the idea of an indoor playground or indoor waterpark, since it's always raining 12/7/2021 8:05 PM 4 Keep ALL ages in mind, not just children! Not everyone has children but would still like activities and things to do in the parks. Have some activities where children aren't welcome, I don't have kids and don't always have to be around them at a park 12/7/2021 8:59 AM 5 The skatepark needs to be upgraded. The concrete is failing, and there needs to be a covered section that can be utilized year round 12/7/2021 7:04 AM 6 Track, outdoor basketball hoops, soccer and/or football field would be nice near Weston High School and the new Amazon building 12/6/2021 9:21 PM 7 I believe more sports facilities are needed in North Snohomish county, specifically Arlington. Artificial turf for year round options is most needed. 12/6/2021 8:38 PM 8 Need more accommodating and accessible sites, services, and events for those with disabilities 12/5/2021 3:20 PM 9 I would prefer parks, recreation and open spaces that are within walking distance of Olympic.12/4/2021 6:42 PM 10 None 12/4/2021 6:42 PM 11 I filled out reasonings in the above other sections. Keeping the parks and trails safe from addicts/thieves would be nice too (along with the dog suggestions)....really want a community indoor pool and track. 12/4/2021 5:22 PM 12 I think there needs to be more of a community center where kids involved in all kinds of sports can go to to practice indoors. The outdoor faucet ilities for sports also need to be improved upon. And when making turf baseball AND softball fields, please make sure the mods for BOTH sports are measured at the correct distance (not the case at Quake). 12/3/2021 8:48 AM 13 I love the parks in Arlington! I moved here from Everett so living here is pure bliss!12/2/2021 11:06 PM 14 More play areas for children. Haller park is crowded.12/2/2021 9:20 PM 15 Big wants as a parent of 4 kids. 1.A community pool 2.a YMCA catering to basketball and volleyball spaces 3. community volleyball sand area or indoor court 4. Indoor walking track for our over 70 5. Indoor training facility that has Terf for football and other sports. This would give teens an outlet that is currently only available in Monroe or Bellevue at a high cost 12/2/2021 5:27 AM 16 quake field for older needs to be updated like lirtle league, young kids need healthy environments to hang with friends. itvrains so much here we need better indoor activity options in Arlington. 12/1/2021 10:48 PM 17 More youth sport opportunities, public tennis courts 12/1/2021 8:20 PM 18 Activity places for children under 18. Museums, inside play areas 12/1/2021 4:45 PM 19 Haller Park splash pads needs more seating for parents.11/30/2021 10:49 PM 20 A park and picnic area on Airport Rd by the new fire station would be nice.11/30/2021 7:23 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 43 / 50 21 No 11/30/2021 4:43 PM 22 More place for farmers markets or similar indoor and outdoor. Support for small business with covered and outdoor eating areas and good patrol and area maintenance. 11/30/2021 11:53 AM 23 Plan for more secure parking areas. Theft and break-in is the biggest deterrent in enjoying parks and trails. 11/30/2021 11:23 AM 24 Dont waste money on play ground equipment that breaks easy or requires a lot of maintenance. Instead of sawdust replace with that bouncy solid rubber flooring. 11/30/2021 4:46 AM 25 Plant more trees please.11/29/2021 7:28 PM 26 Great job with our existing trails. Our family uses them often. The splash pad at Haller is awesome, perhaps the closing date could be pushed past Labor Day (the weather is great thru September) A public aquatic center would be great, we travel to Snohomish to use that facility, would be a great opportunity for our community. 11/29/2021 5:42 PM 27 Arlington is doing such a great job. I would love to see a bmx track, pump track, mountain bike park attractions. That is what me and my kids love. We also love soccer and could use turf fields to play year round. An indoor bike park would be awesome so we can do it year round. Love what you have done with downtown. Keep up the great work, Arlington rules! 11/29/2021 10:53 AM 28 Adult softball league 11/29/2021 9:10 AM 29 More dog friendly events with beer 11/28/2021 7:07 PM 30 We need an adapted playground, one that is more than a swing (the new addition at Haller Park). A playground for kids of all abilities- our school playgrounds lack this type of equipment and so do our city playgrounds. 11/28/2021 2:51 PM 31 An asphalt pump track would be a great addition to the Arlington area and attract local bikers and many from surrounding areas. Climbing walls would also be great for the cold wet winter months. 11/28/2021 1:16 PM 32 An asphalt pump track in the city would be amazing.11/28/2021 12:41 PM 33 Preventative homeless activities and growth of the mountain biking community.11/28/2021 11:45 AM 34 Pump track please 11/28/2021 8:14 AM 35 Yes more parks please,up on Arlington heights and along the stilly river thank you for the parks that we do have, much appreciated❤ 11/28/2021 7:04 AM 36 More music events, more street fairs, parks and rec programs for kids with weekend or evening options for working parents, summer movies in the park, indoor rec options like water park (like forest park), children’s museum, stem learning, gymnastics, dance etc. 11/28/2021 3:38 AM 37 Edible landscaping A place for kids to hangout roller skate, arcade, play basketball, have dance classes sponsored by the city. A indoor obstacle course for different ages 2-12. With a place for 0-2 moms/dads to watch the kids with walls that have activities for that age group. And floors with pads. Play basketball or wall ball. Dance play arcade games separately from the 13 and up. 11/26/2021 9:55 PM 38 I would love to see improvements to the twin rivers disc golf park. I feel if there was professional tee pads instead of dirt we could host top tier events/tournaments and bring more money into our community 11/26/2021 5:45 PM 39 The skatepark is in very rough shape and I grew up there. It means so much to all of us who use it. Any improvement to our city is appreciated though. 11/26/2021 4:33 PM 40 I really think outdoor sports are a fantastic way of bringing the community together. I ride at the skatepark by the memorial fields almost every day in the sunny seasons, love riding the centennial trail, and hanging out downtown Arlington. We’ve been making additions and keeping up on the area very well & I’m so happy to live in the city. Not much of a concern just a shout that I appreciate the way everything has been going! 11/26/2021 2:45 PM 41 Additions to the skatepark. Like revamping the street section, and adding a mini to the concrete pad hidden in the trees behind the Bill Quake sign. Maybe build a mini skatepark/pump track that is tied into centennial trail. 11/26/2021 1:51 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 44 / 50 42 As long as Progressives stop building in and around Arlington, open spaces are welcome.11/26/2021 8:08 AM 43 Keep as much public land open as possible. Current parks are very good. Thanks for considering doing more. An aquatics center would be super great if you could pull it off. Any special help or places teens could recreate after school of similar would be great 11/26/2021 6:22 AM 44 I would love to see more dog friendly spaces in Arlington as well as an aquatic center. Our community has proved its interest in the splash park has been successful. An addition of a full aquatic center would benefit this area with many uses: swim lesson, aquatic fitness, open swim, lap swim, pool parties, etc. I envision a year round indoor/outdoor pool with a retractable roof to enjoy during the summer months. 11/25/2021 8:43 AM 45 More for kids to do. After school activities.. music in the park. It would be neat to have an arcade downtown for the kids. 11/24/2021 9:56 PM 46 More trees please 11/24/2021 6:31 PM 47 We need to have a community center and aquatic center. Lynnwood and Snohomish have lovely areas. We need to teach kids how to swim. 11/24/2021 6:10 AM 48 A bathroom at more of the parks 11/23/2021 10:19 PM 49 I would love to See tether ball ,sand volleyball, basketball,11/23/2021 8:52 AM 50 Parks in neglected Smokey Point! (The one you have is in a rough area, albeit good that it is there, and has no restrooms) We need something east of Smokey Point Boulevard, perhaps in conjunction with the airport(?) Tie development in with the Complete Streets development of SPBlvd. 11/22/2021 12:16 PM 51 More dog walking trails 11/22/2021 6:55 AM 52 .11/22/2021 5:54 AM 53 Stop with the wasting of money on Art. Need new and exciting play grounds for kids. Re- terracing terrace park was a waste. Develop a playground on the bottom. Division st is too busy for any type of concerts, especially with the new traffic increase from the condos being built. 11/21/2021 7:01 PM 54 I would like to see sidewalks all the way down 172nd Dr. My husband and daughter are legally blind and right now there are no sidewalks, no bus, and no dial a ride. It is very hard and dangerous for them to go anywhere on their own. 11/21/2021 12:34 PM 55 Would love to have some open ball fields and maybe even a space that is outdoors, but also a large covered area where people can stay out of the elements while still enjoying the outdoors. Also to ensure the areas remain safe and drug free 11/19/2021 9:10 PM 56 A YMCA and improvement to skate park, bike jumps would be great!11/19/2021 8:29 PM 57 Check out other countries. Especially okinawa Japan. Their parks are phenomenal and well kept. 11/19/2021 8:19 PM 58 We need dog parks. I also would like to see events where they will serve other items such as soda or lemonade instead of alcohol. Many people can't drink just alcohol and to not provide it on hot days is very inappropriate. 11/19/2021 8:17 PM 59 We have enough parks. We need to be able to maintain what we have in the lean times 11/19/2021 8:11 PM 60 Would love to see a kindermusik program in Arlington. Also, a drama program for kids.11/19/2021 10:45 AM 61 Thanks for asking. You are running out of spaces, but I wish the city would buy any undeveloped space in the city to put in mini-parks. They lift the spirit and add health and charm to the city. Would love a YMCA with a pool. We need meeting spaces for clubs that aren't expensive or free. Tennis courts would be great. Use the old high school for a community center. You could offer meeting rooms there, classes, lecctures, etc.. 11/19/2021 10:27 AM 62 We are relatively new residents of the Arlington area, are located outside city boundaries (Arlington Heights), but still consider Arlington our "hometown." We are learning the pace of Arlington life and events. Still, we are less interested than we could be about attending Arlington events, due to the lax enforcement of mask wear by large businesses in town and 11/19/2021 10:21 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 45 / 50 during outside large events, as well as the numbers of customers allowed inside by businesses and restaurants. 63 Arlington is so pretty. Please create more beautiful parks with paved walking paths. People of all ages can use them. Would love something like Jennings park. Or just more walking paths for taking kids, adults, seniors on walks in nature. The trees and hills and mountains are so gorgeous in this area and the development of buildings around the airport area and 172nd is starting to block this. We would love to find more open walks with benches (and picnic tables) please. 11/9/2021 9:53 AM 64 Commend you on the renovation of Haller Park and the Splash Park, big hit. Would love to see more neighborhood parks in the 1, 2, and 3 areas. 11/7/2021 6:23 AM 65 We are absolutely in need of more recreation. Specifically swimming options (indoor or outdoor) and a bike track. Also, the skatepark is very outdated and not user friendly. It was created for really advanced skaters without options for people who are more casual or learning. 10/31/2021 1:17 PM 66 Path to Legion Park over railroad tracks, harder to cross West Ave to get to Main(Olympic) street and Park. Kind of wish railroad tracks ended south of park. 10/27/2021 9:43 AM 67 At York Memorial Park, the trail there has a trash can that is overflowing with all kinds of garbage. It is literally on the ground now and its disgusting. There is graffiti on the picnic tables, the benches should be repaired, the slides should be redone. Especially the small child slide, it's showing its age. All in all the park needs a new facelift. 10/24/2021 7:38 AM 68 None 10/22/2021 10:40 PM 69 More kids parks, with trails would be great.10/22/2021 1:39 PM 70 A covered multi-area play space would be great. I know so many people that go out of Arlington for pump track, might be a cool idea for all ages 10/21/2021 10:52 AM 71 York Park needs more maintenance, especially on the trail portion leading out of it. A garbage can has not been emptied in the old basketball hoop area since the beginning of summer and it's a hazard to walk by. There is also often broken glass on the trail from homeless or drug addicts hanging out and needles. 10/19/2021 7:19 AM 72 maintain natural areas along river 10/17/2021 8:58 PM 73 Yes, leave open spaces, it's getting built up to fast lately and over crowded.10/15/2021 11:03 PM 74 Continue improving and expanding splash park and it’s hours, equipment and amenities.10/15/2021 2:40 PM 75 I would love to see a mini park and community garden put in high clover it would be amazing for young kids to learn the value of growing their own food. Also there is so much space that doesn’t get used would love to see it utilized for something amazing like that 10/15/2021 9:11 AM 76 Involve the community as much as possible in planning, organizing, committing hours to help with projects, etc. People really love this community and want to be part of the process. Use the skills, talents and passion of the citizens, which are no cost. Pride of community is obvious here. Embrace it. 10/14/2021 4:02 PM 77 Preserve open nature spaces in town 10/13/2021 2:15 PM 78 Consider the seniors in the area. There are few active, engaging things to do here. I am considering leaving Arlington after so many years to move to where I can engage in art, music, fitness and outdoor activities. It becomes a rather non-stimulating environment. 10/12/2021 7:18 PM 79 It would be great to have some Adult Softball Fields. Open facilities for Adult Basketball & Volleyball. Outdoor and indoor pickleball courts. Fastest growing sport in USA. 10/12/2021 6:08 PM 80 I have many concerns about the parks here. There is NOT enough maintenance! There is too much garbage getting in creeks and other waterways. There is a huge mole problem here and nothing is being done about it! Holes and mounds of dirt instead of smooth ground and grass. Recently visited River Meadow Park and was appalled by the lack of care there! Dead trees, overgrowth of scrubs and holes in the ground all over the place! It’s shamefu!! The wildlife preserve near me is really strugglig. So much needs to be done here. It’s astounding to me how badly the waterways and preserves aren’t cared for! Really sad and depressing. Would like to think more care is coming in future. 10/12/2021 5:26 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 46 / 50 81 Thinking out side the box, I would like the City to consider creating camping sites for tenting, trailer, motorhome recreation at the Country Charm Park. Many people can't afford to take deluxe vacations, and there needs to be more opportunity for them to recreate in their own back yard. If you are interesting in talking about this opportunity, I would enjoy visiting with you. Thanks, Denny 10/12/2021 12:54 PM 82 Arlington has done a wonderful job of creating and maintaining space for us to enjoy. These opportunities add to our physical and mental health as well as help connect people in the community. I love the trails, and all the parks. Seeing Haller transform has been absolutely amazing. Thank you! 10/12/2021 12:11 PM 83 I would like to see more events for kids in Arlington. The Haller park expansion and splash pad made such a beautiful impact for kids of many ages. I think kids have had to deal with such a major life change from the pandemic and focusing on events and activities to help them thrive in life and create positive community and social involvement is extremely important for our nations youth and future. 10/12/2021 10:00 AM 84 Land is disappearing super fast for business development. Buy or hold as many acres as possible now before the land is all built on. 10/11/2021 10:01 PM 85 We need to do more about the homelessness epidemic. It’s bleeding more into our city, and our children are being exposed to adult content. Any deterrent such as: Signs to not feed or give money to, fines to follow disobeying. We need to do more to protect our city from Seattle’s mismanagement. Our children are more important. 10/11/2021 6:10 PM 86 Arlington Proper has several areas already that are sufficient but York Park is the only community park in Smokey Point. Some housing developments have play equipment but they are not great AT ALL! Something that provides multiple activities like; playground, picnics, walking, sports, garden, indoor meeting spaces, with rooms, kitchen, etc. Again, I reference Jennings Park which has something for everyone and is spread out across many varying landscapes. Gardens, streams, woods, grass, playgrounds, barn, meeting space, Parks and Recs...Arlington/Smokey Point needs this. Lakewood area would also greatly benefit from something like this. I can't even remember all the times that my kids when they were little were invited to some activity at Jennings Park. We took art classes there as well. We should have the same! 10/11/2021 4:19 PM 87 YMCA larger boys and girls club, fields, parking. Community center with computers Community Pool for lessons, fun, school swim team 10/11/2021 1:51 PM 88 Boys and girls club and fields are too small for our community. We need more fields and indoor space for basketball, volleyball, etc. A community Pool, YMCA is needed. An off leash dog park. New play structure at terrace park. Fix the fence at terrace park. Bathroom st Jenson park 10/11/2021 12:59 PM 89 I would love to have a YMCA 10/10/2021 8:31 PM 90 Traffic. It’s the worst. Island crossing and the entire length of 172nd. Crown Ridge/ high school traffic. 10/10/2021 4:05 PM 91 More community garden options like the one on French street and a farmers market that features produce options from local farms. 10/10/2021 1:10 PM 92 We desperately need an indoor place in city limits for kids of all ages to play and hang out. Whether arcade, pool tables, jungle gym...we have mini golf and bowling here and nothing else for kids to do in the rainy months. There are plenty of trails and gyms and things for adults, but the kids need some sort of community play place. 10/9/2021 3:21 PM 93 Make it comfortable for parents to be at the playground and they will take their kids more often and let them play longer. I think comfort is mostly someplace to sit in the shade. Just one bench is not enough; people feel crowded when they have to share a bench with multiple families. 10/9/2021 1:11 PM 94 Should connect the various trails as much as possible and include bike lanes on all roads and streets. Add art elements to all parks. 10/9/2021 12:58 PM 95 I think a recreation center with swimming and other recreation would be a great addition to our town. 10/9/2021 12:24 PM 96 Would like a restroom open year-round at Haller Park and expansion of the Whitehorse Trail 10/8/2021 4:58 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 47 / 50 97 more events to bring people to the down town merchants..like the street fairs and car shows .more home town parades. why not a three block halloween parade for kids. 10/8/2021 10:45 AM 98 More community programs and activities for adults. Love walking centennial trail daily but it is becoming dangerous and I have to carry pepper spray to protect myself from people who are in an altered headspace - sick on drugs. My dog and I have been chased, scared by people living in the bushes along the trail, picked up needles, and have called for help with unresponsive people on the trail (passed out). I would use Whitehorse trail more if it was safer but I never walk that trail alone. My neighborhood also has had a significant increase in crime and increase in people walking from Smokey Point to their homes in various brush locations. It is getting to the point that I am not sure it is safe to walk my dog alone on these community trails that I love! 10/8/2021 9:46 AM 99 no thanks 10/8/2021 7:57 AM 100 You desperately need to add parks in Smokey Point. The one by the freeway (York?) is okay at best, and there are no restroom facilities. The Quake is okay, but not all that accessible from Smokey Point. There would seem to be an opportunity to develop a park on the west side of the airport, east of Smokey Point Boulevard- perhaps near the new fire station?.An improved airport trail with restrooms would help, too. 10/8/2021 12:35 AM 101 The road next to the cemetery needs a proper sidewalk. And the cemetery needs its car/walk paths regraveled or just pave it to be rid of potholes. 10/7/2021 9:20 PM 102 Complete the centennial trail path to the one that goes through Darrington. Ya know the one just past the bridge and next to that arch with the earthquake thing? That’d be tight 10/7/2021 8:33 PM 103 We have traveled a lot recently, visiting small towns throughout washington state and I must say that most have had amazing parks full of people being active and having fun. I came home from the most recent trip thinking about how amazing the parks were and why aren’t ours? And Accessibility is nearly zero. We not only need better play equipment, but one or two pump tracks, another smaller scale skate park that’s appropriate for younger children and beginner/intermediate skill levels. A second splash pad would me amazing and fenced play areas are an absolute must for families with very young/multiple/neurodivergent children. Also, there are few accessible points to access the river. The only park that I can take my mother to sit by the river is at twin rivers and that can be a very small, very busy spot when the river is high. The other access points require being able to climb. Just a nice spot with a view and a few benches would be lovely 10/7/2021 8:24 PM 104 I suggest focusing on the children but also keep the city safe and keep the focus positive & forward thinking. 10/7/2021 6:36 PM 105 no 10/7/2021 4:20 PM 106 We would frequent a covered playground. With how much it rains around here it would be nice to have a huge covered area for the kids to run and play while it’s raining. 10/7/2021 12:55 PM 107 We are an outdoor family and use the parks and trails in Arlington a lot. Thank you for wanting to expand our parks and rec! My ideas: 1. There are no parks north of Haller Park (that I know of). I think a playground up north would be WONDERFUL!! Maybe at the Bryant trailhead of the centennial trail?!! 2. Haller Park needs more shade around the splash pad, either by trees or other source during the summer. (I’ve seen shades during the summer around the playground at kayak point). 3. Haller Park needs more picnic tables and benches around the playground. They are all taken on warm days or weekends. 4. On many moms groups based in Snohomish county, moms are looking for a park that has both bathrooms and fully fenced playground. Moms that have lots of kids, or twins, or special needs kids want to go to a playground that they feel safe taking their kids. NO public park in Snohomish county has both a fenced playground and a bathroom. You could bring in families from all over with this type of park!! Arlington would be amazing if they could offer something like this to families with special needs!!!! 5. We used to live in Marysville for a few years. There parks and rec activity options were SO nice. We live too far away to continue with their activities, but would definitely participate in Arlington activities! Especially kids education, sports, and nature study type classes. 6. I have emailed arlington parks a few times the past 5ish years, and have never gotten a reply. I wish there was a better way to communicate with the city with my thanks, comments, and concerns. Thank you for offering this survey!!! 10/7/2021 12:39 PM 108 As a new resident, I typed a list of all the parks and trails on this survey as a resource. I didn't know there were so many. 10/7/2021 9:11 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 48 / 50 109 We LOVE the lights on the trees on Olympic Ave! Thank you for doing that. We hope you will continue to maintain them. Also thank you for the big tree lit up in Legion Park at Christmas time, and for all the activities sponsored throughout the year. Please add some more trash cans and benches along the Centennial Trail, at least in town. 10/7/2021 1:33 AM 110 No 10/6/2021 6:47 PM 111 Would love to see more kids sports programs in Arlington as well as maybe turn the Airport park into a large park for kids similar to Haller and Jennings in Marysville. There are no nice parks really for those of us in Smokey Point. 10/6/2021 1:29 PM 112 More bicycle paths or bicycle lanes to connect neighborhoods to Centennial Trail and Major Retail/Commerce corridors. 10/6/2021 1:09 PM 113 More sidewalks or trails around Arlington.10/6/2021 10:53 AM 114 We lost a great, often-used informal park to the new business park on 172nd and Airport Blvd. It was a huge loss for us. 10/6/2021 10:41 AM 115 After the heatwave that the Pacific Northwest experienced this summer, and the deaths that occurred in the homeless population, I would love to support an organization that provides resources to the homeless. If there are already programs or organizations for these folks, I think that it would be helpful to share this information on a broader scale. 10/6/2021 10:28 AM 116 More cooperation and cross promotion with Senior Center (Stilly Valley Center) and Stilly Valley Health Connections. The Stilly Valley Center could use more City financial support and promotion of its programs. 10/6/2021 9:48 AM 117 Smokey Point and new high rise development need parks, walking trails and playgrounds that are accessible to the residents living in those areas. 10/5/2021 11:23 PM 118 Keep open space. Developing Arlington so tourists come is not serving the community needs. What really is the point of this survey. Schools/ the library should provide media and education needs, not Parks and Rec , 10/5/2021 10:26 PM 119 Would love to see Country Charm Dairy park completed! It is a family favorite and has so much potential! I think that we could also benefit from more garbage cans in Arlington, especially if we are talking about growth 10/5/2021 10:11 PM 120 Continue to focus on keeping it small and the same, I would hate to see it too blown with big buildings- I’m all for more parks/ recreation areas and open spaces! 10/5/2021 7:33 PM 121 Not yet. So far we love it here!10/5/2021 7:20 PM 122 A community park in Smokey Point would be nice for the neighborhoods of that area, also as a civic space near the business center of Smokey Point. 10/5/2021 5:52 PM 123 We need a large Recreation Center with facilities for a variety of Recreational needs and interests. 10/5/2021 5:52 PM 124 We would love to see kids sports programs through the city! Soccer, basketball, baseball, etc. We have two toddlers who would love to be involved in local sports! 10/5/2021 5:03 PM 125 If Mayor Barb wasn't the Mayor of Arlington then it would be a Great City but since she the Mayor she is running Arlington into a Shit Hole just like the guy Communist Dictator Dicklee from where she gets her orders from... Impeach Mayor Barb 10/5/2021 4:28 PM 126 Love the walking trails. Nice to have convenient restrooms available.10/5/2021 4:27 PM 127 Linkage: Make it easier to get from one park or "node" to another by foot or cycle. Cemetery Road is a bottleneck through the unincorporated portion where there are no sidewalks, bikeways or walkable shoulders. Dangerous to walk or bike from High Clover to downtown. 10/5/2021 1:40 PM 128 Take into consideration what City of Renton has achieved in their parks and recreation. They have a central building that houses so many wonderful classes and events. 10/5/2021 12:58 PM 129 none. i think the city has really done a great service of taking care of our local parks since i moved here 32yrs ago. 10/5/2021 12:49 PM 130 Yes, please make all facilities safe for people to visit.10/5/2021 12:48 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Survey SurveyMonkey 49 / 50 131 Lots of open space in and around the airport! any chance of developing a portion of the unused airport property into a park? 10/5/2021 12:38 PM 132 Child focused indoor recreation areas covered spaces and public security. I appriciate the Arlington splash park. It is public free and safe considering the community involvement. Also it is clean and free of garbage drug paraphernalia and loitering. 10/5/2021 10:10 AM 133 Pools, summer camps, childcare, classes 10/4/2021 10:37 PM 134 make it easily accessible. people who live in Glen Eagle can go to the bottom of their hill but it is high risk with so many driveways. People want to get out of their neighborhoods and get on the trails. (all the housing developments in area 3) If there was access COMPLETELY down 172nd, people from east of hwy 9 would go down on bikes or run and hit the trail. instead we have to drive. it's less convenient. the new section of entry to the centennial trail at the top of Getchell is the greatest idea for access. Arlington should be creative like that. 10/4/2021 9:31 PM 135 We would be at the climbing wall every day if there was one. An indoor community pool as well. 10/4/2021 8:16 PM 136 Airport trail needs to be safer 10/4/2021 6:43 PM 137 I appreciate the maintenance along the Centennial Trail. It is also nice when maintenance notices large indents in the trail, and marks those with the white spray paint. This makes avoiding them much easier. I also loved seeing the splash park used this year! This was a great addition to our town. 10/4/2021 5:40 PM 138 I think Arlington does a Greta job with the parks it has!10/4/2021 5:19 PM 139 Sidewalks (Smokey point blvd) to get to the parks and open spaces !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!10/4/2021 4:41 PM 50 / 50 Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 1 / 58 Q1 Using the map above, what is the estimated walking time to and name of the park closest to your residence? Answered: 456 Skipped: 5 40% 184 19% 86 41% 186 456 2.00 #WHAT IS THE NAME OF THE PARK?DATE 1 J Rudy Park 3/29/2022 6:20 AM 2 Gissberg twin lakes 3/29/2022 5:56 AM 3 Portage Creek 3/28/2022 9:02 PM 4 Too hard to tell, map could not be expanded.3/28/2022 6:05 PM 5 Unsure 3/28/2022 5:00 PM 6 Lake stevens resident, use Arlington parks 3/28/2022 10:10 AM 7 All are too far away to walk to except if the white horse trail is included 3/25/2022 9:47 PM 8 Haller Park 3/25/2022 6:38 PM 9 Haller Park 3/25/2022 4:14 PM 10 31 3/25/2022 7:38 AM 11 Bill Quake Memorial Park 3/24/2022 5:57 PM 12 Country charm park or terrace park 3/24/2022 12:26 PM 13 Smokey Point Blvd 3/23/2022 11:17 PM 14 Legion 3/23/2022 10:46 PM 15 Jensen Park 3/23/2022 6:54 PM 16 Woodway Park 3/23/2022 6:06 PM 17 15 3/23/2022 5:45 PM 18 Jennings Park 3/23/2022 5:25 PM 19 Post middle school 3/23/2022 4:56 PM 41%41% 41%19%19% 19%40%40% 40% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% 5 minutes 10 minutes over 15 min… Distance to closest park 5 MINUTES 10 MINUTES OVER 15 MINUTES TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Distance to closest park Appendix D.2 - PRMP Priorities Survey Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 2 / 58 20 Twin rivers park 3/23/2022 4:44 PM 21 Bill Quake Memorial Park 3/23/2022 4:18 PM 22 15 Woodway park 3/23/2022 3:54 PM 23 Number 11 3/23/2022 3:13 PM 24 country charm 3/23/2022 10:20 AM 25 Twin Rivers 3/23/2022 3:06 AM 26 It’s right at 15 min away. And Haller park 3/22/2022 10:45 PM 27 J Rudy York 3/22/2022 5:04 PM 28 Haller 3/22/2022 10:36 AM 29 High Clover (would not consider a park though)3/22/2022 7:03 AM 30 Haller 3/22/2022 12:38 AM 31 Terrace 3/21/2022 11:00 PM 32 River meadows park 3/21/2022 8:35 PM 33 #28 3/20/2022 7:50 PM 34 River Meadows 3/20/2022 4:45 PM 35 I’m not really sure.3/19/2022 6:34 PM 36 Twin rivers 3/19/2022 9:12 AM 37 Terrace Park 3/19/2022 6:38 AM 38 Gissberg Twin Lakes 3/18/2022 1:48 PM 39 post middle school 3/18/2022 12:10 PM 40 I live in Gleneagle. Map is too small for me to see 3/18/2022 10:35 AM 41 Legion park 3/18/2022 5:54 AM 42 Twin Rivers 3/17/2022 3:53 PM 43 Jensen Park 3/17/2022 3:13 PM 44 Wedgewood Park 3/16/2022 12:23 PM 45 Jenson Park 3/16/2022 12:07 PM 46 Terrace Park 3/15/2022 7:18 PM 47 DNR timber trust 3/15/2022 6:50 PM 48 Twin Rivers Park 3/15/2022 4:27 PM 49 Forest Park Trail 3/15/2022 2:06 PM 50 Haller 3/15/2022 11:51 AM 51 DNR Timber Trust 3/15/2022 9:50 AM 52 Centennial Park 3/15/2022 9:03 AM 53 Gissberg Twin Lakes 3/14/2022 9:08 AM 54 Terrance Park 3/13/2022 4:20 PM 55 Strawberry fields 3/13/2022 10:52 AM 56 Evans 3/12/2022 10:39 PM 57 haller 3/12/2022 8:13 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 3 / 58 58 Legion park 3/12/2022 11:15 AM 59 Legion Park 3/11/2022 8:40 PM 60 Jensen 3/11/2022 7:16 PM 61 york park 3/11/2022 4:58 PM 62 J Rudy Memorial Park 3/11/2022 1:29 PM 63 Terrace 3/11/2022 1:06 PM 64 Jensen Park 3/11/2022 1:02 PM 65 Pioneer elementary school 3/11/2022 12:31 PM 66 Legion 3/11/2022 12:31 PM 67 wedgewood park 3/11/2022 12:29 PM 68 Can’t walk to any parks there are no sidewalks 3/11/2022 11:44 AM 69 Jensen Park 3/11/2022 11:34 AM 70 J Rudy York Park 3/11/2022 8:33 AM 71 Gissberg Twin Lakes 3/11/2022 12:06 AM 72 Twin River Park 3/10/2022 8:25 PM 73 Terrace Park 3/10/2022 6:47 PM 74 Rudy York park #7 3/10/2022 6:42 PM 75 Haller park 3/10/2022 6:15 PM 76 River meadows 3/10/2022 5:51 PM 77 #7 3/10/2022 5:11 PM 78 Haller. #11 3/10/2022 4:47 PM 79 Terrace & Legion 3/10/2022 2:59 PM 80 Forest park 3/10/2022 1:43 PM 81 Haller 3/10/2022 10:02 AM 82 Portage Creek Wildlife Area Access 3/10/2022 9:02 AM 83 18 Centennial Trail Park 3/10/2022 8:44 AM 84 Woodway 3/10/2022 8:19 AM 85 Haller Park 3/10/2022 6:46 AM 86 J Rudy Park 3/9/2022 9:25 PM 87 Haller 3/9/2022 9:13 PM 88 Haller 3/9/2022 8:17 PM 89 Haller 3/9/2022 4:45 PM 90 Quake 3/9/2022 2:41 PM 91 Haller Park 3/9/2022 1:38 PM 92 67th and Cemetery Rd 3/9/2022 8:40 AM 93 Haller 3/9/2022 5:10 AM 94 Jennings 3/8/2022 9:48 PM 95 Haller Park 3/8/2022 9:45 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 4 / 58 96 Wedge wood park. #22 doesn’t exist where you have it on the map.3/8/2022 9:39 PM 97 Haller 3/8/2022 8:23 PM 98 Twin rivers park 3/8/2022 8:13 PM 99 Terrace park 3/8/2022 7:48 PM 100 River Meadows 3/8/2022 6:23 PM 101 Judie memorial park 3/8/2022 5:47 PM 102 Terrace Park 3/8/2022 4:01 PM 103 Haller 3/8/2022 3:48 PM 104 High Clover Park, which is just for the High Clover residents.3/8/2022 1:26 PM 105 Bill Quake 3/8/2022 12:40 PM 106 Haller 3/8/2022 11:12 AM 107 Twin Rivers 3/8/2022 6:10 AM 108 31 3/8/2022 6:03 AM 109 Strawberry field athletic complex 3/8/2022 2:20 AM 110 Dont use parks... parking sucks and crime is too high to park off site 3/7/2022 10:55 PM 111 Woodway 3/7/2022 9:00 PM 112 Strawberry Fields 3/7/2022 8:32 PM 113 Gissberg Twin Lakes 3/7/2022 8:26 PM 114 Legion Park 3/7/2022 7:43 PM 115 Terrace Park 3/7/2022 1:23 PM 116 Twin lakes 3/7/2022 9:51 AM 117 Portage Creek 3/7/2022 7:31 AM 118 Portage creek wildlife area 3/7/2022 12:45 AM 119 Haller park 3/7/2022 12:03 AM 120 Woodway park 3/6/2022 8:19 PM 121 Terrace Park 3/6/2022 8:09 PM 122 Evans memorial park 3/6/2022 3:45 PM 123 Haller park 3/6/2022 3:44 PM 124 Centennial trail 3/6/2022 1:31 PM 125 High Clover 3/5/2022 9:45 PM 126 Terrace 3/5/2022 8:57 PM 127 Terrace Park 3/5/2022 5:41 PM 128 Gissberg Twin Lakes 3/5/2022 5:38 PM 129 J Rudy York Memorial Park 3/5/2022 3:28 PM 130 Country charm 3/5/2022 10:28 AM 131 Jensen Park 3/5/2022 8:32 AM 132 Terrace 3/5/2022 8:10 AM 133 Woodway park 3/5/2022 5:28 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 5 / 58 134 Twin rivers 3/5/2022 5:26 AM 135 Centennial Trail 3/5/2022 12:56 AM 136 Stormwater wetland park #11 3/4/2022 10:53 PM 137 Haller park 3/4/2022 10:12 PM 138 Jensen park 3/4/2022 9:51 PM 139 Terrace Park 3/4/2022 8:46 PM 140 Crown ridge 5 3/4/2022 7:10 PM 141 Haller Park 3/4/2022 6:02 PM 142 Bill quake memorial park 3/4/2022 6:01 PM 143 Twin River 3/4/2022 4:44 PM 144 High clover open space 3/4/2022 4:30 PM 145 Wedgewood Park 3/4/2022 3:25 PM 146 J Rudy York 3/4/2022 2:02 PM 147 Jensen & Terrace 3/4/2022 1:32 PM 148 Haller Park 3/4/2022 1:23 PM 149 Jensen park 3/4/2022 12:36 PM 150 Forest Trail Park 3/4/2022 12:10 PM 151 Forest Park Trail 3/4/2022 11:57 AM 152 Forest Park Trail 3/4/2022 11:51 AM 153 Portage creek wildlife area 3/4/2022 8:54 AM 154 Wedgewood Park 3/4/2022 8:50 AM 155 Pioneer Elementary School 3/4/2022 8:22 AM 156 Bill Quake Memorial Park 3/4/2022 8:18 AM 157 IDK 3/4/2022 6:22 AM 158 Portage Creek wildlife area 3/3/2022 9:27 PM 159 Legion Park 3/3/2022 8:28 PM 160 forest park trail 3/3/2022 7:36 PM 161 Twin Rivers 3/3/2022 7:19 PM 162 Twin Rivers 3/3/2022 6:55 PM 163 Terrace Park 3/3/2022 6:40 PM 164 Haller 3/3/2022 4:37 PM 165 Jensen Park 3/3/2022 9:35 AM 166 Terrace park 3/3/2022 8:29 AM 167 31 3/3/2022 7:32 AM 168 J Rudy Memorial Park 3/3/2022 7:25 AM 169 1 3/3/2022 6:47 AM 170 Wedgewood 3/3/2022 6:24 AM 171 Haller 3/2/2022 9:43 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 6 / 58 172 McCollum park 3/2/2022 7:23 PM 173 Jensen 3/2/2022 6:48 PM 174 Jensen Park 3/2/2022 5:34 PM 175 Terrace park 3/2/2022 3:17 PM 176 Centennial Trail 3/2/2022 9:54 AM 177 Haller Park/Haller water park 3/2/2022 6:05 AM 178 Jensen park 3/2/2022 12:11 AM 179 12 terrace park 3/1/2022 7:58 PM 180 Pioneer elementary school 3/1/2022 7:43 PM 181 River Meadows 3/1/2022 7:17 PM 182 Legion 3/1/2022 6:47 PM 183 #7 3/1/2022 2:51 PM 184 River Meadows 3/1/2022 9:48 AM 185 Legion Park 3/1/2022 8:38 AM 186 Portage creek wildlife area 3/1/2022 7:53 AM 187 Haller Park 3/1/2022 7:12 AM 188 J Rudy York Memorial Park 3/1/2022 7:10 AM 189 #1 3/1/2022 6:43 AM 190 Haller 3/1/2022 3:09 AM 191 Haller park! We live in Bryant 3/1/2022 12:09 AM 192 Twin Rivers Park 2/28/2022 11:25 PM 193 Haller Park 2/28/2022 10:33 PM 194 Centennial Trail Park 2/28/2022 8:01 PM 195 River Meadows 2/28/2022 7:41 PM 196 Centennial trail park 2/28/2022 6:58 PM 197 Twin rivers 2/28/2022 5:16 PM 198 Haller Park 2/28/2022 3:00 PM 199 Country Charm 2/28/2022 1:26 PM 200 Haller park 2/28/2022 11:44 AM 201 Arlington Skate Park 2/28/2022 10:37 AM 202 Twin RIVERS 2/28/2022 10:17 AM 203 Zimmerman Hill Climb 2/28/2022 9:45 AM 204 Rudy York 2/28/2022 8:41 AM 205 Twin rivers park 2/28/2022 7:31 AM 206 Jensen Park 2/28/2022 5:53 AM 207 Jensen Park 2/28/2022 1:32 AM 208 Forest Park Trail 2/27/2022 10:21 PM 209 Country Charm 2/27/2022 9:14 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 7 / 58 210 Haller park 2/27/2022 8:14 PM 211 Twin Rivers Park 2/27/2022 7:34 PM 212 Haller Park 2/27/2022 7:22 PM 213 Jensen Park 2/27/2022 6:40 PM 214 Wedgewood Park 2/27/2022 6:12 PM 215 Jensen Park 2/27/2022 4:51 PM 216 Twin Rivers 2/27/2022 4:14 PM 217 Jensen 2/27/2022 3:45 PM 218 Terrace 2/27/2022 2:37 PM 219 Crown Ridge 5 2/27/2022 1:54 PM 220 Haller Park 2/27/2022 10:35 AM 221 Rudy jyork 2/27/2022 9:42 AM 222 High clover park 2/27/2022 8:49 AM 223 Bill Quake/Waldo 2/27/2022 8:47 AM 224 Woodway park 2/27/2022 8:34 AM 225 Portage creek wildlife area 2/27/2022 8:28 AM 226 Haller 2/27/2022 8:16 AM 227 Centennial Trail 2/27/2022 7:39 AM 228 Legion memorial 2/27/2022 6:54 AM 229 York 2/27/2022 6:37 AM 230 Legion 2/27/2022 1:46 AM 231 Post middle school 2/26/2022 9:57 PM 232 Haller Park 2/26/2022 9:46 PM 233 Portage Creek Wildlife Area 2/26/2022 9:33 PM 234 Haller Park 2/26/2022 9:33 PM 235 Haller which I absolutely love! While I am sympathetic to the homeless community, it really takes away the feeling of safety to have them camping on the walking trails by the river as it is very isolated. Females with young children are often concerned. Not asking for anyone to be removed but hope that law enforcement is aware of who is down there and remove anyone who was a potential danger. Also, I would say that I see a lot of likely drug deals going on in that parking lot or people stopping to get high.. 2/26/2022 9:21 PM 236 Wedgewood 2/26/2022 6:55 PM 237 Portage Creek 2/26/2022 6:53 PM 238 Skate park 2/26/2022 5:50 PM 239 Portage creek 2/26/2022 5:25 PM 240 Legion Park 2/26/2022 4:58 PM 241 Jensen park 2/26/2022 4:27 PM 242 1 2/26/2022 4:11 PM 243 J Rudy York 2/26/2022 3:32 PM 244 Terrace Park 2/26/2022 3:17 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 8 / 58 245 Bill Quake 2/26/2022 3:16 PM 246 Centennial 2/26/2022 11:22 AM 247 Pioneer Elementary 2/26/2022 11:18 AM 248 legion 2/26/2022 10:39 AM 249 Forest Trail Park 2/26/2022 9:52 AM 250 Jensen park 2/26/2022 8:13 AM 251 67th Av & Cemetery Rd 2/26/2022 1:19 AM 252 Twin Rivers Park 2/25/2022 11:01 PM 253 J Rudy York Memorial Park 2/25/2022 10:14 PM 254 Forest Park Trail 2/25/2022 10:03 PM 255 Forest Trail 2/25/2022 9:52 PM 256 Country charm 2/25/2022 9:50 PM 257 Strawberry Fields 2/25/2022 9:26 PM 258 Strawberry fields 2/25/2022 8:33 PM 259 Terrace Park 2/25/2022 7:41 PM 260 Arlington open space 2/25/2022 7:12 PM 261 J Rudy York Memorial Park 2/25/2022 5:53 PM 262 Country Charm Park 2/25/2022 5:41 PM 263 Stormwater Wetland Park 2/25/2022 4:02 PM 264 Forest Park Trail.2/25/2022 3:51 PM 265 Evans 2/25/2022 3:50 PM 266 High clover park 2/25/2022 3:37 PM 267 67th / Cemetary Rd 2/25/2022 3:37 PM 268 Jensen 2/25/2022 3:23 PM 269 Twin rivers 2/25/2022 10:50 AM 270 Twin Rivers 2/25/2022 8:24 AM 271 Don't know 2/25/2022 8:22 AM 272 Country charm park 2/25/2022 7:40 AM 273 Crown Ridge 5 2/25/2022 6:38 AM 274 High clover 2/25/2022 3:12 AM 275 Country Charm Park 2/25/2022 12:14 AM 276 Woodway 2/24/2022 11:24 PM 277 Woodway Park 2/24/2022 10:23 PM 278 Gissburg twin lakes 2/24/2022 10:01 PM 279 Haller Park 2/24/2022 9:20 PM 280 Woodway Park 2/23/2022 8:26 PM 281 Wedgewood Park 2/23/2022 3:33 PM 282 Pioneer elementary 2/22/2022 8:52 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 9 / 58 283 Clover Park 2/22/2022 8:47 PM 284 Jensen Park 2/22/2022 3:24 PM 285 Bill quake Memorial 2/22/2022 2:22 PM 286 J Rudy York Memorial Park 2/22/2022 9:44 AM 287 High Clover Park 2/22/2022 9:01 AM 288 Wedgewood Park 2/22/2022 7:38 AM 289 Haller 2/21/2022 7:06 PM 290 Bill Quake 2/21/2022 6:18 PM 291 Twin Rivers Park 2/21/2022 1:29 PM 292 Forest Park Trail 2/21/2022 12:01 PM 293 High Clover Park 2/20/2022 9:25 PM 294 J Rudy York Memorial Park 2/20/2022 5:16 PM 295 Centennial trail 2/20/2022 5:21 AM 296 Portage Creek Wildlife 2/20/2022 12:16 AM 297 Haller Park 2/19/2022 10:49 PM 298 Portage creek open space access 2/19/2022 10:28 PM 299 Twin rivers 2/19/2022 9:00 PM 300 Wedgewood 2/19/2022 8:56 PM 301 J Rudy York Memorial Park 2/19/2022 5:28 PM 302 Wedgewood Park 2/19/2022 5:26 PM 303 Wedgewood Park 2/19/2022 1:35 PM 304 Forest Park 2/19/2022 11:01 AM 305 j rudy york 2/19/2022 10:54 AM 306 Haller, Country Charm, Twin Rivers 2/19/2022 9:35 AM 307 Portage Creek 2/19/2022 8:52 AM 308 legion park 2/19/2022 7:51 AM 309 River Meadows 2/19/2022 7:23 AM 310 Twin rivers 2/18/2022 10:48 PM 311 High Clover Park 2/18/2022 8:40 PM 312 Haller 2/18/2022 8:36 PM 313 Rudy York memorial park 2/18/2022 8:30 PM 314 J Rudy York 2/18/2022 7:58 PM 315 Dog park 152nd 2/18/2022 7:53 PM 316 Wedgewood 2/18/2022 7:11 PM 317 JENSEN PARK 2/18/2022 5:38 PM 318 Haller 2/18/2022 4:53 PM 319 Haller park 2/18/2022 4:48 PM 320 Bill Quake Memorial Park 2/18/2022 3:20 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 10 / 58 321 Haller 2/18/2022 2:47 PM 322 Terrace, legion, post, country charm, Lebanon all 5min walk away.2/18/2022 2:16 PM 323 Terrace Park, Legion Park, Post Middle School Green Space, Country Charm Park, Lebanon Park 2/18/2022 2:14 PM 324 Rudy York 2/18/2022 1:59 PM 325 High Clover Park 2/18/2022 1:55 PM 326 High Clover Park 2/18/2022 1:47 PM 327 Haller park 2/18/2022 1:44 PM 328 Haller Park 2/18/2022 1:06 PM 329 Wedgewood 2/18/2022 12:47 PM 330 Legion or Jensen (equal)2/18/2022 12:43 PM 331 Portage Creek Wildlife Area 2/18/2022 12:30 PM 332 Centennial trail 2/18/2022 12:21 PM 333 Legion Park 2/18/2022 11:54 AM 334 J Rudy York Memorial Park 2/18/2022 11:07 AM 335 bill quake memorial park 2/18/2022 11:07 AM 336 Haller Park 2/18/2022 11:05 AM 337 Haller 2/18/2022 11:03 AM 338 Legion park 2/18/2022 10:24 AM 339 High Clover Park 2/18/2022 10:22 AM 340 Terrace park, approx 2 mins 2/18/2022 10:15 AM 341 River meadows 2/18/2022 10:15 AM 342 Woodway 2/18/2022 10:04 AM 343 Twin Rivers Park 2/18/2022 9:49 AM 344 woodway trail 2/18/2022 9:35 AM 345 Haller 2/18/2022 9:15 AM 346 High Clover Park 2/18/2022 8:33 AM 347 Wedgewood and Woodway (14 and 15)2/18/2022 7:45 AM 348 Portage creek park 2/18/2022 6:03 AM 349 Jensen Park 2/17/2022 10:25 PM 350 Jensen 2/17/2022 9:08 PM 351 Terrace 2/17/2022 6:51 PM 352 J Rudy York Memorial Park 2/17/2022 6:39 PM 353 Legion Memorial Park 2/17/2022 6:21 PM 354 Legion Park 2/17/2022 6:20 PM 355 Centennial Park 2/17/2022 5:59 PM 356 Haller 2/17/2022 5:53 PM 357 Terrace Park 2/17/2022 5:14 PM 358 Rudy York 2/17/2022 4:55 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 11 / 58 359 Jenson Park 2/17/2022 4:40 PM 360 High Clover Park 2/17/2022 4:26 PM 361 Centennial Park 2/17/2022 4:23 PM 362 Wedgewood Park 2/17/2022 4:17 PM 363 29 centennial trail 2/17/2022 4:16 PM 364 Portage creek rec area 31 2/17/2022 3:46 PM 365 32 2/17/2022 3:33 PM 366 Forest Park Trail 2/17/2022 3:09 PM 367 Forest Park Trail 2/17/2022 1:19 PM 368 Jensen Park 2/17/2022 1:13 PM 369 Rudy York Memorial Park 2/17/2022 1:00 PM 370 J. Rudy York Memorial Park 2/17/2022 12:10 PM 371 Terrace park 2/17/2022 11:22 AM 372 JENSEN PARK 2/17/2022 10:53 AM 373 River Meadows, but to dangerous to walk on Jordan road, so we have to drive 2/17/2022 9:54 AM 374 Terrace Park 2/17/2022 7:05 AM 375 Terrace Park 2/17/2022 6:04 AM 376 High Clover Park 2/17/2022 5:54 AM 377 Twin Rivers 2/17/2022 5:25 AM 378 Jensen 2/16/2022 11:55 PM 379 Portage Creek 2/16/2022 10:15 PM 380 Wedgewood 2/16/2022 9:11 PM 381 Jensen park 2/16/2022 8:58 PM 382 Forest Park Trail 2/16/2022 8:54 PM 383 Jensen Park 2/16/2022 7:53 PM 384 Jensen Park 2/16/2022 7:41 PM 385 Bill Quake Memorial Park 2/16/2022 7:14 PM 386 Woodway Heights 2/16/2022 7:13 PM 387 Legion Park 2/16/2022 7:06 PM 388 Woodway Park 2/16/2022 6:53 PM 389 Terrace Park 2/16/2022 6:33 PM 390 Gissberg Twink Lakes 2/16/2022 6:23 PM 391 Jensen park 2/16/2022 5:36 PM 392 Haller 2/16/2022 5:23 PM 393 Legion Park 2/16/2022 5:06 PM 394 Twin Rivers 2/16/2022 5:01 PM 395 High Clover Park 2/16/2022 4:57 PM 396 Legion 2/16/2022 4:43 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 12 / 58 397 Bill Quake Memorial Park 2/16/2022 4:25 PM 398 Gissberg Twin Lakes 2/16/2022 4:22 PM 399 Forest Park Trail 2/16/2022 4:20 PM 400 Legion Park 2/16/2022 4:02 PM 401 Bill Quake Memorial Park 2/16/2022 3:32 PM 402 Portage Creek Wildlife Area 2/16/2022 3:00 PM 403 Haller Park 2/16/2022 2:51 PM 404 Jensen 2/16/2022 2:45 PM 405 Haller park 2/16/2022 2:40 PM 406 Wedgewood park 2/16/2022 2:01 PM 407 7. J. Rudy York 2/16/2022 2:00 PM 408 Rudy York Park 2/16/2022 12:02 PM 409 High clover park 2/16/2022 12:02 PM 410 Bill Quake memorial park 2/16/2022 11:30 AM 411 Forest park trail 2/16/2022 10:57 AM 412 Jensen Park 2/16/2022 10:29 AM 413 Forest Park Trail 2/15/2022 8:17 PM 414 Don’t know name on highland ave 2/15/2022 8:15 PM 415 J Rudy York Memorial Park 2/15/2022 7:48 PM 416 Woodway Park 2/15/2022 7:36 PM 417 J. Rudy York Memorial Park 2/15/2022 6:12 PM 418 Forest Trail Park 2/15/2022 6:11 PM 419 Bill Quake Memorial Park 2/15/2022 5:54 PM 420 J Rudy York Memorial Park 2/15/2022 5:48 PM 421 Rudy York Memorial Park 2/15/2022 4:36 PM 422 J Rudy York Park 2/15/2022 4:29 PM 423 Haller park 2/15/2022 4:27 PM 424 Wedgewood Park 2/15/2022 4:18 PM 425 Haller Park 2/15/2022 4:14 PM 426 Legion 2/15/2022 3:29 PM 427 York 2/15/2022 3:18 PM 428 storm water wetland park 2/15/2022 3:17 PM 429 J Rudy York Memorial Park 2/15/2022 3:11 PM 430 Portage creek wildlife area 2/15/2022 3:08 PM 431 Arlington open space 67th & cemetery road 2/15/2022 2:19 PM 432 Haller Park 2/15/2022 2:13 PM 433 Portage creek wildlife area 2/15/2022 2:08 PM 434 Woodway Park 2/15/2022 1:44 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 13 / 58 435 portage creek wildlife area 2/15/2022 1:44 PM 436 Bill Quake Memorial 2/15/2022 12:51 PM 437 Bill Quake Memorial Park 2/15/2022 12:44 PM 438 Terrace Park 2/15/2022 10:39 AM 439 Jensen Park 2/14/2022 9:26 PM 440 Centennial Park 2/14/2022 6:12 PM 441 Portage Creek Wildlife Area 2/14/2022 5:34 PM 442 Legion Park 2/14/2022 5:28 PM 443 Bill Quake Memorial 2/14/2022 5:09 PM 444 Legion Park 2/14/2022 5:05 PM 445 Country charm park, terrace park NJ 2/14/2022 3:52 PM 446 Terrace Park 2/14/2022 3:46 PM 447 Legion Park 2/14/2022 1:22 PM 448 Terrace park 2/14/2022 12:42 PM 449 Country Charm 2/14/2022 11:46 AM 450 Terrace Park 2/14/2022 11:01 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 14 / 58 Q2 In general, how would you rate the location, quantity, and quality of the existing inventory of parks, recreation, open spaces, and trails provided in Arlington by the city, neighboring cities, county, and school districts? Answered: 458 Skipped: 3 8% 37 21% 98 43% 196 20% 93 7% 32 456 2.97 4% 20 19% 85 45% 206 27% 121 5% 24 456 3.10 8% 35 24% 108 40% 185 22% 101 6% 28 457 2.95 #COMMENTS?DATE 1 Alot of parks don't seem to be maintained other than mowing 3/28/2022 9:02 PM 2 We need more fields for sports. The availability to get lines on fields for sports is hard if it’s not soccer or football. Lacrosse is much needed and getting larger in our area. The fields we play on havi mg to be combined with all other sports takes it toll on the fields. We need to consider more terf fields. We also need to take in more consideration that all sports should be able to be lined for fields they need. Especially for the student athletes on school property. These lacrosse players deserve the same as football and soccer. 3/28/2022 5:00 PM 3 Country charm park use to be the best, until the new construction 3/24/2022 12:26 PM 4 Lack the of community parks within the whole city of Arlington 3/23/2022 11:17 PM 5 There needs to be enforcement of park rules and an addition of parental supervision of youth below the age of 16 at parks. Also, the youth ust "hanging" out at parks unsupervised who are participating in littering and vandalism, officers need to either cite them and/or drive them home and explain to parents that they need to set clear guidelines for their children or cite the parents. 3/23/2022 10:46 PM 7%7% 7% 5%5% 5% 6%6% 6% 20%20% 20% 27%27% 27% 22%22% 22% 43%43% 43% 45%45% 45% 40%40% 40% 21%21% 21% 19%19% 19% 24%24% 24% 8%8% 8% 4%4% 4% 8%8% 8% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Lowest Low Moderate High Highest Location - of existing par... Quantity - the number and s... Quality - the physical... LOWEST LOW MODERATE HIGH HIGHEST TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Location - of existing parks and trails in relation to your neighborhood Quantity - the number and size of existing parks and trails provided in the city Quality - the physical condition of park furnishings including parking, restrooms, trails, courts, fields, and picnic shelters Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 15 / 58 6 Haller Park is beautiful, but the others could use a facelift. I wish there were more parks in old town, as well. 3/23/2022 6:54 PM 7 I like the playgrounds and green spaces but would enjoy having additional trails nearby.3/23/2022 6:06 PM 8 The fields at post and haller middle school are in poor condition.3/23/2022 4:56 PM 9 We have no quality athletic complex 3/23/2022 3:54 PM 10 Need more athletic spaces for youth programs ie. Football field, lacrosse fields, soccer fields for youth programs. 3/23/2022 3:13 PM 11 more public restroom facilities would be great in town 3/23/2022 10:20 AM 12 Not enough playgrounds. Fields for sports are limited and not not in the best shape.3/22/2022 7:03 AM 13 Drugs and garbage all over 3/21/2022 8:13 PM 14 they are horrible we go out of town for parks nothing good here 3/20/2022 7:50 PM 15 Homeless people defalcating on the trail and sidewalks is a problem. They also camp along the river and under the bridge making it so others cannot enjoy the facilities. 3/20/2022 4:45 PM 16 We feel like we are not in the city.3/19/2022 6:34 PM 17 Arlington provides an abundance of parks and trails that are easily accessible 3/18/2022 1:48 PM 18 I have a plot in the community garden at 3rd and French. It is a good start, but needs so much more. We also need one here in Gleneagle. 3/18/2022 10:35 AM 19 Sports ct. would be great 3/16/2022 12:07 PM 20 Maintenance of parks is lowest and needs to be more people to fully support facilities 3/15/2022 9:50 AM 21 Quality over quanity is important and having the proper city employees to maintain.3/15/2022 9:03 AM 22 The parks are satisfactory, but they should be updated and expanded if possible.3/13/2022 4:20 PM 23 Still don’t think the pocket park on Olympic was a good idea, seems like a waste of resources. I feel it would be a better use if it was sold to a business which attracts commerce and generates sales tax. It is not needed as a park for the city. 3/12/2022 11:15 AM 24 I use the trails around the airport for walking.3/11/2022 7:16 PM 25 There are no parks in smokey point area that have restrooms or picnic shelters 3/11/2022 4:58 PM 26 another park is smokey point would be so valuable 3/11/2022 1:29 PM 27 I'm an older adult, so it doesn't bother me, but I see that there aren't decent or adequate playground items for children 3/11/2022 1:02 PM 28 We just moved in but we’ve loved the walking trails but the actual parks by us aren’t very big and wish they had more to do on them. 3/11/2022 12:31 PM 29 Its understood that the maintenance crew is doing the best they can maintaining the existing parks - however in order to add more parks of high quality to the city, it is necessary that more staff get added to the city teams. Please consider this before making promises to improve and make more parks available to the community. 3/11/2022 12:31 PM 30 I value the centennial trail and the parks adjacent to it!! I'm an avid bike rider!!3/11/2022 12:29 PM 31 Haller Park is our favorite. We rarely go to others because they aren't as family friendly.3/11/2022 8:33 AM 32 Would be nice if there was a restroom there.3/10/2022 6:42 PM 33 While river meadows is close as the crow flies there is no way to get to it from our house without driving a half hour around. It could use a bridge. There’s nearly no parks near Burn Road. 3/10/2022 5:51 PM 34 The bathrooms and water always seem to not be open 3/10/2022 10:02 AM 35 Benches need maintenance and some parks still need to be built after 10+ years!3/10/2022 9:02 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 16 / 58 36 Would like to see turf fields somewhere in Arlington. Maybe joining with the school district and turf the field at Haller. 3/9/2022 4:45 PM 37 I’ve found it difficult to find parks. Signage could be improved.3/9/2022 8:40 AM 38 Overall we could use more sport courts and field turf fields. Tennis and pickle ball courts would awesome. Extra field turf fields besides the school would be nice. 3/8/2022 9:45 PM 39 Our big desire is better bike lanes on some of the county roads! Stanwood Bryant, Kackman etc. The parks are nice though,! 3/8/2022 3:48 PM 40 Arlington has several small spaces to explore sure, however the parks suck! Haller is the only one available that has ok parking and new safe equipment. There is no other option and most people MUST drive there. I hate the park choices on this town, very limited inventory!!! 3/8/2022 1:26 PM 41 Start making the parks safer for families 3/8/2022 11:12 AM 42 The parking and the restrooms need great improvement in most of the parks 3/8/2022 6:10 AM 43 Park 31 could be better maintained. The grass can be waste high at times. This may be a county park. It has the potential to be something really special. 3/8/2022 6:03 AM 44 Too many drug dealers and drug addicts at the parks closest to me.3/7/2022 8:26 PM 45 Some of the parks could use a little more "love"3/6/2022 3:44 PM 46 They should be clean and in working order at all times 3/4/2022 9:51 PM 47 Need more Pickleball courts 3/4/2022 3:25 PM 48 They recently started updating the park close to us but I still wouldn’t feel safe letting my child hang out there without my supervision 3/4/2022 2:02 PM 49 Have seen improvements 3/4/2022 1:32 PM 50 Haller Park really needs more shade near the playground and spray park in the summer, and the parking lot and restrooms need a bit more maintenance. 3/4/2022 1:23 PM 51 The forest connected to Forest Park could be included in the park or become an off lease dog park. 3/4/2022 11:57 AM 52 Mostly just green areas.3/4/2022 8:50 AM 53 Arlington has failed to add large space parks which are sorely needed. I am seeing high density housing going up on the corner of 172nd and 67th, and it does not appear there is any park, open space or even a play area associated with this construction. So families will move there and children have no place to play. The busy road and sound of traffic will be what they see from their window. It is concerning that this type of construction, known to be so very difficult for people's well being, is allowed. 3/4/2022 8:22 AM 54 need park at Smokey Point 3/4/2022 8:18 AM 55 I am actually impressed with how many choices there are. But the quality really varies with some quiet nice and others looking tired. 3/3/2022 9:27 PM 56 A lot of the parks have an increase in illegal activity. It is difficult to feel safe at times.3/3/2022 7:32 AM 57 Very well maintained 3/3/2022 6:47 AM 58 I would love more trails 3/2/2022 9:43 PM 59 Any sort of walking or running paths are not safe when we have to cross streets. Especially 67th. We have almost been hit by cars multiple times trying to walk to the airport from glen eagle. Big trucks, people speeding. It’s not good. More housing means more pedestrians and there will be more loss of life if something isn’t done to improve walkability conditions. 3/2/2022 7:23 PM 60 some park facilities need updating; gazebos shelters. Some like Terrace is dark and has become a hang out, and seems to becoming trashy. 3/2/2022 5:34 PM 61 An indoor pool would be great for kiddo to learn how to swim, basketball courts would be nice, just more activities for kids in general would be nice, there's nothing around here. Thanks! 3/2/2022 6:05 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 17 / 58 62 We need better playgrounds and picnic facilities. We would love undercover play areas and toddler specific play areas. 3/1/2022 8:38 AM 63 I never use the parks or trails, just a restroom when driving around, if needed 3/1/2022 7:53 AM 64 I wish we had trees to shade us from the hot heat in the summertime 3/1/2022 12:09 AM 65 Some great-Haller, more day access bathrooms along trails needed 2/28/2022 8:01 PM 66 Better restrooms 2/28/2022 6:58 PM 67 We need more benches and tables. They are always all filled on warm days!2/28/2022 3:00 PM 68 Would Love To See a park geared towards teens, bigger swings that they can fit in, bigger slides, etc. 2/28/2022 10:37 AM 69 The parks are definitely improving in town, bathrooms could use some work, and safety from aggressive kids, homeless, and people needs to be monitored more. The worry of my kids coming across needle is very strong as well. 2/28/2022 7:31 AM 70 Need bathrooms at Jensen Park (ports potty is in front of handicap space!) and accessible playground options 2/27/2022 6:40 PM 71 Need basketball hoops there enough room at most parks 2/27/2022 3:45 PM 72 I would like to see more bathrooms and some events and fun things for kiddos. Especially some new things for babies 2/27/2022 2:37 PM 73 There seem to be more small playgrounds that kids get board on vs larger ones.2/27/2022 8:47 AM 74 The play equipment is lame. There’s only 1 park in Arlington that has suffice entertaining play equipment and that park isn’t easily accessible for residents that don’t live downtown. 2/27/2022 8:34 AM 75 Many of the parks outside of downtown are neglected.2/26/2022 9:33 PM 76 For people with health issues where they need a bathroom it is not always easy to find one 2/26/2022 9:33 PM 77 Would love to see benches or better yet picnic tables in areas that don't have them. Portage creek for example. Stopping for a break from walking is essential with young kids or those those with disabilities (and need the exercise the most). 2/26/2022 9:21 PM 78 This is confusing. Is this asking how I rate the priority of addressing location, quantity, and quality or how I currently rate these aspects of the parks? 2/26/2022 6:55 PM 79 Bathrooms at Haller park need a longer open season for families!2/26/2022 4:58 PM 80 I wish more special needs options 2/26/2022 4:27 PM 81 I would love to see more parks such as Jennings Marysville park for families. Conserving wildlife and creating walking trails. My family and I used to live near North Creek Trails in Bothell I’d Love.. to see Arlington create more parks such as this with playgrounds. 2/26/2022 4:11 PM 82 Arlington really does go above and beyond when it comes to parks 2/26/2022 3:32 PM 83 Lacking in Smokey point a good park 2/26/2022 11:22 AM 84 Well maintained parks and walking area, we don't have any by where I live 2/26/2022 10:39 AM 85 I’m too stressed by overcrowding, traffic jams and no grocery options (as haggen sits empty)2/26/2022 8:13 AM 86 Country Charm Park is sure sadly a wasted resource, so much potential. I didn't know there was a park 67 & Cemetery 2/26/2022 1:19 AM 87 We especially appreciate the improvements to Haller park. That was one we had stopped going to before due to drug use and the homeless population 2/25/2022 11:01 PM 88 Would be better if we could reduce drug activity and homelessness.2/25/2022 7:41 PM 89 There any not any city parks near my house. To get to any my kids would have to go in the hwy or down steep stairs 2/25/2022 7:40 AM 90 We could use more shelters and lighting 2/25/2022 6:38 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 18 / 58 91 Grafitti 2/22/2022 8:47 PM 92 The York Memorial Park toddler play equipment is in need of replacement. Haller Park and Jensen are fantastic and in good shape. 2/22/2022 9:01 AM 93 Haller Park is a great park. Would love more like it.2/20/2022 9:25 PM 94 There are no parks within walking distance, I am rating them lowest in showing that there are none; this survey is confusing, I am not rating them lowest in priority, I think that should all be highest priority , right now I think they are either nonexistent in my area or low quality; again this survey is worded strangely 2/20/2022 5:16 PM 95 No dogs allowed. No shelters. Few sitting areas.2/20/2022 12:16 AM 96 We need car wash and decent. Grocery store not more people,parks and apts,hate this 2/19/2022 10:28 PM 97 It’s ridiculous that land is being used for building - we need more trails and parks.2/19/2022 9:00 PM 98 I am lucky to live near the biggest and best parks.2/19/2022 9:35 AM 99 More sports courts for kids to play on during non school days 2/18/2022 10:48 PM 100 I looked up the closest 3 to my home and 1 is open but just a grass area, one is permanently closed and the third is temporarily closed. 2/18/2022 8:40 PM 101 More events at terrace park would be nice.2/18/2022 2:16 PM 102 Terrace park could use some upgraded equipment but please don't remove the old merry go round. The new merry go rounds are terrible in comparison (like the one in Haller park, it sucks) 2/18/2022 2:14 PM 103 Parks with restrooms needed in Smokey Point. The rub is how to keep them from getting messed up by vandals &/or homeless 2/18/2022 1:59 PM 104 I miss not having access to Portage Creek Wildlife Sanctuary off of Cemetary Rd. It was wonderful when we used to be able to walk to it from our home in Zone 1. 2/18/2022 1:47 PM 105 School District discourages (or flat out doesn't allow) use of their grounds for public use.2/18/2022 12:43 PM 106 Would be nice to have more in Smokey Point area 2/18/2022 11:07 AM 107 I would like to see more diversity in playground equipment like exsists at Haller Park 2/18/2022 11:05 AM 108 Difficultly finding parking and the over flow of cars on 530 is a major challenge during the summer. 2/18/2022 9:49 AM 109 The Parks Department is incredibly understaffed and it is impossible for them to be able to keep up with demands on this city. Parks don't create revenue, but they create community and family. We can't let those values fall by the wayside. As the city constantly grows up (literally...the constant addition of multi-story residential buildings is staggering), we have to remember that the city has an obligation to provide safe, clean, and well cared for park areas. 2/18/2022 7:45 AM 110 Overall very clean and well kept! Love the various trees and lights for Christmas and summer nights in the gazebo. 2/17/2022 6:21 PM 111 I’m sad and angry about the condition of some of the parks here. Dead trees, overgrown vines and brush. Holes in the ground that are dangerous if stepped in. Probably made by moles and there’s a huge mole problem all over my area. It’s getting worse! 2/17/2022 4:40 PM 112 Keep up the great work, I feel that people don't realize how beneficial parks and trails are, even when they use them already, But the more people realize these benefits, the more people will utilize the parks, trails, etc. Thanks! 2/17/2022 4:23 PM 113 Not sure I can speak to the quality as I have not been in a great amount of the parks.2/17/2022 4:17 PM 114 too many drug addicts, i got mugged one time 2/17/2022 4:16 PM 115 It would help if the restrooms were open 2/17/2022 3:46 PM 116 Overall I think Arlington has done wonderfully with their parks. My main complaint is I no longer use the Centennial trail south of 204th, due to the Marijuana processing plant. That smoking and vaping isn't allowed in parks is great, but useless if drug processors are allowed to fill the air by parks with the substances because they aren't on park property. 2/17/2022 1:13 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 19 / 58 117 Airport Blvd and the trail around the airport are nearby but not listed above; no amenities 2/17/2022 1:00 PM 118 Smokey Point is lacking in resources for young families as far as recreation and safety.2/17/2022 12:10 PM 119 The bathrooms are always dark feeling, not enough light especially at River Meadows 2/17/2022 9:54 AM 120 Terrace Park needs loving care.2/17/2022 7:05 AM 121 I live within city limits and one of the biggest perks is the many parks available to our family.2/16/2022 7:53 PM 122 All parks but one have boring play structures and are un-inviting to children older than 6.2/16/2022 7:13 PM 123 Hoping the quality could be a bit better, not picking up windfall from trees or repairs to terrace park 2/16/2022 6:33 PM 124 We have a great selection spread throughout Arlington and do not need more. We need to concentrate on what we have 2/16/2022 5:36 PM 125 you did not list airport trail 2/16/2022 4:25 PM 126 There is one park within walking distance from me. It is the size of two residential yards. It is used by drug users and criminal activity, thanks to lack of concern by the city. 2/16/2022 12:02 PM 127 Parks in our area need improvement 2/15/2022 8:15 PM 128 The park closest to us need some work, on the play place and to the landscaping 2/15/2022 6:12 PM 129 Grounds are not maintained enough. brush and berry bushes are over growing. I have replaced net twice over five years and the backboard on the basketball court needs to be re furbished. 2/15/2022 6:11 PM 130 The closest park that provides, large area of enjoyment for all ages is Twin Rivers Park. We live very close to the Airport Trail and would love to see the woods closest to Stillaguamish Athletic Center user for a park for all ages. An Ideal location would be adjacent to the new Fire Staion. Currnently our natural areas are being taken over by office complexes/light industrial and of course the HUGE Amazon facility. This has already had an impact on the Airport walking trail. 2/15/2022 4:36 PM 131 There have been several homeless encounters with them using curse words at my young children. 2/15/2022 4:27 PM 132 I would like more trails, easier access to them 2/15/2022 3:29 PM 133 No parks close enough to enjoy.2/15/2022 3:18 PM 134 Unsafe to walk along or cross Smokey Point 2/15/2022 3:11 PM 135 Haller Park is a great park. I grew up across the street from it and have many wonderful memories. Thanks for adding the "Splash Park" I think that was a wonderful idea for the kids. 2/15/2022 2:13 PM 136 Haller park is great, wish other parks were as nice.2/15/2022 2:08 PM 137 The park near me (Woodway) doesn't have much, I don't know why it even exists.2/15/2022 1:44 PM 138 The teams and families do a good job of cleaning up after their games!!!2/15/2022 1:44 PM 139 need park at Smokey Point 2/15/2022 12:44 PM 140 Jack & I are new to the quaint little town of Arlington Wa and very impressed with the facilities and development of the town . 2/14/2022 6:12 PM 141 I don't understand this question. I think the parks could do better 2/14/2022 3:52 PM 142 No Parking on the lower or northside of Terrace Park, people visiting the lower part of the park often park in the street interfering with traffic on east division street. 2/14/2022 3:46 PM 143 I wonder if something like this https://grassmatsusa.com/reusable-lawn-protection/ could be used in Legion Park. 2/14/2022 1:22 PM 144 Would like to see more emphasis on maintaining existing facilities. The fence around Terrace Park has needed repairs for several years. 2/14/2022 11:46 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 20 / 58 Q3 CONSERVE AND ENHANCE CREEK CORRIDORS - under the proposed plan, the city could conserve and enhance corridors along Eagle, Prairie, Kruger, Edgecomb, Portage, March, and Quilceda Creeks including some that are and will remain privately owned. The objective would be to remove invasive species, replant native vegetation, and install interpretive signage and exhibits. How important is this proposal to you? Answered: 453 Skipped: 8 8% 34 14% 62 30% 136 34% 153 15% 68 453 3.35 #COMMENTS?DATE 1 waste of time and money 3/23/2022 10:46 PM 2 Salmon spawning is very important. They need to be taken care of regularly.3/22/2022 7:03 AM 3 don’t mess with nature leave it alone please 3/20/2022 7:50 PM 4 They are salmon habitat. Riparian strips are important for keeping the creeks cool enough for salmon survival. 3/20/2022 4:45 PM 5 From the areas listed that i have visited in the past year, the vegetation seems well kept and not large enough to need added interpretive signage 3/18/2022 1:48 PM 6 Invasive species control only important part I think 3/18/2022 10:35 AM 7 Keeping invasive things out and native area in good condition is important 3/15/2022 9:50 AM 8 Again, to install, maintain and replant, more staff is needed.3/11/2022 12:31 PM 9 I value that the city values this!!3/11/2022 12:29 PM 10 Having places to go and things to do with family and friends in a safe place (Swimming pool :) ) 3/10/2022 6:15 PM 11 Definitely remove invasive species. No point in interpretive signage on private property.3/10/2022 5:51 PM 12 Make the parks usable by humans. That's what they are there for. Have some other group do conservation of non-park areas. 3/10/2022 9:02 AM 15%15% 15%34%34% 34%30%30% 30%14%14% 14%8%8% 8% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Lowest Low Moderate High Highest Conserve and enhance cree... LOWEST LOW MODERATE HIGH HIGHEST TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Conserve and enhance creek corridors Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 21 / 58 13 A good idea for the schools to have students help with this as a community/science field trip 3/8/2022 11:12 AM 14 Replant I’m with native species offers an opportunity for community involvement and where families could get involved. 3/8/2022 6:03 AM 15 I am not interested in this issue.3/4/2022 9:51 PM 16 Keep native habitat as close to pristine as possible benefits every species, including human 3/4/2022 3:25 PM 17 Provide better access to parks 3/4/2022 11:57 AM 18 Add parking to be able to access the corridors. Signage and exhibits just will be vandalized.3/4/2022 8:50 AM 19 Essential.3/4/2022 8:22 AM 20 That is a great investment 3/3/2022 9:27 PM 21 would rather see parks with more toys, seats and be cleaner 3/3/2022 7:36 PM 22 Great Idea! We have beautiful creeks running though our city, Portage creek is important to me. 3/3/2022 9:35 AM 23 It is important to remove invasive species, especially around the waterways where it directly effects salmon spawning. 3/2/2022 5:34 PM 24 I like having wildlife areas for the actual wildlife. Humans are the invasive species.3/1/2022 7:53 AM 25 Let's not worry about that right now 3/1/2022 12:09 AM 26 Absolutely important. Let’s protect our environment. Is there any way we can try to train volunteers? 2/28/2022 3:00 PM 27 It’s is very important to be good stewards of our land for the animals and future generations.2/28/2022 7:31 AM 28 pick up trash!2/27/2022 6:40 PM 29 Portage creek is overrun with blackberries and trash. It’s really important to preserve and protect salmon habitat. 2/27/2022 1:54 PM 30 Let nature be natural.2/26/2022 9:33 PM 31 Conserving wildlife is so important 2/26/2022 4:11 PM 32 Remove the invasive apartment cities 2/26/2022 8:13 AM 33 Anything to preserve natural areas and resources 2/26/2022 1:19 AM 34 rate install interpretive signage and exhibits as Lowest.2/23/2022 3:33 PM 35 I like the idea as long as there would be trails for folks to walk on along in the corridors.2/22/2022 9:01 AM 36 Not priority,no more wasted money in our home many years.people are moving g 2/19/2022 10:28 PM 37 leave them alone. past so called improvements didnt work 2/19/2022 8:56 PM 38 The creeks are important ant natural resources that should be accessible for enjoyment by all.2/19/2022 9:35 AM 39 Adopt a stream can do some of the work and maybe save money.2/18/2022 8:36 PM 40 LOTS OF SALMON STILL RETURN TO SOME OF THOSE CREEKS TO SPAWN (KRUGER).2/18/2022 5:38 PM 41 This is important as invasive species such as blackberries can make enjoying the trails and creeks difficult. 2/18/2022 2:35 PM 42 As we grow, it is important to me that we do our best to preserve our streams and wildlife 2/18/2022 12:43 PM 43 I went to Pioneer Elementary when I was a kid. And I remember the salmon coming up through the creeks in Gleneagle. We learned a lot about the importance of our natural environment and the ecosystems that compose it in the K-12 School system. Some day I'd hope that my future kids could have the same experience, literally getting to see the salmon run through their home neighborhood. 2/18/2022 11:54 AM 44 If this is to help the environment, than that is important, but if it is just for cosmetics, it is low priority 2/18/2022 10:22 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 22 / 58 45 The homeless live in the over growth by our house. We won't walk through the trail by the creek. 2/17/2022 9:08 PM 46 Very important! Also important to mitigate/control litter in the area to make sure the above efforts are worthwhile. 2/17/2022 6:21 PM 47 Absolutely needed and long overdue!! What about Stillaguamish Ave? So much trash and overgrowth along this street. Trash near creek will ultimately find its way into creek and twin ponds. It’s really quite terrible how it looks around the creek and ponds on Stilly Ave.!! 2/17/2022 4:40 PM 48 Cool!2/17/2022 4:23 PM 49 i enjoy this idea but still too many homeless and drug addicts 2/17/2022 4:16 PM 50 Might just help to clean out some areas.2/17/2022 3:46 PM 51 Taxpayers should not improving private properties 2/16/2022 5:36 PM 52 If you keep the homeless people out so we're safe, that would be more of a priority 2/16/2022 5:06 PM 53 that is very good a learning trail 2/16/2022 4:25 PM 54 I wholeheartedly support restoration and land conservation 2/16/2022 4:02 PM 55 Sure but these areas do not allow 2/15/2022 4:36 PM 56 Great plan 2/15/2022 4:18 PM 57 conserve all we can is important with the area growing so fast 2/15/2022 1:44 PM 58 Agree with objective except installing interpretive signage. Leave it natural.2/15/2022 10:39 AM 59 Improve and preserve now !2/14/2022 6:12 PM 60 Sad to see so much trash along these creek corridors.2/14/2022 11:46 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 23 / 58 Q4 PARK PICNIC SHELTERS, TABLES, AND TRAILS - under the proposed plan, the city could install picnic facilities to provide public access to passive park features including woodlands, wetlands, and wildlife habitat. The proposal would provide picnic facilities within a 5-minute walk of most residential areas including group picnic shelters in locations suitable for public gatherings. How important is this proposal to you? Answered: 456 Skipped: 5 5% 25 13% 57 31% 140 39% 176 13% 58 456 3.41 #COMMENTS?DATE 1 I go to parks/trails to be with nature not people 3/24/2022 12:26 PM 2 the city must then patrol the areas and keep them crime free. Transients and youth will ruin these areas if they are allowed to. Patrol, cite those who violate rules/vandalize and this could be a great idea. 3/23/2022 10:46 PM 3 Unless patrolled, this will attract homeless and/or drugs/crime 3/23/2022 3:54 PM 4 Concern that this would attract increased amount of vagrants and substance abusers to congregate in these areas 3/23/2022 3:13 PM 5 Vandalism is a concern 3/22/2022 7:03 AM 6 yes 3/20/2022 7:50 PM 7 Homeless people will just turn them into a shelter or encampment.3/20/2022 4:45 PM 8 I love the wetlands storm park. Something should be done to attract more people.3/19/2022 6:34 PM 9 I honestly feel tat this could be a waste of funds as it seems that most have picnic tables. Possibly adding picnic tables to those that do not have them. 3/18/2022 1:48 PM 10 As long as it is done in way that will not encourage homeless gatherings 3/18/2022 10:35 AM 11 How would the city be capable of providing good maintenance to the new things with no new hires 3/15/2022 9:50 AM 12 Our city and county currently have the largest problem with drug use/homeless that I have seen here in the past 30 years. Until this probably is address with some resolve we should not 3/14/2022 9:08 AM 13%13% 13%39%39% 39%31%31% 31%13%13% 13%5%5% 5% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Lowest Low Moderate High Highest Add picnic shelters,... LOWEST LOW MODERATE HIGH HIGHEST TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Add picnic shelters, tables, park trails Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 24 / 58 use our resources to create more shelter and areas that will bring these issues deeper into our neighborhoods. Thus taking it away from the use of our good citizens. Use the resources to create safer neighborhoods! 13 I would like to see recycle bins in parks with literature on how and what to recycle. More shelters and tables for picnics and cookouts would be nice. Charcoal grills that could be installed in the spring and taken down in November would be wonderful. 3/13/2022 4:20 PM 14 chairs or a bench seem the most important 3/11/2022 7:16 PM 15 That would add to the beauty of the neighborhood 3/11/2022 1:06 PM 16 How is the city going to handle the extra garbage and litter that will come with more picnic shelters and tables? 3/11/2022 12:31 PM 17 It would be on the trail 3/10/2022 6:15 PM 18 Especially if it could be in the Burn Road area 3/10/2022 5:51 PM 19 Don't forget the campground that is still in Country Charm Park. It needs to be seriously maintained! 3/10/2022 9:02 AM 20 More places to sit and possibly have a birthday party would be great.3/8/2022 7:48 PM 21 Could be good if it's properly maintained. I would hope the city will be provoding trash/recycle bins 3/8/2022 11:12 AM 22 Picnic tables are less desirable. I would love to see the City main the large grass areas at their parks. There is a very large demand for field sports (both soccer & football); However the fields that the city owns are not suitable for our athletes. With the exception of the high school, all the fields within the city are uneven. Family’s in both organized and unorganized sports have to leave the City of Arlington to participate. Family’s of all ages, athlete and non athletes want a safe WIDE OPEN space to let their kids run. Picnic tables alone do not promote gatherings. 3/8/2022 6:03 AM 23 O think we need to deal with the homeless problem in Arlington before we add more shelters for them to hang out in. And by taking care of this problem, I don't mean putting them in jail, I mean actually helping them get the treatment they need. 3/7/2022 7:43 PM 24 They would become a spot for the homeless to hangout and sleep at.3/7/2022 7:31 AM 25 My family loves picnics 3/6/2022 3:44 PM 26 I live in the upper left corner of this map and there is nothing nearby at all. :-(3/4/2022 10:53 PM 27 We need more trees and shade at Haller park 3/4/2022 10:12 PM 28 Parks are my biggest concern but it is nice to have shaded areas and benches at the parks.3/4/2022 9:51 PM 29 My only concern becomes creating more opportunities for garbage people would pack in, but either not pack out and wondering about ongoing care and cleaning. 3/3/2022 9:27 PM 30 with the number of apartments going up this would give families more outdoor areas to hang out 3/3/2022 7:36 PM 31 We need more covered areas because of the rain 3/3/2022 6:47 AM 32 Trails would be nice, but I don’t care for picnic stuff.3/2/2022 9:43 PM 33 while adding picinic areas in nice, I am more concerned with the number of garbage cans available near these benches. I see throughout the Centennial trail, numerous benches and hardly any garbage/recycling recepticals. I think if you are going to invite someone to sit down, slow down and enjoy the parks that you also need to expect a certain amount of trash to accompany it. as someone who picks up trash on my walks, I often look for places to dispose of what I pick up and find very little, convenient or intuative places where garbage cans are. If there is a bench, there should be a can. 3/2/2022 5:34 PM 34 Parks are abundant, but so are the homeless. They encroach in our parks and ruin the beauty and lessen families and children using them. 3/2/2022 9:54 AM 35 My husband is disabled and having someplace to stop and rest is most excellent.3/1/2022 7:58 PM 36 Nice idea but would be overtaken but the druggies and homeless.3/1/2022 7:17 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 25 / 58 37 We use our personal property for BBQing and eating outside 3/1/2022 7:53 AM 38 Sounds nice, but I don't want the homeless to claim it as a home 3/1/2022 12:09 AM 39 Not nearly enough picnic shelters given our climate.2/28/2022 11:25 PM 40 This is incredibly important, COVID-19 isn't going anywhere and we need more outdoor gathering places 2/28/2022 7:41 PM 41 Instead of buying new one how about maintaining what we already have 2/26/2022 9:33 PM 42 You read my mind. See comments above. Twin lakes could use more seating too for for bird watchers in the winter. 2/26/2022 9:21 PM 43 Needed 2/26/2022 4:11 PM 44 I’m sorry I feel the vagrants would destroy these spaces 2/26/2022 8:13 AM 45 Would love to see one at High Clover Park 2/22/2022 9:01 AM 46 I think there need to be more parks first and then figure out what makes sense for each location; this one size fits all does not work 2/20/2022 5:16 PM 47 This is for all the apt.dwellers enough wasted plans for small town now crowded messy 2/19/2022 10:28 PM 48 Good, as long as they are maintained. Will there be restrooms?2/19/2022 9:35 AM 49 I live in an area of high density apartments. A place to go for picnics is important 2/18/2022 2:35 PM 50 If anything the picnic areas need cleaned up more regularly, broken bottles and trash.2/18/2022 2:14 PM 51 Why do I see nothing on the map for Smokey Point east of SPBlvd.?2/18/2022 1:59 PM 52 I don't think these get used frequently enough. I mostly see younger kids use them as hangout spots rather than picnic areas. It's not a bad thing, but I think funds could be better allocated elsewhere. 2/18/2022 11:54 AM 53 We do need more gathering areas and trails. Would like to stress the need for easily accessible parking again. 2/18/2022 9:49 AM 54 This falls in line with my previous comments. Providing a place for families to gather is more important to our community than we know. Probably more important than ever. 2/18/2022 7:45 AM 55 Already a good number as is.2/17/2022 6:21 PM 56 Are they going to be kept up properly?!2/17/2022 4:40 PM 57 Very exciting!2/17/2022 4:23 PM 58 I would say it depends on how many of the other picnic areas are being used and to what capacity. 2/17/2022 4:17 PM 59 we have a lot and drug addicts use them all 2/17/2022 4:16 PM 60 Picnic areas typically get abused and become trashed.2/17/2022 12:10 PM 61 It's great for family and friends to be able to have a safe place to gather and have outdoor activities and picnics. 2/17/2022 9:54 AM 62 Would love access to boardwalk through nature area for wildlife viewing 2/16/2022 7:41 PM 63 We have a trail system in centennial and airport trails. We don't need the expense of another 2/16/2022 5:36 PM 64 Again, needs to be kept clean of graffiti and homeless 2/16/2022 5:06 PM 65 sounds like Disneyland 2/16/2022 4:25 PM 66 Rudy York Park is a crime and drug center.2/16/2022 12:02 PM 67 Please develop Country Charm Park 2/15/2022 5:54 PM 68 Absolutely do not have adequate park of any kind in the Smokey Point area of Arlington. Would love to see something like a Jennings park in Smokey Point. The areas surrounding the airport could definitly support a wonderful park. Especially in the area close to where the air 2/15/2022 4:36 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 26 / 58 show is held each year and where there is storage, etc.... WE NEED MORE PARKS and less industrial buildings. Even the Strawberry fields etc could be enhanced to be more enjoyable with trees, picnic, trails, etc. 69 people use parks when they are clean, maintained and have shelter from sun or rain.2/15/2022 4:18 PM 70 this would only cause the wildlife to abandon their homes. these areas should be only for hiking. In residential areas it would be nice 2/15/2022 1:44 PM 71 Leave it natural 2/15/2022 10:39 AM 72 Excellent Plan 2/14/2022 6:12 PM 73 The newly installed metal benches and tables on Gilman Walk may be vandal resistant but are uninviting in appearance and function. 2/14/2022 11:46 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 27 / 58 Q5 MULTIUSE TRAILS - under the proposed plan, the city could develop a multiuse trail network to provide connections to parks, schools, and other community destinations that access all residential areas. The trail segments would be designed for hike, bike, and dog use depending on environmental constraints and neighborhood property impacts. The proposal would install wayfinding signage and directories along the trail corridors. How important is this proposal to you? Answered: 454 Skipped: 7 5% 24 7% 34 28% 128 34% 155 25% 113 454 3.66 #COMMENTS?DATE 1 This would increase the walk ability of the town. That would be amazing.3/23/2022 6:54 PM 2 Unless patrolled, this will attract homeless and/or drugs/crime 3/23/2022 3:54 PM 3 Arlington residents need more trails and places to take dogs.3/22/2022 7:03 AM 4 that’s good 3/20/2022 7:50 PM 5 Drug addicts would take them over and ruin it.3/20/2022 4:45 PM 6 Adding more trails to help connect them would be a great way to connect the community and explore outside the existing trails. More connections should lead to higher outdoor recreation for families 3/18/2022 1:48 PM 7 Especially good to have dog access on leashes 3/18/2022 10:35 AM 8 Get shoulders in good working order and provide good trails for people to not be next to roadways, Need more maintenance staff 3/15/2022 9:50 AM 9 Would like to see these trails be paved so they are no maintenance for the city...3/15/2022 9:03 AM 10 Again, Please do not creat paths that lead to and from our neighborhoods. Keep them at parks and out in nature. Pathways and trails leading into and out of neighborhoods is asking for more theft and creating a trailway for these people 3/14/2022 9:08 AM 11 Mile and Km markers would be would be helpful. Signs in Spanish are essential for future generations. 3/13/2022 4:20 PM 25%25% 25%34%34% 34%28%28% 28%7%7% 7%5%5% 5% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Lowest Low Moderate High Highest Develop off-road tra... LOWEST LOW MODERATE HIGH HIGHEST TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Develop off-road trail network Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 28 / 58 12 I sometimes walk or bike to downtown Arlington I have found it to be very dangerous to be on a bike or walking when i exit the airport trail near Cemetery Rd (204th St NE) & 54th Dr NE to get the the downtown area. Road is narrow, traffic is fast and there are no sidewalks until I get close to 67th Ave NE 3/11/2022 4:58 PM 13 It's nice to be able to get direction/info on the various parks and trails, to be able to find them 3/11/2022 12:29 PM 14 Have concerns regarding some of the trails and would like more information regarding them 3/10/2022 6:42 PM 15 I worry about safety for children in hidden corridors.3/10/2022 5:51 PM 16 What about the abandoned trail network at Country Charm Park?3/10/2022 9:02 AM 17 Would love more safe and planned walking trails.3/10/2022 8:44 AM 18 Not super important to me.3/8/2022 7:48 PM 19 Disaster for people loving on the trail. There is no Policing the people who trespass,leave garbage and ride atv and motorbikes on the trails. 3/8/2022 11:12 AM 20 Signage is not important and creates additional maintenance that doesn’t really add an attraction to trails. Maintained trails is what attracts folks to using them. 3/8/2022 6:03 AM 21 I rely on trails to exercise my dog and myself, more would be fantastic!3/7/2022 9:00 PM 22 This would be great for those of us that love walking as exercise 3/6/2022 3:44 PM 23 More trails and a dog park!!!!3/5/2022 10:28 AM 24 connecting centennial trail to the white horse trail is going to be huge, I will use it often to ride my bike. 3/4/2022 10:53 PM 25 From where I live an additional trail would be difficult. The trail that is currently there has many stairs so biking isn’t possible. 3/4/2022 9:51 PM 26 Stop developing!3/4/2022 7:10 PM 27 Parking at multiple access points.3/4/2022 8:50 AM 28 The single project that improved my standard of living in Arlington was the Centennial Trail- a county park. I have used the trail hundreds of times. All trails in Arlington should be connected to the Centennial Trail. 3/4/2022 8:22 AM 29 I think the Centennial trail is a good example of how this would add great value. Often it is more about the journey with end point destinations. The ability to travel between parks without having to go on streets would be great. It is a way to explore and discover. 3/3/2022 9:27 PM 30 this would be awesome and more inviting for bike rides and walks 3/3/2022 7:36 PM 31 I love the idea of more trails 3/3/2022 6:47 AM 32 Yes please! There is no where to walk in Smokey point 3/2/2022 9:43 PM 33 Again, these trails are great, but if the homeless are taking over, families will not use them. Enforce and deter homelessness! 3/2/2022 9:54 AM 34 Need something for ATV use.3/1/2022 7:17 PM 35 We live rural and enjoy the quiet, less people and traffic.3/1/2022 7:53 AM 36 Thank you for providing, walkers, joggers, bikers and nature enthusiasts places to enjoy the beauty of our community 2/28/2022 8:01 PM 37 High visibility would be important for our community members safety 2/28/2022 7:31 AM 38 There are no off-leash dog parks in Arlington. Please make this TOP PRIORITY 2/27/2022 10:21 PM 39 pave them for true accessibility!2/27/2022 6:40 PM 40 Keep bikes and pedestrians separate 2/26/2022 9:33 PM 41 This is very important for the health of our community 2/26/2022 9:33 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 29 / 58 42 It would be great to have a bike path on 211th st. Cars drive so fast and it is not safe for bikes.2/26/2022 5:25 PM 43 Would be too many Druggies& homeless for them to be safe for kids and women 2/26/2022 4:58 PM 44 Cennential trail is too crowded and impedes with the flow of traffic with the inadequate roads 2/26/2022 8:13 AM 45 Good to build community 2/26/2022 1:19 AM 46 Off leash dog park is highest 2/25/2022 9:52 PM 47 And connect to the Centennial Trail.2/25/2022 3:51 PM 48 Connections for pedestrians is very important as we grow 2/22/2022 9:01 AM 49 Horse trails 2/21/2022 6:18 PM 50 Would love to see a sidewalk/walkway along Cemetery Road from 47th to 67th.2/20/2022 9:25 PM 51 As a community we have lost vast amounts of trails for biking, walking, & dogs, to development; another example of Arlington caring more about getting business money in rather than taking care of its citizens 2/20/2022 5:16 PM 52 Not needed 2/19/2022 10:28 PM 53 This would help with active transportation to get around, too… not just recreation.2/19/2022 9:35 AM 54 More trails for hoodlums 2/19/2022 7:23 AM 55 I use Centennial Trail on a regular basis and would like to see more connections between trails. 2/18/2022 3:20 PM 56 As population increases, I think pedestrian walkways are very important. I lived in Marysvilles for 2 years recently, and it is not fun to walk around parts of Marysville. Not only for safety reasons (poorly lit) but they're often litter ridden and poorly maintained. 2/18/2022 11:54 AM 57 Already plenty of access as is.2/17/2022 6:21 PM 58 Fantastic!2/17/2022 4:23 PM 59 I love the trail systems, even though I am getting too old to use them like I would like to. Too old to be alone on a trail. 2/17/2022 4:17 PM 60 we have a lot and it’s nice 2/17/2022 4:16 PM 61 As long as you have working sidewalks this will be unnecessary.2/17/2022 3:46 PM 62 It's a great idea, but the city would need to find some way to keep the homeless from using these areas for camping and living, they need to be safe for families and people walking alone. 2/17/2022 9:54 AM 63 I really like this one...2/17/2022 5:25 AM 64 We don’t need freaking trails. We don’t need spots for homeless to camp out and enter into peoples backyards. We NEED BETTER ROADS DUE TO ALL THE APARTMENTS AND COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS YOU ARE BRINGING INTO THIS CITY. 2/16/2022 7:13 PM 65 All this would do is introduce the criminal element to new areas 2/16/2022 5:06 PM 66 nice get a full day to enjoy Arlington from different points 2/16/2022 4:25 PM 67 Getting to the airport extension from my neighborhood, highland view estates, is almost impossible to do safely right now. Any improvements made would be appreciated 2/16/2022 4:20 PM 68 The safer it is for bicycling, the better!2/15/2022 5:54 PM 69 Love the multiuse trails!2/15/2022 5:48 PM 70 I would love to see the Airport trail system incorporated into a park like Jennings Park. Beautiful trees already in existence, etc. 2/15/2022 4:36 PM 71 Please include fenced dog park areas for off leash.2/15/2022 4:18 PM 72 Please add more sidewalks and safe street / highway crossings 2/15/2022 3:11 PM 73 This would be ok if its safe for the community,maybe using cameras to keep out unsafe people 2/15/2022 1:44 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 30 / 58 74 Support trails, but no signage or directories. LEAVE IT NATURAL.2/15/2022 10:39 AM 75 What a good idea 2/14/2022 6:12 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 31 / 58 Q6 PLAYGROUNDS AND PLAY AREAS - under the proposed plan, the city could develop playgrounds and play areas to provide access within a 5-minute walking distance of most residential areas in the city. The proposal would design age-appropriate features for young and older age children. The proposal would upgrade some existing playground equipment to meet ADA requirements, safety concerns, and new activity interests. How important is this proposal to you? Answered: 456 Skipped: 5 4% 19 7% 33 29% 134 32% 148 27% 122 456 3.70 #COMMENTS?DATE 1 Seems to be plenty of children parks, we need adult nature trails 3/24/2022 12:26 PM 2 New equipment would be so great! Our playgrounds are aging and inaccessible to kids with disabilities. This would give kids more safe places to play! 3/23/2022 6:54 PM 3 Absolutely, parks for the kids!3/23/2022 3:54 PM 4 Kids need more places to play with all these developments with no yards and apartments that are being allowed. 3/22/2022 7:03 AM 5 yes 3/20/2022 7:50 PM 6 I would recommend not including the HOA miniparks and schools in this-have them use their funds to front this and add these to the local parks where families can bring their kids to play. 3/18/2022 1:48 PM 7 Many ADA upgrades are needed in the entire Arlington area.3/18/2022 10:35 AM 8 Several play areas need upgrading 3/16/2022 12:07 PM 9 Our current equipment is not in great shape at most parks and needs some attention, need more staff to maintain a great level of service 3/15/2022 9:50 AM 10 Upgrading the playgrounds seem to drive out the negative activity.3/15/2022 9:03 AM 11 I see kids playing in Terrance Park almost daily, which I enjoy. The basketball court needs to be updated. The old staircase should have a second railing for safety. 3/13/2022 4:20 PM 27%27% 27%32%32% 32%29%29% 29%7%7% 7%4%4% 4% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Lowest Low Moderate High Highest Develop playgrounds ... LOWEST LOW MODERATE HIGH HIGHEST TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Develop playgrounds and play areas Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 32 / 58 12 Again, who is going to be responsible for updating and maintaining all this new infrastructure? (sp?) 3/11/2022 12:31 PM 13 valuable that these will be and some are available for kids so the time is not spent on technical pieces (phones, computers.....) 3/11/2022 12:29 PM 14 Here’s the thing. “Safe” playgrounds are not fun for kids. There’s no element of challenge and they don’t want to play. I have seven children ages 1-20 and I have been to a park or two. Please don’t get rid of run park activities like merry go round. Add challenge, balance beams, bars, climbing walls. Playgrounds with a theme are great- pirate ship, castle, doll house/play house. Most park playgrounds are being made so boring it’s not worth taking them. Slides need to be long and swings need to go high. 3/10/2022 5:51 PM 15 Where I live - I feel like this is well done already!3/10/2022 2:59 PM 16 No kids so personally this is not a high priority 3/10/2022 8:44 AM 17 2xday 3/10/2022 6:46 AM 18 Crown Ridge has a park with aging play structures. Propose the city funding new ones 3/8/2022 9:48 PM 19 again maintence.....City or Tax payers?3/8/2022 11:12 AM 20 Parks with play areas and structures are wonderful! Garbage can however are often overflowing and aren’t necessarily maintained well. Power washing the play structures once a year or every other year, along with weekly clean ups would be a great addition. Again maintaining grassy area to promote safe place to run would be a wonderful benefit to the parks. A large covered play structure would promote getting out during our wet weather seasons. 3/8/2022 6:03 AM 21 Play areas would be nice, but still another area where homeless would hang out 3/7/2022 7:31 AM 22 All existing playground equipment should meet ADA requirements.3/5/2022 5:38 PM 23 This is very important! My housing community has a small playground but it is not safe nor fun for my kids. It’s basic and run down 3/4/2022 9:51 PM 24 #18 Hartland homes mini-parks have been removed, with no plan to replace!3/4/2022 4:30 PM 25 Again, more Pickleball please 3/4/2022 3:25 PM 26 Terrace Park playground could really use improvement. Despite being within walking distance of Haller Park, I prefer to drive my daughter to Terrace Park during the summer when it's hot due to the plentiful shade, but the playground is rather pitiful in comparision. 3/4/2022 1:23 PM 27 As the city grows with new big industry child care and safe areas will be in demand 3/4/2022 8:54 AM 28 Include swings, not just climbing structures.3/4/2022 8:50 AM 29 I think a few of these is a good idea, but again I worry about long term care and cleanliness. Fewer but larger and well cared for is better than lots of small ones, that eventually become run down and dirty. 3/3/2022 9:27 PM 30 this is very much needed!3/3/2022 7:36 PM 31 Kids always love more play structures 3/3/2022 6:47 AM 32 I definitely think some of the parks need a refresh of equipment. Please don't get rid of the merry-go-round at Terrace park!! 3/2/2022 5:34 PM 33 Again, homeless individuals are hanging around parks, such as Haller. Homeless camps popping up. Safety should be a priority in parks. 3/2/2022 9:54 AM 34 Kids need to spend time outdoors and stay active 3/1/2022 7:58 PM 35 Kids need a safe, fun place to play.3/1/2022 7:17 PM 36 Please add a covered play ground!3/1/2022 8:38 AM 37 We don't have young children and would never visit these 3/1/2022 7:53 AM 38 Would love a fenced playground near Legion Park!!!! We go to so many events, like the farmers market each week when it’s open and we would love to be able take the kids to a 2/28/2022 3:00 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 33 / 58 playground after! 39 With all the above provided improvements, an increase of staffing to care for the parks would seem very important as well. 2/28/2022 7:31 AM 40 It would be nice to have covered playgrounds to use in rainy weather. Cover with light filtering sails or something. 2/27/2022 7:22 PM 41 accessible playground more poured rubber or turf for easy navigation.2/27/2022 6:40 PM 42 Please add something’s for younger children. Like under 2 2/27/2022 2:37 PM 43 Please update the park on 196th pl ne Arlington 2/27/2022 8:49 AM 44 Look at parks in Rexburg and the big one in Rigby Idaho for ideas 2/27/2022 8:47 AM 45 I have a child in a wheelchair. This would be amazing.2/27/2022 7:39 AM 46 We definitely need more ADA accommodations through out Arlington 2/26/2022 10:39 AM 47 Less apartment cities allowed please.2/26/2022 8:13 AM 48 Good to build community 2/26/2022 1:19 AM 49 They are too often vandalized Orr left unmaintained 2/25/2022 3:37 PM 50 There should be playgrounds that have safe/fun equipment for all kids.2/25/2022 7:40 AM 51 Adding a play area at High Clover Park is super important as Heartland Homes HOA just removed theirs in late 2021. There are no play areas near this area of town. 2/22/2022 9:01 AM 52 Other than near schools & downtown there are very few playgrounds 2/20/2022 5:16 PM 53 No police protection for children around drug activity not adressed 2/19/2022 10:28 PM 54 Good for families, to get kids and parents away from their phone/gadget/screens.2/19/2022 9:35 AM 55 My 1 year old got his teeth kick out on swings. I prefer all the upgrades and safety 2/19/2022 7:23 AM 56 Access to playgrounds and play areas encourages families to play outdoors and contributes to high quality of life. 2/18/2022 3:20 PM 57 Because of so much high density housing 2/18/2022 2:35 PM 58 New playground would be nice but please leave old one alone, they are more fun for the kids. Like the spinning wheel at Terrace please don’t replace it, my kids love it. 2/18/2022 2:16 PM 59 Please don't replace the Terrace park merry go round!2/18/2022 2:14 PM 60 Rivercresat Estates has a unmaintained playground that the City could take over. for use of the adjoining neighborhoods. The play area goes unused because of poor maintenance. There are a lot of young families within a 5 mile radius that could benefit from a playground and picnic facility. 2/18/2022 12:30 PM 61 Meeting ADA and safety concerns are a high priority! Please do that! "New activity interests" are low priority for our household. 2/18/2022 10:22 AM 62 We live very close to a playground. I absolutely love that kids can go there and play. It's open, clean, and very visible. It's a great space for kids to get outdoors. 2/18/2022 7:45 AM 63 I think adding ADA upgrades would be great. More important than developing new parks, for instance. 2/17/2022 6:21 PM 64 Very good for early health benefits for kids, sounds stellar!2/17/2022 4:23 PM 65 I love playgrounds for kids, but I do worry about the liability.2/17/2022 4:17 PM 66 we have plenty 2/17/2022 4:16 PM 67 Doesn't matter if you put them in if you can't maintain the m 2/17/2022 3:46 PM 68 I WOULD LIKE TO SEE FACILITIES FOR SAND VOLLEYBALL, TENNIS/PICKLEBALL AND BASKETBALL AT ARLINGTON PARKS 2/17/2022 10:53 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 34 / 58 69 Living in city limits with a small child, playgrounds are extremely important to our family 2/16/2022 7:53 PM 70 my family and I would love to have access to play equipment that allows for wheelchair access on park equipment 2/16/2022 7:41 PM 71 There’s not much for kids to do in this city.2/16/2022 7:13 PM 72 A 10 minute walk is more than acceptable. Any new housing developments should put in a park for the residents and the users should be paying for the up keep with hoa 2/16/2022 5:36 PM 73 As long as they're all maintained, which hasn't been the case with most 2/16/2022 5:06 PM 74 Smokey Point Meadows is in my neighborhood. We do use it but it is really quite sub-standard. It was upgraded a couple years ago but is has not ages well at all. There is a shed on the property that is accesible to anyone which could potentially invite undesirables. I could suggest making it a more pleasant destination with benches, picnic area and plantins. The play structure is actually pretty awful 2/15/2022 4:36 PM 75 Homeless issues in parks near young children 2/15/2022 4:27 PM 76 With so many homes with little or no yard space, kids need parks to be fun and stimulating.2/15/2022 4:18 PM 77 Need more sidewalks and safe ways to cross streets and highways.2/15/2022 3:11 PM 78 Improving existing playgrounds/play areas would be very benefical for children in Arlington 2/15/2022 2:08 PM 79 i think children should not be alone in these areas 2/15/2022 1:44 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 35 / 58 Q7 SPORT COURTS - under the proposed plan, the city could develop sport courts to provide multiuse basketball, pickleball, volleyball, and other activities within a 5-minute walking distance of most residential areas of the city. The proposal would upgrade some existing basketball courts to increase surface and equipment durability, meet safety concerns, and accommodate new activity interests. How important is this proposal to you? Answered: 456 Skipped: 5 7% 34 10% 45 33% 149 30% 139 20% 89 456 3.45 #COMMENTS?DATE 1 We need more fields for sports. The availability to get lines on fields for sports is hard if it’s not soccer or football. Lacrosse is much needed and getting larger in our area. The fields we play on havi mg to be combined with all other sports takes it toll on the fields. We need to consider more terf fields. We also need to take in more consideration that all sports should be able to be lined for fields they need. Especially for the student athletes on school property. These lacrosse players deserve the same as football and soccer. 3/28/2022 5:00 PM 2 Preserve nature, do not add more manmade 3/24/2022 12:26 PM 3 Again need facilities for youth programs but not limited to court sports, rather field sports are in higher demand. Twin rivers revamp would be perfect for field sports. 3/23/2022 3:13 PM 4 yes get our teens involved so they have healthy places 3/20/2022 7:50 PM 5 We need a public pool.3/20/2022 4:45 PM 6 This is a great way to update and add on additional sports courts. Adding options such as to read while you walk programs where books can be read throughout your walk and disc golf courses would be great. 3/18/2022 1:48 PM 7 Too noisy if near residences 3/18/2022 10:35 AM 8 Give some alternate things to do in a park or around the city, need more staff to maintain a great level of service 3/15/2022 9:50 AM 9 Low maintenance Sport Courts are the best.3/15/2022 9:03 AM 20%20% 20%30%30% 30%33%33% 33%10%10% 10%7%7% 7% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Lowest Low Moderate High Highest Develop sports courts LOWEST LOW MODERATE HIGH HIGHEST TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Develop sports courts Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 36 / 58 10 A freesbie golf course along a trail may be a good idea. I saw one in Carnation.3/13/2022 4:20 PM 11 I think it would be great to have a full sized basketball court on the west side of legion park. This could be a nice way to attract youth to that area 3/12/2022 11:15 AM 12 I have lived in Smokey point since 1997 when York Park was developed It has been the place for many kids to play basketball As the apartment population continues to increase these kids need a place to play. 3/11/2022 4:58 PM 13 that's just b/c I don't have children or grandchildren in the area. I think it is very valuable though!!! 3/11/2022 12:29 PM 14 The old Hagans would be a great place to add a sport court next to the swimming pool 3/10/2022 6:15 PM 15 How about a multi use stage area too. Some kids have sports that are not on a court. We have zero places in the community to train. 3/10/2022 5:51 PM 16 Pickleball please!3/10/2022 8:44 AM 17 Basketball 3/8/2022 9:48 PM 18 Spend the money on the schools equipment and fields.3/8/2022 11:12 AM 19 The map references schools; however the elementary schools are all locked off and cannot be accessible during non-school hours. Basketball courts under lights would be a huge plus at Hall and/or Terrace Park. The Judy Park in Smokey point needs to me mimicked at Jenson Park. 3/8/2022 6:03 AM 20 Need fields with lights not just for baseball. There are any other sports that need fields and the city only had one at quake with no lights. 3/7/2022 12:26 PM 21 Basketball courts!!3/5/2022 10:28 AM 22 Pickle ball would be amazing. Sports courts would give safe things for teens to do.3/4/2022 9:51 PM 23 Yes, please!3/4/2022 3:25 PM 24 Tennis courts are suggested over basketball for crowd type concerns 3/4/2022 8:54 AM 25 Pickleball courts are must!3/4/2022 8:50 AM 26 this would be amazing for out teens and young adults!!!!3/3/2022 7:36 PM 27 A basketball court would be amazing 3/3/2022 6:47 AM 28 Covered basketball courts!!3/2/2022 9:43 PM 29 Build it, and they will come; I think it's important for kids to get out and play. If more areas had courts, they would be used. 3/2/2022 5:34 PM 30 It would just attract crimes and careless people to quiet neighborhoods. It would make an even ground for tent and RV dwellers. 3/1/2022 7:53 AM 31 Great to get some hockey nets available. Street hockey is getting big 2/28/2022 10:33 PM 32 Work all the rain, it would be nice to have some of these courts covered. So we can utilize these spaces during bad weather, which we have more often than not 2/28/2022 10:37 AM 33 Very much needs basketball courts and other sports 2/27/2022 3:45 PM 34 It looks is hard to find tennis courts and pickle ball would be great to add for all ages 2/26/2022 9:33 PM 35 My family loves sports and I love the walking trails 2/26/2022 4:11 PM 36 More options for getting around town please 2/26/2022 8:13 AM 37 Good to build community 2/26/2022 1:19 AM 38 YES!!2/25/2022 3:37 PM 39 There should be courts in other places than at schools 2/25/2022 7:40 AM 40 Kids need more outlets for outdoor activities. The schools are usually locked on weekends 2/21/2022 6:18 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 37 / 58 41 We have some baseball fields and a few basketball courts and could really use more for pickleball & volleyball especially 2/20/2022 5:16 PM 42 Not sure if you need courts in EVERY neighborhood? Maybe by region?2/19/2022 9:35 AM 43 I think we are really lacking in this area.2/18/2022 10:48 PM 44 Because of so much high density housing 2/18/2022 2:35 PM 45 We don’t have enough sport fields & sports programs in arlington.2/18/2022 2:16 PM 46 Rivercresat Estates has a unmaintained basketball court that the City could take over for use of the adjoining neighborhoods. The court goes unused most of the time because it is in poor condition. If the courts could be maintained this would give children and young adults a good safe place to play. 2/18/2022 12:30 PM 47 Public Tennis Court PLEASE!2/18/2022 11:05 AM 48 People in sports already have facilities to play in, I would rather there be more trails and green spaces for people of all ages to go on walks, bike rides, etc. 2/18/2022 10:22 AM 49 Providing sports courts to kids is one of many great ways to keep them active and involved.2/18/2022 7:45 AM 50 Please more basketball and volleyball!2/18/2022 6:03 AM 51 It allows older kids a place to play too 2/17/2022 9:08 PM 52 No comment 2/17/2022 6:21 PM 53 Excellent!2/17/2022 4:23 PM 54 Good only for sportsters.2/17/2022 4:17 PM 55 we have quite a few 2/17/2022 4:16 PM 56 I like this idea 2/17/2022 3:46 PM 57 I AM PARTICULARLY INTERESTED IN DEVELOPING SAND VOLLEYBALL COURTS AT JENSEN, COUNTRY CHARM OR TWIN RIVERS PARKS. MY ADULT VOLLEYBALL DROP IN PARTICIPANTS HAVE BEEN MEETING IN ARLINGTON FOR MORE THAN 15 YEARS. 2/17/2022 10:53 AM 58 Yes, especially volleyball!2/16/2022 7:13 PM 59 Taxpayers provide this at the schools and shouldn't pay twice 2/16/2022 5:36 PM 60 Would be nice but vandals would just screw it up 2/16/2022 11:30 AM 61 I suspect that most people do not know that these sport courts are open to anyone.2/15/2022 4:36 PM 62 great plan 2/15/2022 4:18 PM 63 Need sidewalks, bike lanes, and safe crossings 2/15/2022 3:11 PM 64 Id rather have grass and trees and wildlife. Theres the YMCA and other places to do these activites 2/15/2022 1:44 PM 65 Are all public school facilities available ?2/14/2022 6:12 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 38 / 58 Q8 ATHLETIC (MULTIUSE) FIELDS - under the proposed plan, the city could develop multiuse soccer/baseball fields at Country Charm Park and possibly improve other existing public and school fields for multiuse to serve all age groups with practice and competition game opportunities. How important is this proposal to you? Answered: 455 Skipped: 6 10% 47 13% 58 32% 147 29% 130 16% 73 455 3.27 #COMMENTS?DATE 1 How about lacrosse and football fields 3/28/2022 9:02 PM 2 We need more fields for sports. The availability to get lines on fields for sports is hard if it’s not soccer or football. Lacrosse is much needed and getting larger in our area. The fields we play on havi mg to be combined with all other sports takes it toll on the fields. We need to consider more terf fields. We also need to take in more consideration that all sports should be able to be lined for fields they need. Especially for the student athletes on school property. These lacrosse players deserve the same as football and soccer. The field at Haller and post need work. We need fields like Lake Tye Park in Monroe!!! Lots of Arlington people go there to play sports as well as use their trails and parks. 3/28/2022 5:00 PM 3 It is embarrassing that Arlingron does not have atheistic fields like other cities. There are so many youth sports programs and not enough places where our youth can practice and be competitive. 3/25/2022 6:38 PM 4 I believe you should look at the fields at Lake Tye Park in Monroe and learn from them. You should develop a multi use field with lining for baseball, soccer and Lacrosse. Yes that’s right Lacrosse is growing In Arlington and the fields at Haller and Post are very poor and almost to dangerous to compete on 3/23/2022 11:17 PM 5 Need more fields for sports like lacrosse and football which are so common and popular in Arlington!! 3/23/2022 4:44 PM 6 Lacrosse!!! You have a club that supports kids K-12 and are struggling to find fields! Most cities allow practice/play on school turf fields or have turf multi-use fields with lights. 3/23/2022 3:54 PM 7 Definitely need this!3/23/2022 3:13 PM 8 Our school fields are horrible. Our kids are forced to play on outdated and unsafe fields. We as 3/23/2022 3:06 AM 16%16% 16%29%29% 29%32%32% 32%13%13% 13%10%10% 10% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Lowest Low Moderate High Highest Develop multiuse fields LOWEST LOW MODERATE HIGH HIGHEST TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Develop multiuse fields Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 39 / 58 parents at the schools,as well as having kids who play little league baseball are not allowed to make any improvements to these fields, even if it’s filling in huge holes. The schools say that the maintenance department is in charge of the fields but they refuse to do anything. I don’t understand the politics involved but it’s for the kids… if your able to help with improving the schools fields, that may be able to solve soo many issues. In the end, it is about the kids, right?????? 9 there is enough 3/20/2022 7:50 PM 10 We also need a public swimming pool.3/20/2022 4:45 PM 11 Again, having the school districts fund this for their areas is my recommendation.3/18/2022 1:48 PM 12 Need to take better care and stay on top of maintenance of the current fields as well, need more staff to maintain a great level of service 3/15/2022 9:50 AM 13 The city should buy the old track and field near the hospital. I would love to walk around a rubber track with exercise stations. Presently, it is locked and goes unused. 3/13/2022 4:20 PM 14 There are many busy roads between the smokey point neighborhood and the ball fields on east side of airport Would be nice to have ball fields closer 3/11/2022 4:58 PM 15 kids need other diversions than the computer and glad our community is doing this/planning this!! 3/11/2022 12:29 PM 16 It would be nice to have more playing fields 3/10/2022 6:15 PM 17 See above.3/10/2022 5:51 PM 18 This would be amazing.3/9/2022 4:45 PM 19 This is a huge need for all the kids and adults in our community 3/8/2022 9:45 PM 20 Spend the money on the SCHOOLS.3/8/2022 11:12 AM 21 Arlington Residents currently have to leave the City to find a decent field to kick a soccer ball, play football or even throw a frisbee. Twin Rivers, Jensen park, Haller park all have large uneven grassy area; however the uneven grounds are not suitable for field sports and non of which have sufficient parking. Field sports promote healthy activities for both boys and girls. 3/8/2022 6:03 AM 22 Basketball courts, we need more 3/5/2022 10:28 AM 23 I need more exercise!3/4/2022 3:25 PM 24 I'm good with Country Charm, but school fields would open up too much liability for the City 3/4/2022 8:18 AM 25 we need many more! there is not enough space for our teams to have enough practice to be competitive and succesful. 3/3/2022 7:36 PM 26 Yes!!!!!3/3/2022 6:47 AM 27 I think Country Charm should be left as a natural area. We already have Quake field for baseball/soccer etc. 3/2/2022 5:34 PM 28 Our favorite place to walk to river is country charm 3/1/2022 7:58 PM 29 Nothing we'd ever use or visit 3/1/2022 7:53 AM 30 How would we be paying for this?3/1/2022 12:09 AM 31 We do not have enough ball fields for lacrosse and we need more turf fields because the grass fields are dangerous and cause injuries. Maybe we can partner with some of the bigger businesses to help sponsor turf fields. The high school will not let the high school age lacrosse team use it 2/26/2022 9:33 PM 32 More automobile access please 2/26/2022 8:13 AM 33 Good to build community 2/26/2022 1:19 AM 34 The fields need to be maintained 2/25/2022 7:40 AM 35 Missing so much revenue not having this!2/24/2022 10:23 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 40 / 58 36 We have more of these than some of the other various trails/activities listed in the above categories so I would not prioritize them quite as high because the entire community can not use them; however I do think they are important 2/20/2022 5:16 PM 37 Where is there room?2/19/2022 10:28 PM 38 Seems like there are already lots of ball fields?2/19/2022 9:35 AM 39 ANYTHING TO GET KIDS AND EVEN ADULTS OUTSIDE.2/18/2022 5:38 PM 40 The field at Kent Prairie Elementary needs finished to an useable ball field. Its the only elementary without a decent field. It’s within walking distance of many apartments. 2/18/2022 2:35 PM 41 Our sport fields are embarrassing, twin rivers soccer fields are a mess 2/18/2022 2:16 PM 42 The soccer fields at Twin Rivers are terrible, grass is bad, ball doesn't roll. Country Charm park development should be a high priority also, lots of green space available. 2/18/2022 2:14 PM 43 Better public access to already exsisting ones 2/18/2022 11:05 AM 44 I thought sporting fields were already part of the plan at country charm 2/18/2022 10:15 AM 45 No comment 2/17/2022 6:21 PM 46 Alright!!2/17/2022 4:23 PM 47 a great necessity for our young people, giving them a place to use up energy in a good way. Out of trouble. 2/17/2022 4:17 PM 48 we need new tracks t post and haller middle school not the highs hool 2/17/2022 4:16 PM 49 I like this idea 2/17/2022 3:46 PM 50 We already have enough soccer and baseball fields.2/16/2022 7:13 PM 51 Why aren't sports using school fields and gyms?2/16/2022 5:36 PM 52 I would like to see additional staffing to take good care of these high use facilities 2/16/2022 4:02 PM 53 Kids as well as adults need fields to be able to go out and play or train or just to run on! they must be multi-purpose synthetic turf fields for year around use. 2/15/2022 6:11 PM 54 The young one's love playing sports, let's give them the fields 2/15/2022 4:18 PM 55 None are near Smokey Point neighborhoods.2/15/2022 3:11 PM 56 We dont need more fields.2/15/2022 1:44 PM 57 I'm good with Country Charm, but school fields would open up too much liability for the City 2/15/2022 12:44 PM 58 Open school grounds to all people at all times for individual and group recreation 2/15/2022 10:39 AM 59 Dislike idea of soccer/baseball fields at CC Park due to increased traffic (on top of the development being built there) as well as being in a flood plain. 2/14/2022 11:01 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 41 / 58 Q9 SPECIAL EVENT AREAS - under the proposed plan, the city could develop flexible large and small areas to host community festivals, celebrations, and other special events at appropriate park sites throughout the city. How important is this proposal to you? Answered: 455 Skipped: 6 6% 28 17% 77 35% 159 28% 126 14% 65 455 3.27 #COMMENTS?DATE 1 Look at Lake Tye Park in Monroe 3/23/2022 11:17 PM 2 good idea we need a ymca here 3/20/2022 7:50 PM 3 We have a lot of space for this.3/20/2022 4:45 PM 4 This is a great proposal to bring the community together in larger events 3/18/2022 1:48 PM 5 We have area in downtown already 3/18/2022 10:35 AM 6 Need more then just one park to provide some event areas, need more staff to maintain a great level of service 3/15/2022 9:50 AM 7 There would be need to close coordination with mass transit to shuttle people to a large festival site. 3/13/2022 4:20 PM 8 It would be great to develop the field at country charm with better access and it could be good to host an annual country fair in that space. It would attract many people. 3/12/2022 11:15 AM 9 Love to see outsiders come to our area!!!3/11/2022 12:29 PM 10 Concerned regarding location 3/10/2022 6:42 PM 11 The old Hagans has much open space pool add some grills courts 3/10/2022 6:15 PM 12 Yes! Please bring back the Viking fest, a renaissance fair, and opportunities for outdoor gatherings. 3/10/2022 5:51 PM 13 Country Charm Park would be a great special event area. But it needs PARKING!3/10/2022 9:02 AM 14 We have good fields already 3/8/2022 9:48 PM 15 Terrace park would be cool, however it's such a dark and shady park. I know big trees are 3/8/2022 7:48 PM 14%14% 14%28%28% 28%35%35% 35%17%17% 17%6%6% 6% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Lowest Low Moderate High Highest Develop multiuse fields LOWEST LOW MODERATE HIGH HIGHEST TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Develop multiuse fields Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 42 / 58 important but is sooooo dark and kinda creepy. If some NOT all the trees were removed to let it the light we would definitely go there more. 16 Spend the money on the Schools 3/8/2022 11:12 AM 17 I think festival are best promoted in downtown Arlington. This also promotes supporting our small business owners along Olympic. 3/8/2022 6:03 AM 18 It would be nice for additional town events to have a place to occur 3/4/2022 9:51 PM 19 Although well intended, I would hate to see funds used for this proposed area (#5) and feel it would create more problems with crime, vandalism, drug use, and homelessness. 3/4/2022 4:30 PM 20 Community events need a nice venue 3/4/2022 3:25 PM 21 Love this idea too 3/3/2022 6:47 AM 22 Legion park has become too small for big events 3/2/2022 7:23 PM 23 I think building at Smokey Point Blvd would be an attraction for the unsavory types that are common in the area. 3/2/2022 5:34 PM 24 We loved going to events such as movie/music in the park 3/1/2022 7:58 PM 25 Nothing we'd ever use 3/1/2022 7:53 AM 26 That would be nice 3/1/2022 12:09 AM 27 make the farmers market area not on grass, so difficult to get around with wheel chair or stroller! 2/27/2022 6:40 PM 28 Would love more options to hold birthday parties since my child’s birthday is not in a month that can be outside 2/27/2022 2:37 PM 29 I think the new stage at legion park is great and we need more areas like that.2/26/2022 9:33 PM 30 Would be Amazing for our community! The downtown isn’t going to be able to support our growing community for special events fund raising events movie in the park events would be wonderful!! 2/26/2022 4:11 PM 31 Wonderful 2/26/2022 10:39 AM 32 More roads please 2/26/2022 8:13 AM 33 Good to build community, especially as we grow 2/26/2022 1:19 AM 34 We need a city swimming pool 2/25/2022 3:23 PM 35 They need to be kept clean and useable 2/25/2022 7:40 AM 36 I think we have quite a few areas now that can be used for this 2/20/2022 5:16 PM 37 Enough already no parking too many people in our town,we are not big city 2/19/2022 10:28 PM 38 Could be useful for tourism events 2/19/2022 9:35 AM 39 2/19/2022 7:23 AM 40 A-TOWN COULD BECOME A HUB FOR OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES WHICH IS A VERY GOOD THING. 2/18/2022 5:38 PM 41 These events are good for local business and economy.2/18/2022 2:14 PM 42 It would be nice to have more outdoor social gathering spots, especially with Covid!2/17/2022 6:21 PM 43 Great idea!2/17/2022 4:23 PM 44 Better to have some multi-use fields. Saves land and money.2/17/2022 4:17 PM 45 we don’t need anymore 2/17/2022 4:16 PM 46 We already have in downtown areas 2/16/2022 5:36 PM 47 We have no space left... not sure where you'd hold any community festival without shutting 2/16/2022 5:06 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 43 / 58 down streets. 48 This area is known for their many festivals and gathering spaces. I like the idea of making more of these available to take the pressure off downtown Arlington. 2/16/2022 4:02 PM 49 Yes, please! AGain, I highly recommend the areas in and around the airport trail system. The areas near the new firestation and the areas along 43 where they are preparing to put in a round-about woud be lovely. There is a nice mixture of fields, trees and trails that would lend very nicely to a a suburban park system. Would also make a lovely area for all the new workers in the abundance of new business complexes... 2/15/2022 4:36 PM 50 love when local neighborhoods can come together like this 2/15/2022 4:18 PM 51 More crosswalks, bike lanes, and sidewalks in Smokey Point Blvd proposed area.2/15/2022 3:11 PM 52 dont need this to waste money on this .there are plenty of places to have celebrations.2/15/2022 1:44 PM 53 But country charm could not support large amount of traffic 2/14/2022 3:52 PM 54 Please don't ruin Country Charm.2/14/2022 1:22 PM 55 Again, concern about increased traffic to/at CC Park for large events.2/14/2022 11:01 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 44 / 58 19%85 12%56 24%107 25%116 20%91 Q10 Where do you live based on the map above? Answered: 455 Skipped: 6 TOTAL 455 20%20% 20%25%25% 25%24%24% 24%12%12% 12%19%19% 19% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Outside of … ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Zone 1 Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone 4 Outside of city Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 45 / 58 5%25 20%91 19%85 20%93 32%146 4%18 Q11 How many years have you lived in Arlington? Answered: 458 Skipped: 3 TOTAL 458 4%4% 4%32%32% 32%20%20% 20%19%19% 19%20%20% 20%5%5% 5% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% 0-1 2-5 6-10 11-20 21+Don't live in… ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES 0-1 2-5 6-10 11-20 21+ Don't live in Arlington Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 46 / 58 16%71 11%48 36%164 30%136 8%38 Q12 Where do you work? Answered: 457 Skipped: 4 TOTAL 457 8%8% 8%30%30% 30%36%36% 36%11%11% 11%16%16% 16% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Retired Not current…Arlington Elsewhere i… Elsewhere … ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Retired Not currently working Arlington Elsewhere in Snohomish County Elsewhere outside of Snohomish County Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 47 / 58 84%381 16%75 Q13 What type of housing do you live in? Answered: 456 Skipped: 5 TOTAL 456 16%16% 16%84%84% 84% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% Owner Rental ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES Owner Rental Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 48 / 58 Q14 How many people in your household are in the following age groups? Answered: 456 Skipped: 5 29% 109 24% 90 29% 112 10% 40 4% 15 4% 15 381 64% 156 24% 59 10% 25 1% 2 1% 2 0% 1 245 49% 118 22% 53 26% 63 2% 4 0% 1 0% 1 240 31% 102 24% 77 44% 143 1% 3 0% 1 0% 0 326 42% 104 29% 72 27% 67 2% 5 0% 0 0% 0 248 53% 109 30% 61 15% 31 0% 0 1% 3 0% 0 204 4%4% 4%4%4% 4% 1%1% 1% 1%1% 1% 10%10% 10% 2%2% 2% 1%1% 1% 2%2% 2% 29%29% 29% 10%10% 10% 26%26% 26% 44%44% 44% 27%27% 27% 15%15% 15% 24%24% 24% 24%24% 24% 22%22% 22% 24%24% 24% 29%29% 29% 30%30% 30% 29%29% 29% 64%64% 64% 49%49% 49% 31%31% 31% 42%42% 42% 53%53% 53% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% 0 1 2 3 4 5+ under 18 18-24 25-34 35-49 50-64 65+ 0 1 2 3 4 5+TOTAL under 18 18-24 25-34 35-49 50-64 65+ Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 49 / 58 Q15 Are you a registered voter of the City of Arlington? Answered: 456 Skipped: 5 16% 73 84% 383 456 1.84 84%84% 84%16%16% 16% 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100% No Yes Registered voter of... NO YES TOTAL WEIGHTED AVERAGE Registered voter of Arlington? Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 50 / 58 Q16 Do you have any specific comments to make that the proposals described in this survey do not address? Answered: 194 Skipped: 267 #RESPONSES DATE 1 Would like to see a large park with turf fields, play areas, skate park all in one like lake tye area in Monroe. Possibly the area south of smokey point, park 26 on first map. A place open for youth sports, practices and games like lacrosse! Unfortunately the strawberry fields are unavailable for any club/youth sports other than soccer! 3/28/2022 9:02 PM 2 We need more outdoor ares for older children. Fields for Lacrosse, Baseball, Soccer. Need courts for Basketball and area nets for Hockey. Frisbee golf area plus a dog run. Place up in Mount Vernon us great for all this 3/28/2022 7:02 PM 3 Please include restrooms in the parks that are open and well-maintained. Parks without restrooms are useless. 3/28/2022 6:05 PM 4 We need a sports complex like at Stanwood high school as well as lake Tye park in Monroe. That is much needed for our area! These student athletes deserve an area like that as our Arlington lacrosse players are the only ones in the area who don’t have terf or a good field to play on. Other areas don’t like to come to Arlington homes games because of our field conditions. It’s rather embarrassing. Our fields become the laughing stock of sports around the area. These kids deserve better when they put there all into sports they love. Especially the fastest up and coming sport in the area such as Lacrosse. 3/28/2022 5:00 PM 5 We enjoyed spray park 3/28/2022 10:10 AM 6 I would love better sports fields in our area that can be used for multi-sports including a turf area that would require very little maintenance. 3/25/2022 4:14 PM 7 Preserve the country and wildlife. Stop building!!!3/24/2022 12:26 PM 8 We have a young and successful youth and high school lacrosse club in the City Of Arlington that is having issues through the school district to get the availability to use the turf fields at the High School when they allow youth football and soccer clubs use the fields. I would really love to see our high school athletes get the ability to play on their own turf field but unfortunately that doesn’t look like an option for my high school athletes. 3/23/2022 11:17 PM 9 No 3/23/2022 6:54 PM 10 I would really like to see less of the apartments and pot growing facilities. We can smell those from the schools it is terrible!!! Less growth! 3/23/2022 5:45 PM 11 I live in Marysville right next to Arlington 3/23/2022 5:25 PM 12 We live outside of the city limits, and our son goes to school in Everett, but we do want to support Arlington sports. It's hard when other clubs have more to offer in the way of fields. 3/23/2022 3:54 PM 13 I’m really passionate about the athletic fields for the kids and adults. Please please read my response to the above. The school baseball fields really need a ton of work. They are a safety hazard and if you guys can help, that would be amazing. Please contact me if you any questions!!! Momof2boys2617@gmail.com 3/23/2022 3:06 AM 14 28232 SR 9 NE 3/22/2022 10:36 AM 15 I would love to see a playground that has some kind of rain shelter. Those sun sails or something that reduces the amount of rain so kids can play when it is raining. 3/22/2022 12:38 AM 16 expand 172nd agree or build a parallel street that off the hwy exist it takes us more than 30 minutes hair on that road it’s bad really bad we consider moving away for this issue 3/20/2022 7:50 PM 17 We need to enforce no camping. We need a public swimming pool so kids can take swimming lessons. Many kids drowned in the river every year. 3/20/2022 4:45 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 51 / 58 18 I think it would be great to improve the parks. I wonder about the long term cost, how many workers will be needed to staff. 3/19/2022 9:12 AM 19 Arlington is such a beautiful city and has so much to offer. Bringing the community together within the parks with added trail systems and larger community areas would be great! 3/18/2022 1:48 PM 20 More community gardens. More safe ADA accessible public restrooms. Better handicap parking designated on N Olympic 3/18/2022 10:35 AM 21 Safety and misuse of park property.3/17/2022 3:53 PM 22 17611 Redhawk Dr 3/16/2022 12:23 PM 23 6205 188th Pl NE 3/16/2022 12:07 PM 24 All of these improvements and projects would be great for our community but should only be implemented when the City of Arlington has enough staff and a budget to properly maintain them. 3/15/2022 7:18 PM 25 16058 36th Ave NE 3/15/2022 6:50 PM 26 I would like to see increased parking space at the most popular parks, access to public bus stops at parks, and Whitehorse trail be paved from Arlington to Darrington :) 3/15/2022 4:27 PM 27 Need more staff to maintain a great level of service, for the community and its visitors 3/15/2022 9:50 AM 28 The City seems to have great ideas on building up the parks and keeping it look nice. The city seems to be low on staff and pulled thin for the staffing to maintain these great parks and desitnation. With a growing population the city should be increasing their staff to keep them looking nice for many years not just the year they are built. 3/15/2022 9:03 AM 29 I would love to see the city consider the construction of a large aquatic center similar to the one in Snohomish, but have the city own it. I go lap swimming at the Snohomish center or at LSHS. I play pool, a competition lap pool, and a relatively shallow (3 to 5 feet) for lessons and lap swimming would be incredible for our children and future generations. One or sides would have sliding doors for the summer. A semi-covered outdoor pool for the summer would be ideal. I saw a 50 meter pool in Japan on on one end. It was enclosed, but it had one end that had sliding doors like an airplane hanger. It was perfect for the summer. The entire pool was no more than 5 feet deep for water walking, lessons, lap swimming, and playing. Arlington could team up with Lakewood, Stanwood and Tulalip Tribes for swim meets, etc. 3/13/2022 4:20 PM 30 Smokey Point neighborhood’s need more parks 3/12/2022 10:39 PM 31 more field space for team sports.....baseball soccer foorball 3/12/2022 8:13 PM 32 Given my age, passive parks with a bench is a need.3/11/2022 7:16 PM 33 since many people may not see this survey on website, information or notice of survey should be posted at all parks here in Arlington 3/11/2022 4:58 PM 34 I have lived in arlington since i was 10 years old until this passed year. I could not find affordable housing in the area as woman. So sad. But I am still blessed to work and spend most of my leisurely time in Arlington with family and friends so I still consider this place my home. I work in the Smokey Point area and I would love to see more parks, open spaces, event spaces in the Smokey point area! It would be wonderful! 3/11/2022 1:29 PM 35 I am a dog lover and owner of two active dogs. I would love the city to provide a wonderful off leash park. There are numerous dog owners in town and when we meet to have our dogs play we always talk about how nice it would be to have an exceptional dog area. 3/11/2022 1:06 PM 36 Staffing needs based on the increase in area to maintain. Please consider this before implementing all these amazing things. 3/11/2022 12:31 PM 37 when asked about home location. I put 4 b/c my present home. for 25+ years lived in zone 3 3/11/2022 12:29 PM 38 Need sidewalks on 531 from 67th to hwy 9 and bus service. There is no way to walk safely or get around without a car. It would be nice to have a YMCA in Arlington. It is not a senior friendly city. 3/11/2022 11:44 AM 39 203 S Stillaguamish Ave 3/10/2022 6:47 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 52 / 58 40 If excess traffic is toomey from the improvements how is that going to be handled?3/10/2022 6:42 PM 41 I’m not seeing how you can address vandalism and safety of playgrounds against transient population, predators, or drug users leaving needles around. I would love to see an obstacle course, geo caching, row machines, dance stage, callesthenics workout area, and little kid bike trail. 3/10/2022 5:51 PM 42 Country Charm Park needs ROAD ACCESS and PARKING INSIDE the park!3/10/2022 9:02 AM 43 Pool! We need a pool!3/8/2022 9:48 PM 44 I would love to see the city work with the county to develop more courts and fields. King county has an incredible system of parks and fields. We could do much better for our kids and adult leagues. 3/8/2022 9:45 PM 45 Restrooms at the parks. There needs to be a porta-potty back between the two baseball fields at quake. The quality of the current ones down at quake are poor. Need maintenance and janitorial services bad. 3/8/2022 8:23 PM 46 Sidewalks! Make it safer for families to walk if they don't live downtown. I cannot walk my children anywhere near or on Kackman because of no sidewalks or trails and a fast speed limit. 3/8/2022 6:23 PM 47 More police in smokey point boulevard, its a lot of homeless stilling stuff from houses in the area. I ben out of the house twise this year and my house is been vandalized for kids doing graffiti and homeles traing to got in, its crazy 3/8/2022 5:47 PM 48 We need fully ada accessible playgrounds 3/8/2022 12:40 PM 49 Wht does the City not invest in the Schools of Arlington? I would think that woulkd be priority.3/8/2022 11:12 AM 50 Please consider parking.parking.parking when planning for large area for field sports. Stocker fields in Snohomish is also located in the flood plain, so mimic their low impact design. 3/8/2022 6:03 AM 51 I would love more dog friendly or dog specific areas. Currently Strawberry Fields is the only off leash dog area, and its inaccessible many months out of the year because it floods. 3/7/2022 9:00 PM 52 More growth for the bike community would be great! Things like pump tracks, dirt jumps, and small trail systems. 3/7/2022 8:32 PM 53 My concern with all of this is how it will be paid for. I'm done paying higher taxes and/or Levy's. I am also concerned that these trails will just be a new place for homeless folks to hide out. They are already all over the Centennial trail. 3/7/2022 7:43 PM 54 Would love a pump track or similar for bikes!3/7/2022 12:45 AM 55 I would like to see a pump track for kids along the centennial trail with trail access 3/6/2022 8:19 PM 56 Forget about basketball courts, fix the roads!!!!3/6/2022 3:45 PM 57 I would love a bike pump track or more bike and running trails!3/5/2022 10:28 AM 58 Cemetery road and 62nd needs a sidewalk for walking it is dangerous around the loop with no sidewalk. This area connects to the airport trail and lots of people like to ride bike and walk there 3/4/2022 10:12 PM 59 Our city needs more safe areas for teens to hand out. Down town is not an option. They need things to do like sports courts Ect to keep them out of trouble. 3/4/2022 9:51 PM 60 Please stop building more housing in down town Arlington. It’s losing its small town feel that everyone knows and loves. 3/4/2022 8:46 PM 61 Stop developing... moved here for the small town atmosphere and it is being ruined!3/4/2022 7:10 PM 62 I'm sure it's been addressed, but I'll highlight again. Please ensure enough lighting is incorporated to keep visitors/participants safe and would-be no-gooders at bay. 3/4/2022 3:25 PM 63 18522 Woodbine Dr Arlington WA 98223 3/4/2022 11:57 AM 64 No 3/4/2022 11:51 AM 65 I am concerned about bike lanes. In reviewing the drawings of intended modifications to 172nd 3/4/2022 8:22 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 53 / 58 Street, it appeared there was no dedicated bike/walking lane. I saw bikes behind parked vehicles, next to traffic. I was uncertain why parking on 172nd St was included in the plan. That space would be better used to add a lane for traffic with a dedicated bike lane on the curb side of the road. Cascade Bike Club can provide reference to experts in the design of bike lanes. 66 We would love to see a riverwalk from Haller Park to Country Charm Park.3/3/2022 6:40 PM 67 In order to have a thriving and healthy city the proposals the city of Arlington is offering would make us a destination for all. I love and am proud of our city. 3/3/2022 9:35 AM 68 Country charm park seems inaccessible due to the construction which sucks because it was a nice place for dog walking 3/3/2022 8:29 AM 69 We would love some type of pump track or bike riding area. We drive all the way to Bellingham to let my boys use the pump track. 3/3/2022 6:47 AM 70 Please improve safety for pedestrians. Please make our town and parks accessible for all.3/2/2022 7:23 PM 71 Homelessness! Within the last six months we’ve been deterred from entering Haller Park due to encroachment of homeless people. Protect our families and children, these individuals have criminal history (high numbers of pedophiles). Parks and safety should go hand in hand. 3/2/2022 9:54 AM 72 Everyone loves The splash park we should have more. Also we have to make this community more walkable/bikeable 3/1/2022 6:47 PM 73 Please STOP building on and interrupting nature areas and the wildlife running out of places to flee. We bought out lovely, rural home over 15 yes ago and low income apartments and crime have inched their way into this once small, quiet and low-crime area. Heaven forbid we a 10 x 10 piece of vacant land in the area. 3/1/2022 7:53 AM 74 Keeping our parks safe from drug activity and needles etc is very important to me and the safety of my children. 3/1/2022 7:12 AM 75 Please install more crosswalks! Especially along Smokey Point Blvd north of 172nd. Also, it is SO difficult to exit neighborhoods onto Smokey Point Blvd in the same area. It can take upwards of 20 minutes to wait for a break in traffic in order to turn out (for example on the side streets near the Smokey Point Community Church). Traffic lights are very much needed! 3/1/2022 7:10 AM 76 No 3/1/2022 12:09 AM 77 Although I live in Arlington Heights, the parks in and around Arlington represent the best opportunity for recreation. 2/28/2022 11:25 PM 78 Would love a YMCA that is local, or indoor arena area for the older kids to go. Laser Tag, ropes course, etc. Need more stuff for rainy days that is local 2/28/2022 10:33 PM 79 Anywhere a housing develops goes in there should be a park of equal size. Keep Arlington rural 2/28/2022 6:58 PM 80 What about a covered playground park? Like the covered sports courts at school? With so many rainy days it would get a lot of use! 2/28/2022 3:09 PM 81 I would love to see a fenced playground near Legion park happen. Also, can we use the old Arlington High School for community use? It would be a huge benefit to our entire community! 2/28/2022 3:00 PM 82 In any park, adequate parking, maintained trails, etc...and some sort of emergency comminication. 2/28/2022 10:17 AM 83 I would love to have better access to the Stillaguamish River bed at Haller Park under the Hwy 9 overpass. Stairs or something. It would be nice to declare the river bed there at Haller Park and oficial off leash dog area. 2/27/2022 7:22 PM 84 Please put a park and basketball court in zone 1 more specifically on 196th pl ne Arlington. We have a very old park and court but the closest park is high clover and we have to walk on the dangerous main road to get there with small kids. We could really use a safe walking distance park. The neighborhood of 196th pl ne has a ton of kids aging from babies to teens that would utilize a park every day of the year in that location. Thank you 2/27/2022 8:49 AM 85 Build an AQUATIC CENTER! Corner of 67th and 172nd is the perfect location.2/27/2022 8:34 AM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 54 / 58 86 Would love to see some of the existing trials (like Whitehorse) restored.2/27/2022 8:28 AM 87 More play equipment that is wheelchair accessible for kids would be great.2/27/2022 7:39 AM 88 It's important to retain trees and outdoor areas for the population growth that is happening. It's critical for families, pets and overall image of our community. 2/27/2022 6:37 AM 89 No 2/27/2022 1:46 AM 90 Do something so that we can use Country Charm park. It's been over 10 years now!2/26/2022 9:33 PM 91 I would like to see us continue to improve main street with new non-antique vintage stores, the Chinese restaurant corner needs to be cleaned up, and more marketing to being tourists into town. The city did a great job this past Christmas with the Hometown Holiday weekends, love Super Saturday, and the Christmas decorations in Legion park were beautiful. We have all the makings of a Hallmark movie small town. Seems like things are headed in the right direction. 2/26/2022 9:33 PM 92 Could this include repair/expansion of the wetland trail at Pioneer Elementary School?2/26/2022 6:55 PM 93 Would love more trails and parks 2/26/2022 5:50 PM 94 No. But I cant tell where i live according to that map. I live on the edge of town but was a homeowner in rown for many years. 2/26/2022 4:58 PM 95 3325 177th PL NE, Arlington, WA, 98223 2/26/2022 3:32 PM 96 I would really like this board to focus on improving the parks and areas we have currently and stop adding in apartments and big business. 531 needs to be widened before anything else. It is frustrating to current residents. 2/26/2022 3:16 PM 97 2607 178TH ST NW 2/26/2022 10:39 AM 98 automobile traffic!!!! With apartment cities being built next to sidewalks making road expansion IMPOSSiBLE! The lack of infastructure is immoral….parks won’t help much if they are overcrowded….. 2/26/2022 8:13 AM 99 Make it a very high priority to develop in a livable, community-centered way that encourages neighborhood interaction, walkability, green space. Encourage more small businesses downtown to bring the community together as well as making it a destination. 2/26/2022 1:19 AM 100 No 2/25/2022 11:01 PM 101 No 2/25/2022 10:14 PM 102 Keep the parks open to view, no hiding places. More signs for No smoke/Vape alcohol 2/25/2022 10:03 PM 103 Go Parks & Rec!!!2/25/2022 9:52 PM 104 I am in favor of anything to encourage families and friends to gather outdoors and enjoy this beautiful city. Keep up the good work Arlington! 2/25/2022 7:41 PM 105 Dog park would be nice 2/25/2022 7:12 PM 106 No 2/25/2022 5:53 PM 107 17416 Noble Dr 2/25/2022 3:51 PM 108 Looking at the maps you provided, I see a real need for more parks in the Smokey Point residential areas. Thank you for asking! 2/25/2022 3:50 PM 109 Our neighborhood (heartland homes) just ripped out our parks. Maybe this space could be incorporated into this plan since we are in the city limits. 2/25/2022 3:37 PM 110 Just some maintenance and maybe so expansion of the skatepark to include a mini ramp. It's about the only thing I would like to see y'all put some money towards 2/25/2022 10:50 AM 111 We need more areas for teenagers to hang out that are safe. Including basketball, tennis, and pickle ball courts could help this. 2/25/2022 7:40 AM 112 Arlington needs parks with clean and safe restrooms, covered picnic areas, and play equipment for children. Some shade trees would be really nice! 2/24/2022 9:20 PM 113 More recreational youth camps and park organized activities 2/22/2022 3:24 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 55 / 58 114 Stop building and adding residential zone housing or condos. I'm sure amazon is paying enough in tax dollars renovate the whole city / run the city. Ps our roads (172nd) suck! Plus the Amazon building is huge eye sore. Stop running the city like a business keep it small. Down town Arlington is last good part. 2/22/2022 2:22 PM 115 3200 180th Street Northeast 2/22/2022 9:44 AM 116 Love Centennial Trail. Would love more wooded areas to walk. I go to Camano Island for easy trail walking 2/21/2022 6:18 PM 117 I think it would be a good idea to add a recycle bin and a compost bin, which can help reduce the amount of trash that over flows from the trash cans. 2/21/2022 1:29 PM 118 18006 W COUNTRY CLUB DR 2/21/2022 12:01 PM 119 Would love to see a pool! (Or a YMCA) Walking/biking area along Cemetery Road from 47th to 67th. 2/20/2022 9:25 PM 120 It seems like most improvements go to the downtown area and literally zero improvements for citizens in the Smoky Point area. The only improvements here are for businesses. It is unwalkable and becoming unlivable. What used to be a beautiful part of Arlington has become an industrial center with its citizens forgotten 2/20/2022 5:16 PM 121 It would be nice to have dog friendly areas. Or even a dog park. At the very least garbage bins to toss doggie bags. 2/20/2022 12:16 AM 122 I’m new to this discussion. Is a skate park under consideration? I know there’s one near the Boys & Girls club, but that’s so far outside of Arlington’s core (and nowhere near our schools). 2/19/2022 10:49 PM 123 Decent grocery store the planning is terrible here ,traffic mess only will get worse,accidents weekly almost on roads 2/19/2022 10:28 PM 124 Some trail connections, like from 204th to Cemetery Road and the airport trail would be a nice option to avoid 67th Avenue. 2/19/2022 9:35 AM 125 The Centennial Trail is the best recreation addition in the last 25 years. Creek and River work is high on our list for future plans, as well as completion of the Darrington Trail. 2/19/2022 8:52 AM 126 438 S OLYMPIC AVE 2/19/2022 7:51 AM 127 4819 196th PL NE 2/18/2022 8:40 PM 128 25218 Meadow Way NE 2/18/2022 8:36 PM 129 I am very excited about improvements to our parks, but it would also be nice if ALL the garbages were emptied up regularly. The park by my house has a back garbage can by the basketball court that sits full for months at a time. 2/18/2022 8:30 PM 130 I couldn't really read your map because I have to do it on my telephone. I don't know of any parks in the Smokey Point area. I know Downtown Arlington area has a lot of parks and trails which is nice. 2/18/2022 7:53 PM 131 Please install more tennis courts! As far as I know, the only ones are at the high school. Lots more people play tennis than pickle ball. I vote no on pickle ball courts. If tennis courts were installed near the middle schools, they could have tennis teams or use them for PE. Also, we need activities for teens. Most of the park areas seem geared to little kids. 2/18/2022 2:47 PM 132 Post needs rebuilt, & arlingtons schools are packed, need to be building at least 2 more elementary, one more middle, and probably another high & should have started yesterday. The schools need to keep up with the growth. Arlington is currently failing the children & the teachers. 2/18/2022 2:16 PM 133 SCHOOLS. WE NEED MORE SCHOOLS. So many apartment complexes going in, no new schools being built. One floor schools should be multiple floors. Where are all the kids in the new country charm housing development going to go to? Schools needed! 2/18/2022 2:14 PM 134 What's the skinny on two new parks on the airport property? (One by fire station, and one nearer the new commercial buildings) Fact or rumor? And how about the property which WAS to have been the fire stations: would a park work there? 2/18/2022 1:59 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 56 / 58 135 4623 200th St. NE 2/18/2022 1:55 PM 136 The Airport Trail is marvelous. Would love improvements to enhance the experience when walking the portion along 172nd. Would appreciate a variety of walking trails. The ability to walk from Zone 1 on/along Cemetary Road from 47th going east to 67th would be so welcome. 2/18/2022 1:47 PM 137 Would love a dog park 2/18/2022 1:44 PM 138 Looking at existing and future parks, I don't see parks being added to the high density areas where these 3-4 story complexes are going in. There needs to be open space added to accommodate these newly populated areas. I also question how much the school district will allow public use and find including it with this survey misleading. The school district already either fences off, has gates and/or discourages parking in their lots and limits or blocks access to tracks, walking areas, ball fields, tennis courts and playgrounds. Unless that changes you shouldn't include it as part of this survey. 2/18/2022 12:43 PM 139 20704 61st AVE NE 2/18/2022 12:30 PM 140 Work on roads first 2/18/2022 11:03 AM 141 I feel it is of extreme importance to make sure those *with disabilities* have access to paths and trails and play equipment too. Mostly, all this encroaching development in town is pushing out the views of the mountains (such as by the airport), and the scenic, country beauty that used to be a hallmark of Arlington. Can we please have more space and trails for the beautiful landscapes and such? Thanks for asking for our input. 2/18/2022 10:22 AM 142 Please keep in mind safety for the families that go to these parks. Safety meaning lighting, parking, and how traffic in/out flows in busy areas. 2/18/2022 9:49 AM 143 NO 2/18/2022 9:45 AM 144 I just want to reiterate the importance of providing all of these kinds of spaces to the residents in our community. It can't all be blacktop and business. Twin Rivers breaks my heart every time I drive past it. I know that maintenance and care has been transferred back to the county but those ball fields are absolutely horrific. Soon, nobody will use them for anything. And that is heart breaking. 2/18/2022 7:45 AM 145 In my opinion, upkeep of current parks, trails, etc is more important than creating new spaces. The current parks and trails are well loved by the community and will be cherished for years to come. 2/17/2022 6:21 PM 146 I love all that Arlington is doing with Parks! Thank you for all your work with this!2/17/2022 5:59 PM 147 I really like the idea of biking/walking trails. We own electric bikes but have found it can be dangerous riding outside of old towon or off the Centennial Trail. For example, we like yo ride to Skookum brewery but there are areas on that ride that require riding in the street. Or biking to businesses in Smokey Point. 2/17/2022 5:14 PM 148 Keeping roadways, watersheds and creeks free of debri and trash has NEVER been a priority since I’ve lived here going on eight years. There’s so much that needs to be done and it seems so little that is being addressed. 2/17/2022 4:40 PM 149 There needs to be more/widen roads in the city limits to alleviate all of the current and new traffic flow. 2/17/2022 4:26 PM 150 All very great ideas, I'm excited to them realized!2/17/2022 4:23 PM 151 How to stay in budget.2/17/2022 4:17 PM 152 we need to address the homeless issue as well as crime, there have been far too many thefts 2/17/2022 4:16 PM 153 Taking away parking from downtown with little parklets is not a good idea. Spending more than a $1,000,000.00 on the Jim Howell property for a so call statue to the Mayor was a very poor decision for the city. Took away tax dollars and another retail space from MANY different people who wanted the space for their own business. Not that will never happen because the price would be to much for anybody to purchase the property even if the city wanted to sell it. 2/17/2022 3:46 PM 154 19309 46th Ave NE 2/17/2022 3:33 PM 155 no 2/17/2022 3:09 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 57 / 58 156 I hope any development will provide lighting that takes any nearby neighbors' quality of life into account (no bare lights shining out to infinity or light trespass onto neighbors' properties) 2/17/2022 1:00 PM 157 Please fix the fence at terrace park, it was broken last summer and is in generally poor repair 2/17/2022 11:22 AM 158 I AM WILLING TO VOLLUNTEER TIME TO THE PLANNING AND CONSTRUCTION OF A LOCAL SAND VOLLEYBALL COURT. GRANITE FALLS HAS HAD ONE FOR YEARS, MOUNT VERNON ALSO. THEY SEE REGULAR USE. 2/17/2022 10:53 AM 159 The safety of parks and trails 2/17/2022 9:54 AM 160 Terrace Park really needs more attention.2/17/2022 7:05 AM 161 I love what was done to Haller park and hope to see more like that! I appreciate all the parks, trails, etc Arlington has to offer. My only wish is that the bathrooms were open as it makes using the parks and recreation spaces difficult when there’s no restroom available for use. 2/17/2022 6:04 AM 162 1721 249TH ST NE 2/17/2022 5:25 AM 163 Centennial Trail needs enforcement of stop signs at street crossings along 67th, as well as making sure cyclists use the trail and not the road 2/16/2022 10:15 PM 164 access to parks via sidewalk or trails from Magnolia meadows to Gleneagle 2/16/2022 9:11 PM 165 more trails please!2/16/2022 7:14 PM 166 Building a Aquatic Center for all to enjoy.2/16/2022 7:13 PM 167 6501 210TH ST NE 2/16/2022 7:06 PM 168 I have grandchildren who use parks with and most residents rarely use 2/16/2022 5:36 PM 169 A living art wall for graffiti...could be painted out every other year. These little vandals need some place to be positive with their tagging 2/16/2022 5:06 PM 170 Of the listed sites, I use the trails the most, especially centennial trail. This is the trail and site that is most important to me. 2/16/2022 4:20 PM 171 It will be very important to include enough funding for additional staff as the Park system. grows. I worked for Seattle Parks for 31 years and this was one of the things they paid attention to and it worked! 2/16/2022 4:02 PM 172 How is the city managing public art? What policies are in place that address location, maintenance, acceptance, etc.? 2/16/2022 3:00 PM 173 Would like a community indoor & outdoor pool area so people 50 & older can do low impact pool exercises & kids can take swim lessons or have family pool time 2/16/2022 2:51 PM 174 20227 80th Ave NE Unit 37 2/16/2022 2:45 PM 175 Bathroom facilities at local parks. J Rudy Memorial Park is our only local park, but has no bathroom and can be problematic when you have young children. We opt to then drive to another that does have one. 2/16/2022 2:00 PM 176 Once again the original Smokey Point housing areas get little or no accommodations. Other than retail and industrial businesses which lower the quality of life. 2/16/2022 12:02 PM 177 I, As well as other I have talked to would love to see more parks and activities that families can do. It has been very disheartening to see all of these public areas that we would take our families to fly kites, or run the dogs, and play catch get sold off and replaced by big commercial buildings. While we still have new commercial buildings that have sat empty for years now. 2/16/2022 12:02 PM 178 None at this time 2/15/2022 8:15 PM 179 Love to have a YMCA within city limits!!2/15/2022 5:54 PM 180 I am very concerned about the amount of business complexes that have been being built in our Smokey Point community. We have 5-6 new car dealerships, Amazon, Retirement communities and other sites. While there is need for new business. Adequate attention to the road systems in this area have been completely overlooked. The road are a mess. A perfect example is Island Crossing. The road to give ingress and egress to 530 and Smokey Point 2/15/2022 4:36 PM Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) Plan Priorities Survey SurveyMonkey 58 / 58 Blvd was not great prior to the new Truck stop but now that road is a MESS! If you happen to be traveling on those roads the gridlock is crazy. The road is not wide enough for most cars to travel when there are multiple big rigs trying to go north to access 530. In addition, the potholes are horrific and even after being patched they deteriorate rapidly as if nothing had been done. The roads need to be addressed before you begin your crazy expansions of our community NOT AFTER!!!!! 181 No.2/15/2022 4:29 PM 182 Thanks for the forward-thinking to address the needs of our youth 2/15/2022 4:18 PM 183 510 East 2nd Street 2/15/2022 4:14 PM 184 Sidewalks, bike lanes, safe crosswalks to allow Smokey Point residents to safely walk and bike! 2/15/2022 3:11 PM 185 A indoor pool facility like the snohomish aquatic center would be a wonderful asset for the city of Arlington. 2/15/2022 2:08 PM 186 I would like to see bus access on 172nd street between Gleneagle and The Crossing. I know it is a state highway, but with so many people moving here, we need some consideration from the state and county to provide this. There are just so many cars that these two lane roads can handle and round-a-bouts won't help. 2/15/2022 1:44 PM 187 I just wish they would quit building apartments and large apartment complexes 2/15/2022 1:44 PM 188 6206 188th St NE, SPC 29 2/15/2022 12:51 PM 189 Didn't see parking addressed 2/15/2022 12:44 PM 190 We plan to register to vote . Just moved here 2/14/2022 6:12 PM 191 Traffic flow in park areas 2/14/2022 3:46 PM 192 402 N Alcazar Ave 2/14/2022 12:42 PM 193 Please take better care of what is already here. For example the deteriorated fence alongside Terrace Park. 2/14/2022 11:46 AM 194 1104 Park Hill Drive false 2/14/2022 11:01 AM Arlington PRMP Plan E-1 Appendix E: Land and facility demand Park, recreation, and open space land and facility demands can be estimated using population ratios, participation models, level-of- service (LOS) measurements, and/or questionnaire survey methodologies. Ratios The demand for park, recreation, and open space land can be estimated using a ratio of a required facility to a standard unit of population, such as 3.1 acres of athletic fields and playgrounds per 1,000 residents. The ratio method is relatively simple to compute and can be compared with national or local park, recreation, and open space measurements. However, the method cannot account for unique age, social or interest characteristics that may affect the park, recreation, and open space activity patterns within a specific community. Nor can the method compensate for unique climatic or environmental features that may cause seasonal or geographical variations in park, recreation, and open space use patterns. The ratio method is frequently used to estimate land requirements. However, a number of factors may significantly influence the amount of land a community may wish to set aside for park, recreation, and open space purposes. Such factors may include the presence of sensitive environments, scenic viewpoints, historical or cultural assets, trailheads, and other features that may increase land set-asides along a non-motorized transportation or trail corridor. The National Recreation & Park Association (NRPA) compiles data on the amount of land and facilities that have developed over time by major parks, recreation, and open space departments across the country. Depending on the agency arrangements within the participating cities, the ratios may or may not include the lands and facilities that are provided by all public sponsors including city, school, county, state, federal agencies, and private operators within each measuring jurisdiction. Note - the NRPA began publishing a comprehensive list of ratios in 1985 that have subsequently been updated and qualified to account for local methodologies in the years since. NRPA’s most recent data has been published in the 2019 NRPA Agency Performance Review. The 2019 NRPA Agency Performance Review was collected from 1,075 unique park and recreation agencies across the US based on reports between 2016 and 2018 and is published with medians along with data responses at the lower-quartile (lowest 25%) and upper-quartile (highest 25%). The NRPA Park Metrics (formerly PRORAGIS) report compiles survey data for type, size, geography, and other agency characteristics. The benchmarks used here are based on the NRPA Park Metrics results for agencies serving populations of 15,000-25,000 and the median responses to the 2019 NRPA Agency Performance Review when Park Metrics data is not available. Note - the ratios are based on parks properties and facilities owned by cities and not on a composite ratio that may include other public, nonprofit, and private or school district facilities available for public use. Participation models Park, recreation, and open space facility requirements can also be determined using variations of participation models – refined, statistical variations of a questionnaire or survey method of determining recreational behavior. Participation models are usually compiled using activity diaries, where a person or household records their participation in specific recreational activities over a measurable period. The diary results are compiled to create a statistical profile that can be used to project the park, recreation, and open space behavior of comparable persons, households, or populations. Participation models are most accurate when the participation measurements are determined for a population and area that is local and similar enough to the population that is to be projected by E-2 Arlington PRMP Plan the model. The most accurate participation models are usually controlled for climatic region and age, and periodically updated to measure changes in recreational behavior in activities or areas over time. Properly done, participation models can be perfectly accurate predictors of an area's facility requirements in terms that are specific and measurable. However, though accurate, participation models can be somewhat abstract, and if not combined with other methods of gathering public opinion, can fail to determine qualitative issues of an area's demands in addition to a facility's quantitative requirements. For example, an area might provide the exact facility quantities that are required to meet the resident population’s park, recreation, and open space demands, such as a mile of walking trail. However, the facility might not be provided with the proper destination, in a quality or safe corridor, or other important, but less measurable aspect that makes the facility quantity effective and the activity a pleasurable experience. The walking trail, for example, might be located in an area of uninteresting scenery and/or in an inaccessible location. This planning effort utilizes the results of the Washington State Recreation & Conservation Office (RCO) surveys for 6 age groups (male and female) for the northeast region of the state (east of the Cascade Mountains) that were accomplished in 2001, 2006, and 2012. The estimates were developed for each activity demand for the peak season periods that would most impact facility capacities and thereby the level of service to residents. The estimated demands were converted into facility units based on assumed high capacity and turnover rates common to most urban areas of the state. The projected facility unit requirements were then converted into a simple facility unit per 1,000 resident’s ratio to allow comparison with similar ratios developed by the NRPA and found to be the existing facility level-of-service (ELOS) for each activity. Note - participation models can account for facility capacity ratios that may be expressed through management policies or local population preferences concerning volume of use or the degree of crowding that is satisfactory. However, the model cannot account for all Proposed variations in crowding or volume of use that may vary over the length of a trail, season, or by a different user population at the same time. Nor can the model account for communities that may be impacted by tourists or regional users from outside the modeling area. Existing and Proposed level-of-service (ELOS/PLOS) Facility requirements may also be determined by expressing the supply of existing park, recreation, and open space land and facilities as a ratio to the resident existing population (as a unit ratio per 1,000 persons). The existing level-of-service (ELOS) condition or ratio can define an existing standard for each type of park, recreation, and open space provided within the existing inventory. ELOS ratios can be calculated for specialized types of activities for which there are no comparable national or state definitions. Ultimately, department staff with public assistance through telephone or mailed or internet questionnaires can develop Proposed level-of-service (PLOS) ratios for a specific type of facility by determining the quantity that is surplus or deficient in quantity or condition within the existing inventory. For example, the existing supply of beach trails in a jurisdiction of 10,000 persons may be 20 miles, or an existing level-of-service (ELOS) standard of 2.00 miles per 1,000 persons or population. The public may determine, however, that under present conditions the existing trails are overcrowded and located in areas that are of little interest for beach walking purposes. Ideally, the public would like to add 10 more miles to the existing inventory in order to reduce crowding and provide access to more interesting sites. The proposal would increase the overall supply to 30 miles and the Proposed level-of-service (PLOS) standard to 3.00 miles per 1,000 persons. Note – this plan compares all 3 methodologies. However, the plan considers the ELOS/PLOS comparison approach to be the most accurate method of resolving final level-of-service requirements since it can account for impacts of: Arlington PRMP Plan E-3  Out-of-area tourist and regional users,  Combined public and private facility inventories,  Unique environmental or market area dynamics, and  Other variables not proposed to quantify in a participation model or ratio. Land requirements Total park land The RCO does not have a benchmark for park, recreation, and open space land. According to National Recreation & Park Association (NRPA) 2019 NRPA Agency Performance Review agencies serving populations of 15,000-25,000 provided a median of 12.6 acres per 1,000 persons in the population that gradually declined as the population increased up to 250,000. * All proposed identifies 2050 requirements including additional land or facilities that are recommended to be added and the level-of-service per 1,000 persons that will result from the addition and the projected population increase over the next 20-year planning period. The level-of- service ratio will decline due to additional population increase (13,784 persons in the city by 2050) if no additional land or facilities are recommended. ** Ratio is expressed per 1,000 residents within Arlington (year 2020 city population of 22,800) under Arlington and for all public and private facilities under “All total” and “Recommended additional” standard. By comparison, Arlington owns 172.9 acres of parkland or a ratio of 7.58 city park acres per 1,000 residents and the city, county, school districts, state, and HOAs own 1,349.8 acres or 59.20 acres per 1,000 city residents. Select acquisitions of additional parkland to be described in following pages, may provide another 1.0 city park acres equal to a ratio of 36.92 of all park acres per 1,000 city residents by the year 2050. The existing supply of park land is sufficient if all sites were developed to capacity. Therefore, the resulting standard should be sufficient to provide equal park distribution for local needs and to conserve important regional attributes in the city for the reasons listed in the following descriptions considering the amount of land provided in or near the city by other public agencies. Resource conservancies Open space preservation or resource conservancies are designed to protect and manage a natural and/or cultural feature, environment, or facility - such as a wetland or unique habitat, a natural landmark, or a unique cultural setting. Resource conservancies are defined by areas of natural quality for nature-oriented outdoor recreation, such as viewing and studying nature, wildlife habitat, and conservation. Open space preservations or resource conservancies should be located to encompass diverse or unique natural resources, such as lakes, streams, marshes, flora, fauna, and topography. Recreational use may be a secondary, non-intrusive part of the property - such as an interpretative trail, viewpoint, exhibit signage, picnic area or other feature. In practice, there aren’t minimum or maximum benchmarks concerning conservancies - a site should provide whatever is necessary to protect the resource. /1,000 Na Na 2.74 36.05 22.47 Arlington presently provides 62.4 acres of open space and resource conservancies or a ratio of 2.74 acres per 1,000 residents and the city, county, state, school districts, and HOAs provide 821.9 acres or a ratio of 36.05 acres per 1,0000 city residents. The ratio includes portions of the city’s Country Charm, Stormwater Wetland, 67th Avenue, Crown Ridge 5, Old Burn Road, and Portage Creek Parks as well as parks and open spaces owned by the City of Marysville, Snohomish County, Washington State DNR, Arlington School District, and HOAs. E-4 Arlington PRMP Plan While the present supply (existing level-of-service (ELOS) standard) does not need to be increased through purchase, the city’s critical areas ordinance should continue to protect these important resource conservancies and if necessary, acquire development rights if portions of these private landholdings are in jeopardy of development or to provide public access for Proposed wildlife habitat and trail corridors. Sites that merit consideration for acquisition if necessary to conserve riparian habitat, wetlands, ponds, streams, and wooded hillsides include Portage Creek, March Creek, and the Middle Fork Quilceda Creek corridors. Resource activities Resource activities are defined by areas of natural or ornamental quality for outdoor recreation such as picnicking, boating, fishing, swimming, camping, and local parks trail uses. The site may also include play areas, such as playgrounds and open grassy play fields if these areas support the primary outdoor recreational features. The site should be contiguous to or encompassing natural resources including resource conservancies. In practice, there aren’t minimum or maximum benchmarks concerning conservancies - a site should provide whatever is necessary to protect the resource. /1,000 Na Na 2.74 14.00 8.73 Arlington presently provides 62.4 acres of resource active parks or a ratio of 2.74 parks per 1,000 residents and the county, state, and HOAs provide 319.3 acres or 14.00 acres per 1,000 city residents. The ratio includes portions of the city’s Country Charm, Haller, and Stormwater Wetland Parks as well as parks owned by Snohomish County. The existing supply is adequate even as the standard declines to 8.73 acres per 1,000 city residents if these sites are developed to provide resource activities of interest and suitable to each property. Linear trails Linear trails are built or natural corridors, such as abandoned or surplus railroad lines, undeveloped road-rights-of-way, and active utility rights-of-way or natural areas defined by drainage features, topographical changes, wooded areas, or vegetation patterns that can link schools, libraries, or commercial areas with parks. Generally, linear trails may be developed for multiple modes of recreational travel such as hiking, biking or horseback riding. The trail system may parallel established vehicular or other transportation systems, but apart from and usually within a separate right-of-way. Linear trail corridors may also include active play areas or trailhead development located in other types of parkland. Trail systems should be anchored by public facilities, like a school or park that may serve as a destination or trailhead and extend into the surrounding residential areas using natural features or established roads, sidewalks, or other safe travel corridors. Ideally, a minimum trail system should be at least 3-5 miles long and provide the ability to loop back to the point of origin. The trail should be sufficiently wide enough to provide for the type of trail user(s) that it is accommodating, preserve the features through which the trail is traveling, and buffer adjacent land use activities. In practice, there aren’t benchmarks concerning linear trails. An agency should provide as many miles as proposed considering the trail opportunities a city’s geography provides. NRPA RCO Arlington All total All proposed Acres 8.5 287.6 287.6 Arlington presently provides 8.5 dedicated acres of linear trail corridor or a ratio of 0.37 acres per 1,000 residents consisting of the city’s portion of the Centennial Trail, Airport Trail, and an extensive system of trails in resource parks that are not counted as separate acreages. Arlington and Snohomish County provide 287.6 acres including the county portion of the Centennial and Whitehorse Trails or a ratio of 12.61 acres per 1,000 residents. Arlington PRMP Plan E-5 Arlington has considerable and sufficient trail acreage resources were these trail segments as well as the individual resource park trails integrated into a citywide network of on and off-road trails through existing parks and city rights-of-way even as the ratio declines to 7.86 acres per 1,000 residents. Playgrounds and athletic fields Athletic fields and playgrounds are designed for intense recreational activities like field and court games, playground apparatus areas, picnicking, wading pools, and the like. A suitable athletic field and playground site should be capable of sustaining intense recreational development. The site should be easily accessible to the using population and ideally should be linked to the surrounding area by walking and biking trails and paths. Typically, athletic fields and playgrounds may be included within or jointly developed in association with an elementary, middle, or high school facility. The desired service area for an athletic field or playground complex depends on the competitive quality to which the facility is developed and the resident using population that the site is intended to serve. Regionally oriented athletic sites may include 4 or more competitive, high-quality soccer, baseball or softball fields serving organized leagues drawn from surrounding communities or areas - which may include the approximate service area for a high school. Local (community or neighborhood) oriented athletic fields and playgrounds may consist primarily of a playground and a grassy play area, possibly including 1 or more practice or non-regulation athletic fields. Local athletic fields and playgrounds serve residents of an immediately surrounding residential area from a quarter to half-mile radius - the service area for an elementary school. In practice, there aren’t minimum or maximum benchmarks concerning athletic fields and playgrounds. An agency should provide sufficient playgrounds within a 0.5-mile walking distance of most residents and athletic fields to accommodate most league activities of local, younger age residents. Arlington presently provides 23.5 acres or a ratio of 1.03 acres per 1,000 residents of playgrounds and athletic fields. All agencies combined including the city, school district, and HOAs provide 222.0 acres or 9.74 acres per 1,000 city residents. The city’s playground and athletic assets include Bill Quake Memorial, Forest Trail, Haller, J Rudy York, Jensen, Terrace, Waldo E Evans Memorial, Wedgewood, and Woodway Parks as well as the facilities located on the city of Marysville, Marysville, and Arlington School Districts. Generally, the existing picnic, playground, sports court, and field sites are evenly distributed within a 5 or 10-minute walk of all residential neighborhoods and if maintained and developed to capacity will be able to sustain the future population even as the ratio declines to 6.07 acres per 1,000 city residents. Recreation centers/pools Recreation centers and pools are indoor and outdoor facilities providing swimming pools, physical conditioning, gymnasiums, arts and crafts, classrooms, meeting rooms, kitchen facilities, and other spaces to support public recreation programs for school-age children (but not students), teens, senior, and other resident populations on a full-time basis. For the purposes of this PRMP Plan, recreation centers and pools are defined to include all city, county, school-owned, non-profit, and private facilities that are available for public use. The desired service area for a recreation center/pool depends on the extent of the recreational program services to be offered in the facility and the building's potential size and site relationships. Community oriented recreation centers may include a variety of competitive swimming pools, gymnasiums, or courts along with/or in place of a series of public classroom and meeting facilities, a teen and/or senior center and/or a daycare facility providing indoor building space. E-6 Arlington PRMP Plan And/or a community-oriented recreation center may be jointly sited with an athletic park or playground, or in association with a library, civic center, or other public meeting facility. Community oriented recreation centers may be jointly shared with school districts or a part of other city or county building complexes that serve a city or larger surrounding community area. Local recreation centers may consist primarily of a single facility use - like a classroom or gymnasium complex and/or that may be sited as a lone building oriented to a single user group - like a teen or senior center. Local recreation centers serve residents of an immediately surrounding residential area from a quarter to half- mile radius - which is the approximate service area for an elementary school. In practice, there aren’t minimum or maximum benchmarks concerning recreation and community center acreages. An agency should provide sufficient land considering the availability of other public, nonprofit, and private facilities within the local area. NRPA RCO Arlington All total All proposed Arlington does not presently provide any indoor recreation facilities though the city leases a portion of Bill Quake Memorial Park to the Arlington Boys & Girls Club for a recreation center or 6.5 acres or 0.29 acres per 1,000 city residents. Other nonprofit agencies, including the Byrnes Performing Arts Center, Stillaguamish Pioneer Historical Museum, Stilly Valley Center, and Still Valley Health Connections as well as private operators including the Stillaguamish Athletic Club and Gleneagle Golf Course own and operate a variety of indoor meeting, performing, and classroom-oriented facilities. The existing level of service would likely exceed recreation center objectives were the inventory to include indoor space provided by Arlington School District. However, school facilities are not available for use during school hours to meet the needs of seniors, parents, or pre-school children and the private clubs do not provide facilities for low-income participants. The city proposes to possibly develop 1.0 acres for a community center that could include meeting and classroom facilities for day use activities and will be sufficient to meet all future needs even as the ratio declines to 0.21 acres per 1,000 city residents. Special use facilities Special use facilities are single-purpose recreational activities like arboreta, display gardens, nature centers, golf courses, marinas, zoos, conservatories, arenas, outdoor theaters, and gun and archery ranges. Special use facilities may include areas that preserve, maintain, and interpret buildings, sites, and other objects of historical or cultural significance, like museums, historical landmarks, and structures. Special use areas may also include public plazas or squares or commons in or near commercial centers or public buildings. There aren’t benchmarks concerning the development of special use facilities - demand being defined by opportunity more than a ratio. Nor are there minimum or maximum facility or site sizes - size being a function of the facility rather than a separately established design standard. /1,000 Na Na 0.11 0.11 0.07 Arlington provides 2.5 acres or a ratio of 0.11 acres per 1,000 city residents consisting of Centennial, Lebanon, and Legion Parks. Arlington does not plan to provide any additional special use facilities other than proposed improvements to existing park sites such as Terrace and J Rudy York Parks which should be sufficient to meet future needs. Support facilities Support facilities include administrative office space, indoor meeting rooms, shop and equipment maintenance yards, plant nurseries, and other buildings and sites necessary to service the park system that are located outside of park properties. Arlington PRMP Plan E-7 There aren’t benchmarks concerning the development of support use facilities - demand being defined by functional operating requirements more than a ratio. Nor are there minimum or maximum facility or site sizes - size being a function of the type of facility space required and whether the facility space is shared with other jurisdiction support functions rather than a separately established design standard. Arlington provides 7.1 acres of support facilities or 0.31 acres per 1,000 residents of supporting facilities including the Public Works facility located next to Haller Park and the City Maintenance Yard located in the MIC Subarea – park administrative offices are in Arlington City Hall. The current acreage is sufficient to meet current and projected needs. Facility requirements Number of parks The RCO does not have a benchmark for the number of parks that should be provided per 1,000 residents. According to National Recreation & Park Association (NRPA) 2020 NRPA Agency Performance Review agencies serving populations under 20,000 provided a 1 park per 1,300 residents or 0.77 parks per 1,000 persons. NRPA RCO Arlington All total All proposed Arlington currently provides 15 parks including resource conservation sites, resource, linear trails, athletic fields and playgrounds, recreation and community centers, special uses, and maintenance facilities or a ratio of 0.66 parks per 1,000 city residents. The city, Marysville, Marysville School District, county, and HOAs provide a total of 34 parks or 1.49 parks per 1,000 city residents The plan could add 1 more park site for a community center that will provide geographic distribution of local parks within a 5 and 10-minute walking distance of all residential neighborhoods within the city and UGA that will realize a ratio of 0.96 parks per 1,000 city residents which is more than sufficient to meet future needs. Community gardens There is no behavioral data with which the participation model can project community garden or pea patch requirements – meaning specific areas set aside for the planting of ornamental and vegetable plots. According to the National Recreation & Park Association (NRPA) 2020 Agency Performance Review agencies serving populations under 20,000 provided a community garden per 7,914 residents or 0.13 garden sites per 1,000 persons in the population. Arlington currently provides Third Street Community Garden at Presidents Elementary School or a ratio of 0.04 per 1,000 city residents. The plan proposes to provide 2 additional city sponsored community garden plots at High Clover and County Charm Parks or a ratio of 0.08 gardens per 1,000 residents by 2040 which should be sufficient. Waterfront access There is no behavioral data with which the participation model can project waterfront access requirements – meaning shoreline access for fishing and swimming purposes. The NRPA does not have a benchmark for waterfront access. E-8 Arlington PRMP Plan Arlington provides waterfront access at 3 sites or 0.13 sites per 1,000 residents including Country Charm, Haller, and Stormwater Wetland Parks. The city, county, and school district provide 7 sites at Gissberg Twin, River Meadows, Twin Rivers Parks, and Post Middle School Open Space or 0.31 sites per 1,000 city residents. The current available sites provide adequate access to the waterfronts if each site were developed to capacity even though the ratio of waterfront sites will decline to 0.19 sites per 1,000 residents by 2040. Kayaking, canoeing, and rowboat There are no participation model standards for kayak or canoe hand-carry launch sites or facilities. The NRPA does not have a benchmark for kayaking or hand-carry craft launching facilities. /1,000 Na Na 0.13 0.22 0.14 Arlington provides non-motorized or hand-carry craft (kayak, canoe, or rowboat) access sites at Country Charm, Haller, and Stormwater Wetland Parks. The city and county provide 5 sites including River Meadows and Twin Rivers Parks or 0.22 sites per 1,000 city residents. The current available sites provide adequate hand carry access to if each site were developed to capacity even though the ratio of waterfront sites will decline to 0.14 sites per 1,000 residents by 2040. Boating There are no participation model standards for boat launch ramps, floating platforms or docks, and boat moorage slips. The NRPA does not have a benchmark for boating facilities. Arlington provides 1 boat launch ramp at Haller Park or a ratio of 0.04 launch ramps per 1,000 residents. No other agency provides boat launch ramps on this stretch of the Stillaguamish River. This should be sufficient if the Haller Park boat launch ramp were upgraded even though the ratio will decline to 0.03 launch ramps per 1,000 residents by 2040. Camping There are no participation model standards for tent and RV campsites. The NRPA does not have a benchmark for boating facilities. Campsites 0 20 32 /1,000 Na Na 0.00 0.88 0.87 Arlington does not provide campsites though Snohomish County provides 14 tent campsites and 6 yurts at River Meadows Park or a ratio of 0.88 campsites per 1,000 residents. Arlington may develop 12 campsites at County Charm Park for a total of 32 campsites or a ratio of 0.87 per 1,000 residents by 2040. Picnic tables and shelters Participation model projections indicate public agencies should be providing a ratio of 1.77 picnic tables and benches of all types (open and under shelters) per every 1,000 residents then gradually decline to 1.67 as the population ages. The NRPA does not have a benchmark for picnic facilities. NRPA RCO Arlington All total All proposed Arlington PRMP Plan E-9 Arlington presently provides 30 picnic tables and 4 picnic shelters or a ratio of 1.32 picnic tables and 0.18 picnic shelters per 1,000 residents at Bill Quake Memorial, Forest Trail, Haller, J Rudy Memorial, Jensen, Legion, Stormwater Wetland, Terrace, and Wedgewood Parks. The city, Marysville, county, and HOAs provide 59 picnic tables and 8 picnic shelters or a ratio of 2.59 tables and 0.35 shelters per 1,000 residents. In general, Arlington parks do not provide enough tables and shelters within a 5 to 10-minute walking distance in a distributed pattern across the city and UGA. Consequently, another 12 picnic tables and 2 picnic shelters will be provided at Country Charm and High Clover Park for a ratio of 1.94 tables and 0.27 shelters per 1,000 residents to meet future population growth, distribute facilities across the city, meet group facility user needs, and resident interests by 2040. Park and multipurpose trails Participation model projections indicate public agencies should be providing a ratio of 0.15 miles of walking or hiking trails within existing parks or in a separated multipurpose trail corridor per every 1,000 city residents. The NRPA does not have a benchmark for trails per 1,000 residents. NRPA RCO Arlington All total All proposed Parks 3.7 8.0 8.0 Arlington presently provides 3.7 miles of park trails and 9.2 miles of multipurpose trails or a ratio of 0.16 miles or park trails and 0.40 miles of multipurpose trails per 1,000 residents including the city’s portion of Centennial and all the 188th Street Connector, Eagle/Stormwater Wetland, Kruger Park, River Crest, Zimmerman Hill Climb, and Airport Trails. All agencies combined provide 8.0 miles of park trails and 66.2 miles of multipurpose trails or a ratio of 0.35 miles of park trails and 2.90 miles of multipurpose trails per 1,000 residents including the rest of the Centennial and all of Whitehorse Trails. An additional 22.7 miles of multipurpose trail or a ratio of 2.43 miles per 1,000 residents will be added when the proposed multipurpose trail network will extend the Airport, Centennial, and other existing trails to connect with parks, schools, and the downtown throughout the city by 2040. Off-leash dog parks There are no RCO participation model standards for off-leash dog parks or trails. According to National Recreation & Park Association (NRPA) 2019 NRPA Agency Performance Review all agencies provided 0.0226 dog parks per 1,000 persons in the population. NRPA RCO Arlington All total All proposed Arlington provides a designated off-leash dog park in Stormwater Wetland Park or a ratio of 0.04 per 1,000 residents. Marysville provides a dog park in Strawberry Fields Athletic Complex or a ratio of 0.08 dog parks per 1,000 residents. Off-leash dog parks are unique facilities reserved exclusively for pet exercise, training, and social interaction. Generally, such facilities cannot be shared with other park activities. Off-leash dog trails may be shared with limited other trail activities if the volumes are relatively low, and the animals are well trained. An additional dog park or off-leash area could be in Country Charm Park or a ratio of 0.08 dog parks per 1,000 residents by 2040. Separately, Arlington may consider designating some portions of park trails for shared off-leash dog use where shared use will not detract from other users or create hazards between dogs. E-10 Arlington PRMP Plan Playgrounds The participation model projections indicate public agencies should be providing a ratio of 0.60 playgrounds and tot lots of all types per every 1,000 residents then gradually decline to 0.53 playgrounds as the population ages. According to National Recreation & Park Association (NRPA) 2019 NRPA Agency Performance Review agencies serving populations of 20,000-49,999 provided 0.56 playgrounds and tot lots per 1,000 persons. Arlington presently provides 9 playgrounds or a ratio of 0.39 playgrounds per 1,000 residents at 9 city parks including Bill Quake Memorial, Forest Trail, Haller, J Rudy York, Jensen, Terrace, Waldo E Evans Memorial, Wedgewood, and Woodway Parks. All public and private agencies combined including elementary schools, provide 26 covered and uncovered playgrounds or a ratio of 1.14 playgrounds per 1,000 residents. All public and private agency facilities combined provide a significant inventory to provide for playground activities assuming the school facilities are available for public use and located in safe and secure areas for after school activities. However, the present supply is not evenly distributed throughout the city or UGA to provide equal access to all city neighborhood areas. Additional playgrounds and play areas will be provided in 3 parks including Country Charm, High Clover, and Smokey Point Parks or a ratio of 0.82 playgrounds per 1,000 residents by 2040. Skateboard courts and pump tracks There are no RCO participation model standards for skateboard courts or skate dots or climbing walls - or similar rollerblade or in- line skating activities. According to National Recreation & Park Association (NRPA) 2019 NRPA Agency Performance Review all agencies provided 0.02 skateparks per 1,000 persons. Skate 1 1 7 Arlington provides a skateboard park or skate facility at Bill Quake Memorial Park or a ratio of 0.04 per 1,000 residents. No other agency provides skateboard facilities within the city or UGA. The demand for these facilities will increase to meet the needs of younger age residents for beginner, experienced, and some competitive or advanced activities at locations distributed across the city and adjacent to developed areas where skateboarders are now using unauthorized public and private properties for this activity. At least 6 skateboard fixtures or ramps or “skate dots” should be installed across the city in Forest Trail, High Clover, J Rudy Memorial, Jensen, Terrace, and the Rockery Parks or a ratio of 0.19 skateboard options per 1,000 residents by 2040. In addition, a “Pump Track” or a circuit of rollers, banked turns, and features designed to be ridden completely by riders "pumping"— generating momentum by up and down body movements, instead of pedaling or pushing should be developed at Jensen Park or a ratio of 0.03 tracks per 1,000 residents by 2040 to meet the growing interests of this emerging youth activity. Outdoor basketball/sports courts Participation model projections indicate public agencies should be providing a ratio of 0.10 basketball/sports courts of all types per every 1,000 residents and then gradually decline to a ratio of 0.09 as the population ages. According to National Recreation & Park Association (NRPA) 2019 NRPA Agency Performance Review agencies serving populations of 20,000-49,999 provided 0.10 basketball and 0.04 multiuse or sports courts per 1,000 persons. Arlington PRMP Plan E-11 NRPA RCO Arlington All total All proposed Sports 3 12 16 /1,000 0.14 0.09 0.13 0.53 0.44 Arlington presently provides 3 outdoor uncovered courts in Forest Trail, J Rudy York, and Terrace Parks or a ratio of 0.13 courts per 1,000 residents. All public and private agencies combined provide 12 uncovered courts or a ratio of 0.53 courts per 1,000 residents in elementary schools and HOA parks. However, these facilities are not evenly distributed across the city and currently improved only for basketball. Consequently, the existing courts should be reconfigured into sports courts to accommodate basketball, pickleball, and volleyball and 4 more sports courts should be added at Bill Quake Memorial, High Clover, Jensen, and Wedgewood Parks for a ratio of 0.44 courts per 1,000 residents by 2040. Tennis/pickleball courts – in/outdoor Participation model projections indicate public agencies should be providing a ratio of 0.24 tennis/pickleball courts per every 1,000 residents then gradually decline to 0.22 as the population ages. According to National Recreation & Park Association (NRPA) 2019 NRPA Agency Performance Review agencies serving populations of 20,000-49,999 provided 0.23 outdoor tennis courts per 1,000 persons. However, neither standard effectively accounts for the growing use and popularity of pickleball, particularly for older age groups. NRPA RCO Arlington All total All proposed Arlington does not provide tennis courts though the school district and HOAs provide 10 tennis courts or a ratio of 0.44 tennis courts per 1,000 residents. Pickleball overlays will be added to the existing and proposed sports court, particularly at city parks, to reflect the growing interest in this activity. Pickleball overlays will be added at Forest Trail, J Rudy York, and Terrace Parks sports courts and incorporated into new sports courts at Bill Quake Memorial, High Clover, Jensen, and Wedgewood Parks for a ratio of 0.19 pickleball courts per 1,000 residents by 2040. Soccer/lacrosse fields Participation model projections indicate public agencies should be providing a ratio of 0.32 competition or regulation soccer/lacrosse fields per every 1,000 residents then gradually decline to 0.29 as the population ages. The projections do not estimate youth or practice field requirements. According to National Recreation & Park Association (NRPA) 2019 NRPA Agency Performance Review all agencies provided 0.39 rectangular competition fields for soccer and lacrosse and 0.08 multipurpose synthetic and overlay fields per 1,000 persons or 0.47 fields in total. NRPA standards do not estimate youth or practice field requirements. /1,000 Na Na 0.04 0.31 0.36 Arlington presently provides 1practice or multipurpose youth field at Bill Quake Memorial Park or a ratio of 0.04 fields per 1,000 residents and no adult or competition soccer field. All agencies combined including Marysville, Marysville School District, Snohomish County, and Arlington School District provide 7 youth or practice and 15 regulation fields or a ratio of 0.31 youth or practice and 0.66 regulations fields per 1,000 residents. Several the existing park and school fields should be improved with drainage, irrigation, and lighting on some fields to provide adequate and safe practice and competition events. E-12 Arlington PRMP Plan An additional 6 youth or practice and 3 adult fields should be developed in a complex of multipurpose rectangular fields at County Charm Park to meet local youth and practice needs and regional competition games for a ratio of 0.36 youth and 0.49 adult soccer fields by 2040. Baseball/softball fields Participation model projections indicate public agencies should be providing a ratio of 0.53 regulation (250+ feet) baseball and softball fields of all per every 1,000 residents then gradually decline to 0.49 as the population ages. Participation models do not estimate T-Ball or youth field requirements. According to National Recreation & Park Association (NRPA) 2019 NRPA Agency Performance Review agencies serving populations of 20,000-49,999 provided 0.30 regulation baseball/softball youth and 0.08 adult fields per 1,000 persons. NRPA RCO Arlington All total All proposed Arlington presently provides 3 youth baseball fields at Bill Quake Memorial and 1 adult baseball field at Waldo E Evans Memorial Parks or a ratio of 0.13 youth and 0.04 adult baseball fields per 1,000 residents. All agencies combined including Snohomish County and Arlington School District provide 17 youth and 1 regulation fields or a ratio of 0.75 youth and 0.08 regulations fields per 1,000 residents. The supply includes many un-improved school fields that can provide safe or functional practice use let alone regulation game fields for youth or adult play. These fields should be improved with drainage, irrigation, grass, or turf surfaces, and possibly lighting on some fields to provide adequate and safe practice and competition events. An additional 6 youth fields should be developed in a complex of multipurpose rectangular fields at County Charm Park to meet local youth and practice needs and regional competition games for a ratio of 0.63 youth baseball fields by 2040. Swimming pool Participation model projections indicate public agencies should be providing a ratio of 541 square feet of swimming pool area or 0.04 of 13,454 square feet of an Olympic sized swimming pool per every 1,000 residents declining to 503 square feet as the population ages. According to National Recreation & Park Association (NRPA) 2019 NRPA Agency Performance Review all agencies provided 0.03 outdoor swimming pools per 1,000 persons. NRPA RCO Arlington All total All proposed Arlington provides an outdoor splash pad at Haller Park that is a popular attraction at the park though the pad does not qualify as an aquatic facility under this criterion. The Stillaguamish Athletic Club provides an indoor lap pool at or a ratio of 0.03 pools per 1,000 residents. No other agency is currently considering developing an aquatic facility. Recreation centers There are no comparable participation model data with which to project demand for indoor recreation center facilities. According to National Recreation & Park Association (NRPA) 2019 NRPA Agency Performance Review all agencies provided 0.03 recreation centers per 1,000 persons. NRPA RCO Arlington All total All proposed Arlington PRMP Plan E-13 Arlington does not provide gymnasium facilities though the Arlington School District and the Arlington Boys & Girls Club provide 5 youth and 4 adult or regulation gymnasiums or a ratio of 0.22 youth and 0/18 adult gyms per 1,000 residents. The youth gymnasiums are school cafeteria facilities that may not all be playable for league games by youth-aged teams. Most of the gymnasium inventory is in public schools that are not available for use by the public during daytime and some evening hours or in the Boys & Girls Club that is not available for adults. Existing facilities may not be sufficient to provide public access to recreational facilities by retired persons, at-home mothers, or workers during school hours. Therefore, a community/recreation center may be developed by the city to provide physical conditioning and a gymnasium for adult day and evening use. Community centers There is no comparable RCO participation model data with which to project demand for public indoor community center facilities. According to the National Recreation & Park Association (NRPA) 2019 NRPA Agency Performance Review all agencies provided 0.03 community centers per 1,000 persons or 1,612 square feet where an average community center is 53,725 square feet. NRPA RCO Arlington All total All proposed Center 1,500 3,600 10,750 /1,000 1,612 Na 66 158 294 Arlington provides 1,500 square feet or 66 square feet of meeting room facilities per 1,000 residents at City Hall and the Public Works complex. All public and nonprofit agencies combined provide 3,600 square feet or 158 square feet per 1,000 residents at the Arlington Boys & Girls Club, Stilly Valley Center, Stilly Valley Health Connections, and Gleneagle Golf Course. Some of the meeting room inventory is in nonprofit and private facilities that may not be available for public use without a membership or rental fee and may not be available for public use during normal day or evening hours. An additional 7,150 square feet of meeting facilities including an art, crafts, classroom, meeting facilities, large assembly space, kitchen, daycare/childcare, and administration office facility may be developed to provide for day and evening use for adults for a ratio of 294 square feet per 1,000 residents by 2040. Performance facilities There are no comparable participation model data or NRPA standards with which to project demand for publicly accessible performance facilities. Byrnes Performing Arts Center on the Arlington High School site provides 22,444 square feet of stage, orchestra pit, video projection screen, dressing rooms, and seating or a ratio of 982 square feet per 1,000 residents. The Center is sufficient to meet all performing interests even as the ratio declines to 613 square feet per 1,000 residents by 2040. Special event gathering spaces There are no RCO participation model standards with which to project special event gathering spaces nor does the NRPA have a benchmark. Arlington provides 4 special event gathering spaces at Centennial, Lebanon, Legion, and Terrace Parks or a ratio of 0.18 spaces per 1,000 residents. Additional spaces will be provided at Country Charm and Smokey Point Parks to provide distribution of gathering areas in the city and for major event activities at Country Charm Park for a ratio of 0.16 sites per 1,000 residents by 2040. E-14 Arlington PRMP Plan Museums There are no RCO participation model standards with which to project museum requirements nor does the NRPA have a benchmark. Stillaguamish Pioneer Historical Museum provides 23,643 square feet of museum space or a ratio of 1,037 square feet of museum per 1,000 residents. The facility is sufficient to meet future needs even as the ratio declines to 646 square feet per 1,000 residents by 2040. Golf There are no participation model standards with which to project museum requirements nor does the NRPA have a benchmark. Gleneagle Golf Course provides 18 holes of golf, driving range, pitching and chipping area, putting green, pro shop, and a restaurant for a ratio of 0.79 holes per 1,000 residents. The facility is sufficient to meet future needs even as the ratio declines to 0.49 holes per 1,000 residents by 2040. Support facilities There are no RCO participation model standards with which to project supporting administrative office, equipment and shop maintenance yards, and plant nursery requirements. The NRPA does not have a benchmark for park supporting facilities. Sq ft 13,148 13,148 13,148 Arlington provides 7.1 acres and 13,148 square feet of support facilities from the Public Works Maintenance Yard and Operations Center or 0.31 acres and 577 square feet per 1,000 residents. The facilities should be sufficient to meet present and future needs even as the ratio declines to 359 square feet per 1,000 residents by 2040. Future growth implications The Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM) and the Arlington Community Development Department expect the population of the city within the urban growth area will increase from 22,800 persons in 2022 to an estimated 36,584 persons by the year 2050 – or by 13,784 or 60% more persons. This forecasted population increase will create significant requirements for all types of parks, recreation, and open space lands and facilities in the city especially within the downtown area scheduled for higher density development. The population forecasts do not include expected increases in regional tourists and users who also frequent city parks, recreational facilities, trails, and open spaces. Arlington ELOS value 2022 Supply Value Land acres 172.9 $ 48,206,970 Facility units 14,749 $ 38,738,068 Value/capita $ 3,813 Value/household* $ 10,067 * Household of 2.64 persons per single family residential unit Arlington PRMP Plan E-15 Arlington ELOS (existing level-of-service) requirement 2022- 2050 2022 Supply 2050 Deficit 2050 Cost Land acres 172.9 104.5 $ 29,144,073 Facility units 14,749 8,917 $ 23,419,541 Under the existing level-of-service (ELOS) for Arlington owned park land and facilities in the city, the forecasted population increase will create a city-wide need for an additional 104.5 acres of land and 8,917 facility units (square feet, courts, fields, etc.) by the year 2050. The continuation of the city's existing level-of-service (ELOS) could require an expenditure of $52,563,614 by the year 2050 simply to remain current with present standards - not accounting for any maintenance, operation, or repair costs. The approximate cost of sustaining the city's existing level-of- service (ELOS) standard would be equal to about $3,813 per every new person added to the city's population or about $10,067 for every new housing unit. This assumes Arlington would continue to maintain the same ratio of parklands and facilities for the future population that the city had in the past. Composite PLOS (Proposed level-of-service) requirement 2022- 2050 2022 Supply 2050 Add’l 2050 Cost Land acres 172.9 173.9 $ 850,000 Facility units 14,749 29,165 $ 61,238,856 Total cost $ 62,088,856 Arlington PROS cost $ 42,103,127 Under the proposed level-of-service (PLOS) for all park land and facilities in the city, the forecasted population increase will create a city-wide proposal for an additional 1.0 acres of land and 29,165 facility units (square feet, courts, fields, etc.) by the year 2050. This assumes Arlington would supplement the existing inventory as described within this chapter rather than simply extending the same ratios into the future. The realization of the proposed level-of-service (PLOS) could require a total of $62,088,856 by the year 2050 - not accounting for any maintenance, operation or repair costs. Based on the project proposals described in the plan chapters, Arlington’s parks, recreation, and open space (PROS) share (not including multipurpose trails to be built on city right-of-way by Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) funds) of the cost would be $42,103,127 or 68%. Built encroachments However, if these proposals are not realized soon the present trend of increasing developments may:  Encroach upon - or preclude the preservation and public accessibility of the more sensitive and appealing environmental sites, particularly those proposed for cross city trail corridors and additional sensitive land preservations along riparian corridors and shorelines, and  Develop - or otherwise preclude the development of suitable lands for playgrounds, picnic shelters, waterfront access, and other neighborhood facilities. Forcing city residents to:  Use crowded - picnic areas, playgrounds, community centers, and hike and bike on crowded trails,  Commute to play - at overcrowded existing facilities in the city and/or organized recreational programs may have to be reduced, and  Commute to use - available facilities in other areas of the city, particularly out of Arlington and/or to other jurisdictions, parks and/or programs may have to be curtailed to prevent severe overcrowding conditions in the facilities that do provide such services. Such actions would be to the detriment of city residents who have paid the costs of developing and operating these facilities. E-16 Arlington PRMP Plan Financial implications These levels of facility investment may not be solely financed with the resources available to Arlington if the city pursues an independent delivery approach or uses traditional methods of funding. Arlington will not be financially able to develop, manage, and maintain a comprehensive, independent park, recreation, and open space system using only traditional financing methods considering the needs projected. These needs require a citywide financing approach by Arlington and where appropriate in partnership with Arlington School District and Snohomish County, as well as proposed nonprofit or for-profit partners. A citywide approach may use a combination of shared user fees, excise taxes, joint grant applications, impact fees, and voter approved property tax levies to maintain and improve facilities in the face of continued city population increases. Arlington PRMP Plan E-17 E-18 Arlington PRMP Plan Arlington PRMP Plan E-19 E-20 Arlington PRMP Plan Arlington PRMP Plan E-21 E-22 Arlington PRMP Plan Arlington PRMP Plan E-23 E-24 Arlington PRMP Plan Arlington PRMP Plan F-1 Appendix F: Finances An analysis was accomplished of recent financial trends in Arlington and the impact federal and state program mandates, revenue sharing, and the city's urbanization have on the discretionary monies available for park, recreation, and open space. The analysis also reviewed trends in Arlington revenues and the affect alternative revenue sources may have on financial prospects. Revenue and expenditure trends - general government Arlington’s annual general governmental expenditures are derived from the combination of general, special revenue, debt service, and enterprise funds. General fund The General Fund is derived from property and sales taxes, licenses and permits, intergovernmental revenues including state and federal grants, service charges and fees, fines and forfeitures, and other miscellaneous revenues. General funds are used to finance most government operations including staff, equipment, capital facility, and other requirements.  Property tax - under Washington State’s constitution cities may levy a property tax rate not to exceed $3.60 per $1000 of the assessed value of all taxable property within incorporation limits. The total of all property taxes for all taxing authorities, however, cannot exceed 1.0% of assessed valuation, or $10.00 per $1,000 of value. If the taxes of all districts exceed 1.0% or $10.00 amount, each is proportionately reduced until the total is at or below the 1.0% limit. In 2001, Washington State law was amended by Proposition 747, a statutory provision limiting the growth of regular property taxes to 1.0% per year, after adjustments for new construction. Any proposed increases over this amount are subject to a referendum vote. The statute was intended to control local governmental spending by controlling the annual rate of growth of property taxes. In practice, however, the statute can reduce the effective property tax yield to an annual level far below a city's levy authorization, particularly when property values are increasing rapidly. Property tax rates Year Assessed value Levy rate Levied property taxes 2019 $2,779,067,708 1.526 $4,242,206 Source: 2019 Financial Statement In 2019, for example, Arlington’s effective regular property tax rate had declined to $1.526 per $1,000 of assessed value because of the 1% lid limit on annual revenue or about 42% of what the city is authorized to assess.  Sales tax - is the city's largest single revenue source and may be used for any legitimate city purpose. However, the city has no direct control over the taxing policy of this source of revenue. The sales tax is collected and distributed by the state and may fluctuate with general economic and local business conditions.  Utility and other taxes – are collected from the charges assessed on all city utilities including electric, telephone, garbage, telecommunications cable, natural gas, gambling, vehicle fees, admissions, leasehold excise, and other taxes. The utility taxes are collected by the city and may fluctuate depending on what infrastructure upgrades each utility is paying to update utility systems and operations.  Licenses and permits – includes revenues generated from business and occupational licenses and taxes, operating, and building permits. Generally, these fees are used to pay for the inspections, processing, and other charges necessary to perform supporting services.  Intergovernmental revenue – includes state and federal grants or pass-through revenues, usually earmarked for specific programs, as well as funds from Arlington to finance improvements the city wishes to accomplish. F-2 Arlington PRMP Plan Intergovernmental revenue can be significant, depending on the program, Arlington competitiveness, and the extent to which the program is adequately funded at the state and federal levels. To date, however, Arlington has not received any significant federal or state grant for recreation, park, or open space acquisition or development. Given present economic conditions, Arlington should not depend on grants as a viable or major source of financing for facility acquisition and development over the short term.  Charges for services – includes revenue generated to pay for garbage, landfill, utility, and other operating services provided by the city or a city concession or licensee including the following recreation and swimming pool programs.  Fines and forfeits – include monies generated from business fines, code violations, traffic fines, property forfeitures, and other penalties. General Fund Revenue Sources 2022 Taxes $ 14,439,914 77.1% Licenses and permits 303,552 1.6% Total revenue $ 18,732,662 100.0% Source: 2022 Budget – does not include beginning fund balance General Fund Expenditures 2019 General government $ 3,108,079 20.9% Public safety 9,706,250 65.2% Utilities 13,727 0.1% Transportation 0 0.0% Natural and economic environment 1,992,795 13.4% Total $ 14,894,497 100.0% Source: 2019 Financial Statement Special revenues Special revenues are derived from state and local option taxes dedicated to specific expenditure purposes, such as the motor vehicle tax, motor excise tax, real estate excise tax, motel and hotel tax, public art, criminal justice, paths and trails, convention center, and the like. Some special revenues may be used to finance limited capital facilities, such as roads or parks, where the local option allows – such as the local real estate excise tax (REET) and/or under special circumstances Motel/Hotel or Tourism Taxes or Stormwater Utility Taxes where a project or program can be expensed as a direct extension or beneficiary of these accounts. Debt service funds Debt service funds are derived from a dedicated portion of the property tax or general fund proceeds to repay the sale of general obligation (voted) and Councilmanic (non-voted) bonds. Both types of bonds may be used to finance park facility improvements – but not maintenance or operational costs.  Councilmanic (limited or non-voted) bonds - may be issued without voter approval by the Council for any facility development purpose. The total amount of all outstanding non-voted general obligation debt may not exceed 1.5% of the assessed valuation of all city property. Limited general obligation bonds must be paid from general governmental revenues. Therefore, debt service on these bonds may reduce the amount of revenue available for current operating expenditures and the financial flexibility the Council may need to fund annual budget priorities. For this reason, Councilmanic bonds are usually only used for the most pressing capital improvement issues. Arlington PRMP Plan F-3 Total debt capacity Arlington debt capacity – 31 December 2019 2019 assessed valuation = $2,779,067,708 Debt type Limit* Amount Councilmanic bond 1.5% $ 41,686,015 Total allowable 8.5% 236,220,755 Total available * Percent of the total estimated assessed valuation. ** Includes installment contracts and debt service funds. General Obligation (GO), Utility, and Park/Open Space Bonds require 60% voter validation where voter turnout equals at least 40% of the total votes cast in the last general election.  Unlimited general obligation (GO) bonds - must be approved by at least 60% of resident voters during an election that has a turnout of at least 40% of those who voted in the last state general election. The bond may be repaid from a special levy, which is not governed by the 1.0% statutory limitation on the property tax growth rate. Total indebtedness as a percent of the assessed valuation that may be incurred by limited and unlimited general obligation bonds together, however, may not exceed: 2.5% - if indebtedness exceeds 1.5% is for general purposes, 5.0% - if indebtedness exceeds 2.5% is for utilities, and 7.5% - if indebtedness exceeds 5.0% is for parks and open space development. Monies authorized by limited and unlimited types of bonds must be spent within 3 years of authorization to avoid arbitrage requirements unless invested at less than bond yield. In addition, bonds may be used to construct but not maintain or operate facilities. Facility maintenance and operation costs must be paid from general governmental revenue or by voter authorization of special annual or biannual operating levies or by user fees or charges. Enterprise funds Enterprise funds are derived from the user fees and charges levied for utility operations including water and sewer, storm drainage, regional water, solid waste, and cemetery. The enterprise revenues are used to pay operating costs, retire capital facility debt, and plan future replacement and expansion projects. Enterprise funds may be created for a park or recreation activity that has a revenue source sufficient to finance all costs. Capital improvements funding implications Generally, the city has not appropriated very much of the annual budget for capital improvements. The city has building and infrastructure construction requirements but given the declining buying power of annual city budgets, not had the capital resources available to initiate major construction projects from the general funds or non-dedicated funds accounts. The 1% statutory limit on local property tax yields combined with the sporadic and undependable nature of federal and state grants and revenue sharing prevents or discourages the city from making long-term capital investments in infrastructure necessary to support the city’s development. The 1% statutory limit on the general fund levy, severely curtails the city's ability to operate and maintain park, recreation, and open space facilities and services even if the city only utilized unlimited general obligation bonds as a means of providing capital financing. Revenue Prospects - general government Arlington could use the following options to deal with future capital needs: User fees and charges Arlington may elect to use an increasing array of special user fees, charges, and special assessments to pay facility operating and maintenance capital requirements. The user fee approach may be difficult to impose on facilities that don't have readily identifiable or chargeable users - like some passive park or trail systems. The approach may be very responsive, however, for facilities and services that have an identifiable user group receiving a direct proportional benefit for the charge – like aquatic facilities. F-4 Arlington PRMP Plan Special legislation Local government representatives can seek state enabling legislation authorizing new or special revenue sources. Senate Bill 5972 (RCW 82.46) is an example of one possible legislative solution. The 1982 bill gave city governments the option of adding an additional 0.0025% increment to the real estate excise tax (REET) for the sole purpose of financing local capital improvement projects including parks, utilities, and other infrastructure except governmental buildings. Like bonds, Senate Bill 5972 funds may not be used to finance operation and maintenance requirements. Unlimited general obligation bonds Arlington may come to depend on voter referendums as a means of financing a larger portion of the capital improvement program, since unlimited obligation bonds are not paid from the property tax subject to the 1.0% limitation. Voter approved capital improvements may be more representative of actual resident priorities than some other methods of validating capital expenditures, and will at the least, ensure referendum submittals provide widespread benefits. However, bond revenue cannot be spent for maintenance and operational issues – and bond referendums must be approved by a margin over 60% of the registered voters who participated in the last election. General levy rate referendums Proposition 747, the statutory provision limiting the growth of regular property taxes to 1.0% per year, can be waived by referendum approval of a simple (50%) majority of Arlington’s registered voters. Voters can be asked to approve a resetting of the property tax levy rate that would adjust the amount of revenue the city can generate. The new total revenue that can be generated by a resetting of the rate would be subject to the same 1.0% limitation, however, and the total amount of revenue and the resulting property tax rate would start to decline again in accordance with the Proposition. However, the adjusted rate and revenue could finance specific capital improvement projects – or programs that involve construction, maintenance, and operations aspects that a majority of the voters are willing to pay for under the adjusted rate. The resetting of the rate can be permanent, subject to the provisions of Proposition 747. Or temporary, where the rate is adjusted until a specific amount of revenue has been generated to finance a project or program – whereupon the rate reverts to the original or a specified amount defined in the referendum. Expenditures – PRMP functions Parks, recreation, and open space property development and programming services are provided by the Community Engagement Director while the Public Works Department provides maintenance. General Fund PRMP Expenditures 2022 PRMP Percent Athletic field maintenance 15,444 34.9% Park benches 500 1.1% Total $ 44,194 100.0% Source: 2022 Budget The 2022 budget provides $44,194 for miscellaneous PRMP expenditures not including staff of which holiday/community events (38.5%), athletic field maintenance (22.6%), and park amenities (22.6%) were the major items. Ideally, Arlington should recover as much of its PRMP planning and operational costs as possible to avoid using General Fund property taxes or other city discretionary monies or Arlington will not have sufficient funds left with which to fund critical annual and cyclical maintenance, repair, and replacement of existing facilities, and acquisition and development of new parks lands and facilities required to offset population growth and raise level of service standards. Arlington PRMP Plan F-5 Project expenditures as of 31 December 2019 Jensen Farm Waterline Repair $ 294,863 Haller Park Splash Pad 831,224 Terrace Park Renovation 82,602 Total $ 1,208,689 Source: 2019 Financial Statement Note: Does not include refinancing of $3,200,000 for purchase of Country Charm Park (Graafstra property). As of 31 December 2019, the city spent $1,208,689 on park projects for the Jensen Farm, Haller Park Splash Pad, and Terrace Park Renovations mostly from General Funds. Ideally, Arlington should be able to leverage grants, donations, and other sources to finance projects other than relying on General Funds accounts. Revenues – PRMP functions Parks, recreation, and open space revenues may be provided by a combination of allocations from the General Fund and well as special revenue sources including the Path & Trails, Real Estate Excise Tax (REET), Parks Impact Fees, and grants. Possible PRMP revenue sources 2022 Public Art Fund $ 123,500 Lodging Tax Fund 111,000 Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) 1 503,000 Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) 2 508,000 Capital Facilities/Building Fund 55,000 Park Improvement 12,480 Total $ 1,335,480 Source: 2022 Operating Budgets Note: Public Art and Lodging Tax Funds may be used for projects and programs other than at park sites and facilities. Note: REET 1 may be used for PRMP but is primarily defined to support roads and other infrastructure, while REET 2 is defined to be primarily PRMP functions. Funding implications Arlington has acquired a quality park, recreation, and open space inventory using land donations, grants, project development mitigation, impact fees, and a healthy allocation of property and sales tax derived general funds. However, these sources will not continue to yield enough money with which to initiate major facility development and/or with which to accomplish major cyclical maintenance requirements. In addition, considering the 1.0% statutory limit on local property tax yield's effect on discretionary funding in general, the city can no longer depend entirely on traditional revenue sources as a means of funding capital improvement projects. Arlington must devise new financial strategies for the development and maintenance of facilities if it is to meet the park, recreation, and open space interests of city residents. Revenue Prospects – PRMP public sources The following options could be used to deal with future Arlington PRMP capital needs: Washington State grants Washington State, through the Resource Conservation Office (RCO - formerly the Interagency for Outdoor Recreation (IAC)) funds and administers several programs for parks and recreation, and non- motorized transportation and trails purposes using special state revenue programs.  Endangered Species Act (ESA) - a Department of Ecology administered water quality program provides grants for up to 75% of the cost of water quality/fish enhancement studies. Referendum 39 monies can be applied to park and open space developments that propose to restore, construct, or otherwise enhance fish producing streams, ponds, or other water bodies. F-6 Arlington PRMP Plan  Washington Wildlife Recreation Program (WWRP) – provides funds for the acquisition and development of conservation and recreation lands. The Habitat Conservation Account of the WWRP program provides funds to acquire critical habitat, natural areas, and urban wildlife categories. The Outdoor Recreation Account of the WWRP program provides funds for local parks, state parks, trails, and water access categories.  Capital Projects Fund for Washington Heritage – initiated on a trial basis in 1999, and since renewed, provides funds for the restoration and renovation projects for historical sites and buildings by local governments and nonprofit agencies. The Heritage Resource Center (HRC) administers the program.  Boating Facilities Program – approved in 1964 under the state Marine Recreation Land Act, the program earmarks motor vehicle fuel taxes paid by watercraft for boating-related lands and facilities. Program funds may be used for fresh or saltwater launch ramps, transient moorage, and upland support facilities.  Aquatic Lands Enhancement Act (ALEA) - initiated on a trial basis in 1985, and since renewed and expanded, uses revenues obtained by the Washington Department of Natural Resources from the lease of state-owned tidal lands. The ALEA program is administered by the RCO for the development of shoreline related trail improvements and may be applied for up to 50% of the proposal.  Washington State Public Works Commission - initiated a program that may be used for watercraft sanitary pump-out facilities.  Youth Athletic Facilities (YAF) – provides grants to cities, counties, and qualified nonprofit organizations for the improvement and maintenance of existing, and the development of new athletic facilities. The Community Outdoor Athletic Fields Advisory Council (COAFAC) of the RCO administers the program.  Non-Highway & Off-Road Vehicle Activities Program (NOVA) – provides funding to develop and manage recreation opportunities for users of off-road vehicles and non-highway roads. An allocation (1%) from the state Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax (MVFT) and off-road vehicle (ORV) permit fees fund the program. NOVA funds may be used for the planning, acquisition, development, maintenance, and operation of off-road vehicle and non-highway road recreation opportunities.  Firearms and Archery Range Recreation Program (FARR) – provides funds to acquire, develop, and renovate public and private nonprofit firearm and archery training, practice, and recreation facilities. The program is funded from a portion of the fees charged for concealed weapons permits. Federal grants Federal monies are available for the construction of outdoor park facilities from the National Park Service (NPS) Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF). The Washington State Resource Conservation Office (RCO) administers the grants.  NPS (National Park Service) grants - usually do not exceed $150,000 per project and must be matched on an equal basis by the local jurisdiction. The RCO assigns each project application a priority on a competitive statewide basis according to each jurisdiction's need, population benefit, natural resource enhancements and a number of other factors. In the past few years, project awards have been extremely competitive as the federal government significantly reduced the amount of federal monies available to the NPS program. The state increased contributions to the program over the last few years using a variety of special funds, but the overall program could be severely affected by pending federal deficit cutting legislation. Applicants must submit a detailed comprehensive park, recreation, and open space plan to be eligible for NPS funding. The jurisdiction's plan must demonstrate facility need and prove that the jurisdiction's project proposal will adequately satisfy local parks, recreation, and open space needs and interests. Due to diminished funding, however, RCO grants have not been a significant source of project monies for city or other local jurisdictions in recent years.  TEA21 (Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century - can be used to finance on and off-road non-motorized trail enhancements along major and minor arterial collector roads or sometimes, within separate trail corridors. The program was adopted in 1993 and is administered by the Regional Arlington PRMP Plan F-7 Transportation Organization on behalf of the US Department of Transportation. Applicants must demonstrate the proposed trail improvements will increase access to non-motorized recreational and commuter transportation alternatives.  National Recreational Trails Program (NRTP) – is the successor to the National Recreational Trails Act (NRFTA). Funds may be used to rehabilitate and maintain recreational trails that provide a backcountry experience. In some cases, the funds may be used to create new “linking” trails, trail relocations, and educational programs.  Boating Infrastructure Grant Program (BIG) – supports development and renovation of areas for non-trailer-able recreational boats over 26 feet, and related support elements on US navigable waters. Funds may be used to produce and distribute information and educational materials. The federal program compliments the state-funded Boating Facilities Program (BFP) administered for smaller vessels. Environmental impact mitigation – subdivision regulations Arlington subdivision policies can require developers of subdivisions in the city to provide suitably designed and located open spaces, woodland preserves, trail systems, tot lots, playgrounds, and other park or recreational facilities. Such facilities may include major components of the park or recreational system that may be affected by the project's location or development. Arlington may also consider requiring developers to provide acceptable long-term methods of managing and financing maintenance requirements. Attractive management systems could include:  Ownership by a private organization - like a tennis, swimming or golf club, who assumes responsibility for all maintenance responsibilities and costs,  Ownership by a homeowners or common property owners’ association (HOA) - who may contract maintenance responsibilities and assess property owner's annual costs, or  Dedication of property - to Arlington or the Arlington School District who assumes maintenance responsibilities using local city or school funds. Arlington should not accept title and maintenance responsibility unless the land or facility will be a legitimate park or recreation or open space element that may be supported using public financing. Arlington may be contracted by any of the other agencies to provide or oversee a maintenance contract on the owner's behalf provided all Arlington costs are reimbursed by an approved method of local financing. Growth impact fees Arlington adopted a park growth impact fee in accordance with the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA). A park impact fee applies to all proposed residential and industrial developments in the city as a means of maintaining existing park, recreation, and open space levels-of-service (ELOS). The ordinance estimates the impact each residential development project has on park, recreation, and open space facilities within the project's local service zone and makes provisions for setting aside the resources, including lands or monies, necessary to offset the project's local or neighborhood and community or regional facility impacts. The Arlington-Marysville MIC Subarea Plan estimates the impact of each industrial development project has on trail and open space facilities within the project’s local service zone and makes provisions for improvements that are necessary to offset the project’s local or neighborhood and community or regional facility impacts. The dollar value of the project's park, recreation, and open space impact can be offset by the project developer of an amount equal to the combined facility acquisition and development costs that Arlington would incur to maintain the same existing level-of-service (ELOS). A developer may be allowed to choose any combination of land or cash mitigation measures including credit for any park or recreation facilities to be included within the project development. The Arlington ordinance considers the following when determining the F-8 Arlington PRMP Plan types of mitigation measures or development credits to be made available to the developer:  Will the facility - be available to the public,  Have a designated owner - responsible for continuing operation and maintenance (the owner may be a common property owner's association, school district or other agency), and  Correspond to and not exceed or vary from - the types of park, recreation, and open space facilities that are being impacted (a developer could provide but should not able to take full credit value for facilities for which there is no shortage, impact or local interest). Land contributions can be accepted in lieu of monies if the lands will be suitable sites for future facilities. Land and monies accumulated under the proposed ordinance must be invested within a reasonable time of impact assessment or be returned to the contributing developer. Arlington conducts periodic program reviews with residents, user groups, school district, and other agencies to decide the most efficient and representative way of delivering the facilities mitigated by the ordinance. Alternative delivery methods include:  Acquisition of suitable sites - in conjunction with other public or school facilities including title transfer if other public or school agencies enter into special agreements assuming development, operation, and maintenance responsibilities and costs,  Development of facilities - on other public or school sites if other public or school agencies enter into agreements assuming future operation and maintenance responsibilities and costs, or  Any other alternative - including development, operation or maintenance proposals by user groups or private concessionaires or developers that provide a viable facility in accordance with the park, recreation, and open space strategies outlined. Facility user fees and charges Arlington could charge an array of special user fees, charges, and special assessments to pay facility operating and maintenance capital requirements. Proposals to recover recreation program costs could be augmented with additional or higher user fees on picnic shelters, athletic courts and fields, meeting rooms, and other facilities. Arlington could also increase the number of activities subject to user fees and charges and use the proceeds to purchase land, develop, operate, and maintain facilities where all costs are reimbursed by the revenue obtained. Essentially, Arlington would become a facility developer/operator providing whatever facilities or services the market will support from user revenue. User fees have and could be used to provide facilities for park and recreation activities whose profit margins are too low to sustain commercial operations or whose benefiting user group may extend beyond city boundaries. Possible user fee financed facilities could continue to include recreational vehicle parks and tent campgrounds, and any other facility where demand is sizable enough to warrant a user fee financing approach. In essence, the market determines which facility's revenues equal costs, and thereby, which programs Arlington would provide on a direct costs/benefit basis. While important, this source of finance will likely never pay full costs for all programs, or any operation, maintenance, or development costs. Some programs designed for youth and family activities may never generate fees large enough to finance full costs and will require Arlington to determine to what extent the public benefits merit the subsidized fee revenues. The user fee approach may also be difficult to impose on facilities that don't have readily identifiable or chargeable users - like some passive park or trail systems. The approach may be very responsive, however, for facilities and services that have an identifiable user group receiving a direct proportional benefit for the charge. Special legislation – Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) Local government representatives can seek state enabling legislation authorizing new or special revenue sources. Senate Bill 5972 (RCW 82.46) is an example of one possible legislative solution. RCW 82.46 authorizes local governments to enact up to 0.25% of the annual sales for real estate for capital facilities. The Growth Management Act authorizes another or 2nd 0.25% for capital Arlington PRMP Plan F-9 facilities. Revenues must be used solely for financing new capital facilities, or maintenance and operations at existing facilities, as specified in the capital facilities plan. An additional option 3rd REET is available under RCW 82.46.070 for the acquisition and maintenance of conservation areas if approved by a majority of voters of a county. The first and second REET may be used for the following capital facilities:  The planning, acquisition, construction, reconstruction, repair, replacement, rehabilitation, or improvement of streets, roads, highways, sidewalks, street and road lighting systems, traffic signals, bridges, domestic water systems, and storm and sanitary sewer systems, or  The planning, construction, repair, rehabilitation, or improvement of parks and recreational facilities. In addition, the second REET may be used for the following:  The acquisition of parks and recreational facilities, or  The planning, acquisition, construction, repair, replacement, rehabilitation, or improvement of law enforcement facilities, and the protection of facilities, trails, libraries, administrative and judicial facilities, and river and/or floodway/flood control projects and housing projects subject to certain limitations. Like bonds, REET funds may not be used to finance operation and maintenance requirements. Unlimited general obligation (GO) bonds Arlington may use voter referendums as a means of financing a larger portion of the capital improvement program, since unlimited obligation bonds are not paid from the property tax subject to the 1.0% limitation. Voter approved capital improvements may be more representative of actual resident priorities than some other methods of validating capital expenditures, and will at the least, ensure referendum submittals provide widespread benefits. However, bond revenue cannot be spent for maintenance and operational issues – and bond referendums must be approved by a margin over 60% of at least a turnout of 40% of the registered voters who participated in the last election. General levy lid lift referendums Proposition 747, the statutory provision limiting the growth of regular property taxes to 1.0% per year, can be waived by referendum approval of a simple (50%) majority of Arlington’s registered voters. Voters can be asked to approve a resetting of the property tax levy rate or of approving a special purpose limited duration (typically 6-9 years) dedicated property tax levy that would adjust the amount of revenue Arlington can generate. The new total revenue that can be generated by a resetting of the rate or of approving a special dedicated and limited duration levy would be subject to the same 1.0% limitation, however, and the total amount of revenue and the resulting property tax rate would start to decline again in accordance with the Proposition. However, the adjusted rate and revenue could finance specific capital improvement projects – or programs that involve construction, maintenance, and operations aspects that a majority of voters are willing to pay for under the adjusted rate or a specially approved levy. The resetting of the rate can be permanent, subject to the provisions of Proposition 747, or temporary, where the rate is adjusted until a specific amount of revenue has been generated to finance a project or program – whereupon the rate reverts to the original or a specified amount defined in the referendum. Metropolitan Park district (MPD) (SB 2557) In 2002, the state legislature authorized the establishment of metropolitan park districts (MPD) as special units of government that may be independent of any involvement with a city, county, or any other local public agency or jurisdiction. Metropolitan Park districts may provide recreational facilities that are specific to the district’s boundaries in return for the district residents’ agreement to pay the special development, operation, and maintenance costs utilizing special financing devices. Metropolitan Park districts must be initiated by local government resolution or citizen petition following hearings on feasibility and F-10 Arlington PRMP Plan costs studies of the proposed district’s facility development or operation costs. The proposal must ultimately be submitted for voter approval (50%) including all provisions relating to any special financing agreements. The voters must initially approve the formation of the district, and may designate existing elected officials, or a body appointed by existing elected officials or elect district commissioners or officers solely responsible for park and recreation policy. Voters must also approve the establishment of a continuous levy as a junior taxing district – compared with 3-year levies under a recreation service district to provide maintenance, repair, operating costs, and facility acquisition and development projects. Metropolitan Park districts can be flexible and used to provide local or citywide recreational facilities in the same variety of custom service choices with the exception that the financing levy may be as a junior taxing district with a continuous levy. The Tacoma Metropolitan Park District was established in 1909 and is the largest and oldest recreation park district in the State of Washington. Seattle was the most recent and authorized the City Council to perform as the Metropolitan Park District Commissioners. Revenue Prospects – PRMP private Special use agreements Special property agreements can often be used instead of property purchases to secure public use rights for land or property at no cost or a nominal fee, particularly where the possible public use is of benefit to the private landowner. Some forms of special use agreements can provide favorable tax benefits if the use agreement can be shown to have an assigned value. Arlington could expand the use agreement concept to include complete development, operation, or maintenance responsibilities. Package lease agreements will usually provide more effectively maintained facilities than possible where Arlington must staff specialized, small work crews. Sometimes package lease agreements covering use and maintenance aspects may be the only way of resolving an equitable agreement with the private ownership. This may include trails on utility corridors where the ownership may prefer to control development and maintenance activities, and Arlington may prefer to avoid any implied responsibility or liability for the utility worthiness that Arlington's maintenance of a trail system could imply. Public/private service contracts Private market skills and capital may be employed in a variety of ways including the use of public/private services contracts where a private party can be contracted to operate and maintain a facility for a fixed fee cost. Service contracts can be very efficient where the activities are small, scattered in location, seasonal, expert, or experimental. Service contracts are also relatively easy to initiate or terminate if area demand fails to provide sufficient use or revenue to justify continued operation. Service contracts may be very flexible and can include agreements with the county, school district or local user groups who can or would be interested in sustaining the activity on a subsidized or sweat-equity basis in exchange for the facility. Public/private concessions Arlington could lease a portion of a site or facility to a private party in exchange for a fixed fee or a percentage of gross receipts. The private operator assumes operation and maintenance responsibilities and costs in exchange for a profit. For certain types of facilities, such as enterprise fund account facilities like a golf course, campground, marina, indoor tennis courts, or community center Arlington's portion of the profits may be used to pay facility development and/or operation and maintenance costs at the same or for similar facility developments. Arlington may save considerable monies on concessions where the activities are specialized, seasonal, experimental, or unproven. Concessions can be easily initiated, provide direct user benefit/cost reimbursements, and relieve Arlington of a capital risk should market or user interest fail to materialize to at least break-even levels. Arlington PRMP Plan F-11 Concessionaires could operate a wide variety of park and recreational facilities including boating and bicycle rentals, special group and recreational vehicle campgrounds, athletic field and court facilities, and swimming pools and beaches, among others. Public/private joint development ventures Arlington can enter into an agreement with a private or public developer to jointly own or lease land for an extended period. The purpose of the venture would be to allow the development, operation, and maintenance of a major recreational facility or activity in exchange for a fixed lease cost or a percentage of gross receipts. The developer assumes development, operation, and maintenance responsibilities, costs, and all market risks in exchange for a market opportunity providing a profitable return not otherwise available. Arlington realizes the development of a facility not realized otherwise in exchange for a low minimum capital return and no or very little capital risk. Joint development agreements represent an ultimate benefit/cost resolution that may also provide public revenue that Arlington could use for other development opportunities. Examples include the possible joint development on Arlington lands of recreational vehicle campgrounds, seminar retreats, special resorts, swimming pools and water parks, golf courses, and gun and archery ranges, among others. Self-help land leases There are instances where an activity is so specialized in appeal or of a service area so broad in scope that it cannot be equitably financed using public funds. Specialized user groups should be provided with options for developing or maintaining facilities in ways that account for equitable public cost reimbursements. Examples include the use of land leases where Arlington may lease land at low or no cost where a user group or club assumes responsibility for the development, operation, and maintenance of the facility. The club could provide volunteer help or use club finances to develop, operate and maintain the facility as a means of meeting user benefit/cost objectives. Land lease agreements could accommodate organized athletics like soccer, baseball, football, softball, and rugby; or very specialized facilities like shooting ranges, archery fields, OHV trails, and ultra- light aircraft parks, among others. Self-help contract agreements Arlington can purchase land, develop, operate, and maintain a specialized facility under a negotiated contract agreement where a special interest group agrees to defray all costs in addition to or in lieu of a user fee as a means of meeting user benefit/cost objectives. The agreements can be quite flexible and could contract the city, school district, the user group, another public agency or a private operator to be developer/operator. Contract agreements could accommodate a range of more expensive special purpose facility developments including high quality athletic competition facilities for league organizations; and specialized facility developments like shooting ranges and OHV trail systems, or historical or children’s museums, or railroad train excursions when and where the user organization can provide financial commitments. PRMP funding strategies Using the strategies described above, PRMP funding sources should generally be matched to specific needs to avoid duplication and take advantage of each fund's specific possibilities. For example: Program services Fees and charges should be used to finance program services to the maximum extent possible and practical to provide cost/benefit equities and efficiencies. Property tax levy funds should be used to cover shortages where fees cannot be readily collected, as in most special events, or where fees may not be easily raised to cover all operating costs for programs Arlington deems to have special social benefits to the public. Facility operation, maintenance, and minor construction Property tax levy funds should be used to pay operation and maintenance costs for facilities and activities that cannot be financed with fees and charges or financed with other funding methods. Property tax levy funds are flexible and can be adjusted to meet annual programming variations or priorities. F-12 Arlington PRMP Plan Where appropriate, maintenance and operation funds for facilities that are impacted by urban growth should be reimbursed or provided by Arlington and the Arlington School District subject to the pending resolution of an inter-local agreement on planning and services. The funds collected from the excise tax on real estate sales (REET) should be used to finance minor construction improvements to existing properties. The money should also be used to help purchase sites when opportunities arise that cannot await other, less flexible funding methods. Like property tax levy funds, the monies collected from REET are flexible and can be adjusted to meet annual programming needs or sudden changes in priorities or opportunities. Recreational facility development Recreational facilities and athletic fields are important to Arlington's programs but satisfy relatively small proportions of the population compared with parks and trails. Bonds, levies, and other fixed forms of financing should be used to pay for the development of parks, trails, and other facilities that residents assign as high priorities. Recreational facilities with low to moderate priorities should be financed with property tax levy funds, REET, and other more flexible sources of financing. Arlington should investigate the possibility of implementing a wide range of joint recreational facility developments with the Arlington School District. Such ventures could finance acquisition and development costs using open space and school facility development bonds, or conservation futures and REET - and Arlington could finance operating and maintenance using service charges and property tax levy funds. Joint venture agreements could better match costs/benefits with users, avoid duplication, save cost, increase service, and allow each agency to make the best use of funds. Parks, natural areas and trail development Parks and trails benefit the largest percentage of the population and will probably be easier to obtain voted bond or property tax levy issues for than other more specialized uses. General obligation bond or special property tax levy packages could finance the high priority conservancies and trail acquisition and development proposals contained within the development plan chapter of this document. When necessary and appropriate, Councilmanic bonds could be used to purchase sites when opportunities require fast action, or to match possible Washington State RCO state or federal grants for park and trail developments. Special developments Some proposed projects represent unique facilities that may not be easily financed with conventional funding methods. Arlington should explore the opportunities that may be available for the development and funding of joint public/private facilities with private property owners or developers. Joint ventures could save costs, reduce program requirements, and provide city residents with services and facilities not available otherwise. Growth impact fee mitigation Continued residential development within Arlington's service area will severely stress existing Arlington facilities and services. Consequently, Arlington should institute growth impact fee mitigation measures in accordance with the Washington Growth Management Act to preserve unique sites and require land developers to help finance facility developments offsetting project impacts. Financial strategies 2022-2028 An Arlington financial strategy for the next 6-year period (2022- 2028) must generate sufficient revenue to provide recreational program services, maintain and renovate facilities, and implement priority projects chosen from the 20-year (CFP) capital facility program. Three alternative financial strategies illustrate the choices available Arlington under an integrated funding strategy. The strategies combine possible scenarios concerning general funds from property taxes, recreation program cost recovery, residential and industrial Arlington PRMP Plan F-13 growth impact fees, REET, and approval of a property tax levy lid lift. The forecasts are conservative, based on the average trends indicated in capital facility program fund expenditures by Arlington during the 2022-2028 budgeted year but are adjusted to account for expected inflationary increases in the tax and revenue base valuations over the 6-year period. All alternatives would finance $20,047,512 in combined park administration, recreation programs, maintenance, deferred repairs and replacements, and proposed level-of-service (PLOS) facility improvements over the 6-year period with: Proposed 6-yr expenditures Administration $ 680,191 Recreation and public arts 241,468 Parks maintenance 459,129 Repair & replacement (R&R) 4,347,634 PLOS additions/enhancements (17% of total) 8,114,151 Total $ 13,842,573 Alternative 1 proposed 6-year revenues General Fund allocation $ 4,978,051 REET 1&2 (0%) 0 Property tax levy 853,607 Total $ 13,842,573 Annual cost for tax levy Per median $323,200 value $ 2.38  Alternative 1 would generate revenues as follows:  General Funds property tax – if the annual revenue per year because of proposition 747 or the 1% tax limitation would remain relatively constant,  Recreation program cost recovery – would recover an average 50% of all program costs,  Residential park impact fee – would capture 40% of $3,813 cost per person of maintaining Arlington’s existing level-of-service (ELOS) standards through additional population increases,  Industrial park impact fee – would capture 40% of $4,187 cost per non-resident CIC employee of maintaining Arlington’s existing level-of-service (ELOS) standards through additional employment increases,  Arlington Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) – which captures REET 1 and 2 of $0.00125 per $1.00 of sales value for each REET would be utilized 0% for park and recreation purposes,  Supplemental special purpose (limited duration) or property tax levy lid lift – would be sought to finance remaining costs necessary to realize Arlington’s portion of the combined proposed level-of-service (PLOS) standard equal to an annual property tax levy assessment of $2.38 per year for 6 years for a median house value of $323,200. F-14 Arlington PRMP Plan Alternative 2 proposed 6-year revenues General Fund allocation $ 4,978,051 REET 1&2 (0%) 0 Property tax levy (131,051) Total $ 13,842,573 Annual cost for tax levy Per median $323,200 value $ (0.37) Alternative 2 would retain recreation cost recovery at 50%, increase the residential and industrial growth impact fees to 45%, allocate 0% of REET 1&2 over the 6-year period to reduce the balance remaining to $131,051 meaning the other options would generate more money than necessary to fund the proposed level of service (PLOS) without a levy requirement. Alternative 3 proposed 6-year revenues General Fund allocation $ 4,978,051 Rentals 12,924 Recreation cost recovery (50%) 120,734 Residential Growth Impact Fee (50%) 7,884,544 Total $ 13,842,573 Annual cost for tax levy Alternative 3 would retain recreation cost recovery at 50%, increase the residential and industrial growth impact fees to 50%, allocate 0% of REET 1&2 over the 6-year period to reduce the balance remaining to $1,115,708 meaning the other options would generate more money than necessary to fund the proposed level of service (PLOS) without a levy requirement. Financial strategies 2022-2042 An Arlington financial strategy for the next 20-year period (2022- 2042) must generate sufficient revenue to provide administration, recreation programs, park maintenance, renovate facilities, and implement priority projects chosen from the 20-year (CFP) capital facility program. The same 3 alternative financial strategies defined under the 6-year, or 2022-2028 strategy illustrate the choices available Arlington under an integrated funding strategy. The 20-year strategies combine the same possible scenarios concerning recreation program cost recovery, residential and industrial growth impact fees, REET, and approval of a property tax levy lid lift. Total expenditures for the 20-year or 2022-2042 time periods would be $97,456,426 of the proposed level-of-service (PLOS). All alternatives would finance $97,456,426 in combined park administration, recreation programs, park maintenance, park deferred repairs and replacements, and Arlington’s share of proposed composite level-of-service (PLOS) facility improvements over the 20-year period with: Proposed 20-yr expenditures PLOS additions/enhancements 69,609,003 Total $ 97,456,426 Alternative 1 proposed 20-year revenues General Fund allocation $ 79,533,440 Recreation cost recovery (50%) 586,921 Residential park impact fee (40%) 21,025,452 Total $ 97,456,426 Annual cost for tax levy Arlington PRMP Plan F-15 Alternative 1 would generate revenues as follows:  General Funds property tax – if the annual revenue per year as a result of proposition 747 or the 1% tax limitation would remain relatively constant,  Recreation program cost recovery – would retain an average 50% of all programs costs,  Residential park impact fee – would capture 40% of $3,813 cost per person of maintaining Arlington’s existing level-of-service (ELOS) standards through additional population increases,  Industrial park impact fee – would capture 40% of $4,187 cost per non-resident CIC employee of maintaining Arlington’s existing level-of-service (ELOS) standards through additional employment increases,  Arlington Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) – which captures REET 1 and 2 of $0.00125 per $1.00 of sales value for each REET would continue to be utilized 0% for park and recreation purposes,  Supplemental special purpose (limited duration) or property tax levy lid lift – would not have to be sought to finance remaining costs necessary to realize Arlington’s portion of the combined proposed level-of-service (PLOS) standard since the other options would generate $8,920,541 more than necessary to meet the proposed level of service (PLOS) requirement. Alternative 2 proposed 20-year revenues General Fund allocation $ 79,533,440 Recreation cost recovery (50%) 586,921 Residential park impact fee (45%) 23,653,633 Industrial park impact fee (45%) 5,885,048 REET 1&2 allocation (0%) 0 Property tax levy (12,202,616) Total $ 97,456,426 Annual cost for tax levy Per median $323,200 value $ (2.18) Alternative 2 would retain recreation cost recovery at 50%, increase the residential and industrial growth impact fees to 45%, allocate 0% of REET 1&2 over the 6-year period to generate a surplus of $12,202,616 more than necessary to finance the proposed level-of- service (PLOS) requirement. Alternative 3 proposed 20-year revenues General Fund allocation $ 79,533,440 Property tax levy (15,484,692) Total $ 97,456,426 Per median $323,200 value $ (2.76) Alternative 3 would retain recreation cost recovery at 50%, increase the residential and industrial growth impact fees to 50%, allocate 0% of REET 1&2 over the 6-year period to generate a surplus of $15,484,692 more than necessary to finance the proposed level-of- service (PLOS) requirement. Implications Alternatives 1-3 are all feasible for a 6 and 20-year Arlington financial strategy to realize the combined administration, programs, maintenance, repair and replacement (R&R), and proposed level of service (PLOS) projects outlined in this plan. A choice between the alternatives depends on how the City Council would prefer to balance allocations between the General Fund, recreation cost recovery, residential and industrial park impact fees, REET 1&2, and a property tax levy or levy lid lift. F-16 Arlington PRMP Plan Arlington PRMP Plan F-17 G.1-1 Appendix G.1: Prototype facility development costs Playground - 10 child capacity unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear playground, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 0.5 $2,000 b earthwork for playground, parking, access roadcu yd $15.00 746 $11,190 c site preparation, 12" depth Fibar@100'diametersq ft $10.00 15,700 $157,000 d medium play structure each $75,000.00 1 $48,000 e parent bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 3 $7,200 f trash receptacle w/concrete support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 g drinking fountain, precast concrete each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 h bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 i parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 10 carssq ft $9.00 3,000 $27,000 j wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 10 $2,250 k access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x50'sq ft $8.00 1,200 $9,600 l water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 100 $9,000 m water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per playground $298,440 Estimate contingency 10%10%$29,844 Total construction cost per playground $328,284 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$29,546 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$39,394 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$31,778 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$42,900 Total development cost per playground $471,902 Spray park - 10 child capacity unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear site, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 0.5 $2,000 b earthwork for spray park, parking, access roadcu yd $15.00 746 $11,190 c site preparation, concrete platform sq ft $12.00 15,700 $188,400 d spray fixtures each $10,000.00 8 $80,000 e timing control mechanisms each $14,000.00 1 $14,000 f parent bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 3 $7,200 g trash receptacle w/concrete support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 h drinking fountain, precast concrete each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 i bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 j parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 10 carssq ft $9.00 3,000 $27,000 k wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 10 $2,250 l access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x50'sq ft $8.00 1,200 $9,600 m water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 250 $22,500 n water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 o drainage, 8" lline each $60.00 250 $15,000 Subtotal construction cost per playground $404,340 Estimate contingency 10%10%$40,434 Total construction cost per playground $444,774 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$40,030 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$53,373 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$43,054 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$58,123 Total development cost per playground $639,354 G.1-2 Grassy playfield - 1 acre unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 1 $4,000 b earthwork for field, structures, parking, roadcu yd $15.00 1,613 $24,200 c restroom facility, sani-can w/concrete platformeach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 d trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 e playfield, grass seed w/subdrain sq ft $8.50 43,560 $370,260 f irrigation system-quick coupler sq ft $2.00 43,560 $87,120 g drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 h bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 i parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 20 spacessq ft $9.00 6,000 $54,000 j wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 35 $7,875 k access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 l water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 m water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per field $660,555 Estimating contingency 10%10%$66,056 Total construction cost per field $726,611 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$65,395 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$87,193 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$70,336 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$94,953 Total development cost per field $1,044,488 Outdoor handball courts - 3 wall 20'x40' unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a earthwork for court and support area cu yd $15.00 50 $750 b 3"asphalt/4"aggreg/6"gravel sq ft $12.00 1,000 $12,000 c concrete side walls lr ft $400.00 80 $32,000 d trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 e drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 f bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 g parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 2 spacessq ft $9.00 600 $5,400 h wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 2 $450 i access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x25'sq ft $8.00 600 $4,800 j water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 100 $9,000 k water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per court $87,200 Estimating contingency 10%10%$8,720 Total construction cost per field $95,920 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$8,633 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$11,510 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$9,285 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$12,535 Total development cost per court $137,883 G.1-3 Outdoor basketball - 70'x114' unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a earthwork for court, parking, access road cu yd $15.00 460 $6,900 b 3"asphalt/4"aggreg/6"gravel sq ft $12.00 7,980 $95,760 c standards w/hoop and net, 6"steel poles each $3,600.00 2 $7,200 d trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 e drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 f bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 g parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 10 spacessq ft $9.00 3,000 $27,000 h wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 10 $2,250 i access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x50'sq ft $8.00 1,200 $9,600 j water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 100 $9,000 k water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per court $180,510 Estimating contingency 10%10%$18,051 Total construction cost per field $198,561 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$17,870 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$23,827 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$19,221 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$25,948 Total development cost per court $285,427 Outdoor volleyball - 42'x72' unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a earthwork for court, parking, access road cu yd $15.00 276 $4,140 b playing surface, 6"sand/compacted subgradecu yd $60.00 56 $3,360 c boundary lines, imbedded 4"x4"cedar lr ft $10.00 180 $1,800 d net and anchors, 6"x6" treated wood posts each $1,600.00 1 $1,600 e line judges stand, galvanized pipe w/2"x4" frameeach $1,800.00 2 $3,600 f players bench, w/conc support each $1,800.00 2 $3,600 g trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 g drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 i bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 j parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 10 spacessq ft $9.00 3,000 $27,000 k wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 10 $2,250 l access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x50'sq ft $8.00 1,200 $9,600 m water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 100 $9,000 n water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per court $88,750 Estimating contingency 10%10%$8,875 Total construction cost per field $97,625 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$8,786 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$11,715 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$9,450 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$12,758 Total development cost per court $140,334 G.1-4 Outdoor tennis - 60'x120' with lights unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a earthwork for court, parking, access road cu yd $15.00 320 $4,800 b colorcoat/1"asphalt/2"asphalt/4"crushed rocksq ft $16.00 7,200 $115,200 c perimeter fencing, 12'galvanized w/1.75"fabriclr ft $50.00 360 $18,000 d lighting system, 4 poles w/2 km projectorssystem $350,000.00 1 $350,000 e net and anchors, 3.5"galvanized pipe posts each $2,000.00 1 $2,000 f trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 g drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 h bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 i parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 4 spacessq ft $9.00 1,200 $10,800 j wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 4 $900 k access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x50'sq ft $8.00 1,200 $9,600 l water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 100 $9,000 m water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per court $543,100 Estimating contingency 10%10%$54,310 Total construction cost per field $597,410 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$53,767 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$71,689 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$57,829 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$78,070 Total development cost per court $858,765 Outdoor tennis - 60'x120' without lights unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a earthwork for court, parking, access road cu yd $15.00 320 $4,800 b colorcoat/1"asphalt/2"asphalt/4"crushed rocksq ft $16.00 7,200 $115,200 c perimeter fencing, 12'galvanized w/1.75"fabriclr ft $50.00 360 $18,000 d net and anchors, 3.5"galvanized pipe posts each $2,000.00 1 $2,000 e trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 f drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 g bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 h parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 4 spacessq ft $9.00 1,200 $10,800 i wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 4 $900 j access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x50'sq ft $8.00 1,200 $9,600 k water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 100 $9,000 l water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per court $193,100 Estimating contingency 10%10%$19,310 Total construction cost per field $212,410 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$19,117 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$25,489 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$20,561 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$27,758 Total development cost per court $305,335 G.1-5 Football field - 150'x300' unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 2 $8,000 b earthwork, 1'depth cu yd $15.00 1,667 $25,000 c playing surface, grass turf/12" sand w/subdrainsq ft $12.00 45,000 $540,000 d irrigation system-quick coupler sq ft $2.00 45,000 $90,000 e spectator stands, movable metal (40 seats)each $10,000.00 4 $40,000 f restroom facility, sani-can on concrete platformeach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 g trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 h drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 i bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 j parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 50 spacessq ft $9.00 15,000 $135,000 k wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 50 $11,250 l access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 m water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 n water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per field $962,350 Estimating contingency 10%10%$96,235 Total construction cost per field $1,058,585 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$95,273 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$127,030 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$102,471 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$138,336 Total development cost per field $1,521,695 Soccer field - 240'x330' with grass turf unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 2.1 $8,400 b earthwork for field, structures, parking, roadcu yd $15.00 5,094 $76,410 c playing surface, grass turf/12"sand w/subdrainsq ft $12.00 79,200 $950,400 d irrigation system-quick coupler sq ft $2.00 79,200 $158,400 e spectator stands, movable metal (50 seats)each $10,000.00 2 $20,000 f trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 g drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 h restroom facility, sani-can w/conc platform each $2,250.00 2 $4,500 i bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 j parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 50 spacessq ft $9.00 15,000 $135,000 k wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 50 $11,250 l access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 m water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 n water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per field $1,472,960 Estimating contingency 10%10%$147,296 Total construction cost per field $1,620,256 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$145,823 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$194,431 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$156,841 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$211,735 Total development cost per field $2,329,086 G.1-6 Soccer field - 240'x330' with dirt surface unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 2.1 $8,400 b earthwork for field, structures, parking, roadcu yd $15.00 5,094 $76,410 c playing surface, cinder w/subdrain sq ft $1.50 79,200 $118,800 d spectator stands, movable metal (50 seats)each $10,000.00 2 $20,000 e trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 f drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 g restroom facility, sani-can w/conc platform each $2,250.00 2 $4,500 h bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 i parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 50 spacessq ft $9.00 15,000 $135,000 j wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 50 $11,250 k access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 l water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 m water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per field $482,960 Estimating contingency 10%10%$48,296 Total construction cost per field $531,256 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$47,813 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$63,751 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$51,426 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$69,425 Total development cost per field $763,670 Soccer field - regulation 300'x390' with turf lights unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 3.1 $12,400 b earthwork for field, structures, parking, roadcu yd $15.00 5,094 $76,410 c playing surface, synethetic turf/12"sand w/subdrainsq ft $30.00 117,000 $3,510,000 d irrigation system-quick coupler sq ft $2.00 117,000 $234,000 e lighting system, 8 poles w/luminaires system $650,000.00 1 $650,000 f goal posts, galvanized pipe each $4,500.00 2 $9,000 g spectator stands, movable metal (50 seats)each $10,000.00 4 $40,000 h trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 i drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 j restroom facility, sani-can w/conc platform each $2,250.00 2 $4,500 k bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 l parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 50 spacessq ft $9.00 15,000 $135,000 m wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 50 $11,250 n access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 o water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 p water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per field $4,791,160 Estimating contingency 10%10%$479,116 Total construction cost per field $5,270,276 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$474,325 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$632,433 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$510,163 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$688,720 Total development cost per field $7,575,916 G.1-7 Soccer field - regulation 300'x390' with grass lights unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 3.1 $12,400 b earthwork for field, structures, parking, roadcu yd $15.00 5,094 $76,410 c playing surface, grass turf/12"sand w/subdrainsq ft $12.00 117,000 $1,404,000 d irrigation system-quick coupler sq ft $2.00 117,000 $234,000 e lighting system, 8 poles w/luminaires system $650,000.00 1 $650,000 f goal posts, galvanized pipe each $4,500.00 2 $9,000 g spectator stands, movable metal (50 seats)each $10,000.00 4 $40,000 h trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 i drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 j restroom facility, sani-can w/conc platform each $2,250.00 2 $4,500 k bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 l parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 50 spacessq ft $9.00 15,000 $135,000 m wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 50 $11,250 n access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 o water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 p water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per field $2,685,160 Estimating contingency 10%10%$268,516 Total construction cost per field $2,953,676 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$265,831 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$354,441 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$285,916 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$385,986 Total development cost per field $4,245,850 Soccer field - regulation 300'x390' with dirt surface unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 3.1 $12,400 b earthwork for field, structures, parking, roadcu yd $15.00 5,094 $76,410 c playing surface, cinder w/subdrain sq ft $1.50 117,000 $175,500 d goal posts, galvanized pipe each $4,500.00 2 $9,000 e spectator stands, movable metal (50 seats)each $10,000.00 4 $40,000 f trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 g drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 h restroom facility, sani-can w/conc platform each $2,250.00 2 $4,500 i bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 j parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 50 spacessq ft $9.00 15,000 $135,000 k wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 50 $11,250 l access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 m water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 n water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Total construction cost per field $572,660 Estimating contingency 10%10%$57,266 Total construction cost per field $629,926 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$56,693 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$75,591 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$60,977 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$82,319 Total development cost per field $905,506 G.1-8 Baseball field - 200' with grass turf unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 1.2 $4,800 b earthwork for field, structures, parking, roadcu yd $15.00 2,586 $38,790 c infield mix w/subdrain cu yd $55.00 133 $7,333 d outfield, grass turf/12" sand w/subdrain sq ft $12.00 36,400 $436,800 e irrigation system-quick coupler sq ft $2.00 36,400 $72,800 f backstop, 3"pipe posts w/supports, 2"chain linkeach $12,500.00 1 $12,500 g players bench, w/conc support each $1,600.00 4 $6,400 h spectator stands, movable metal (50 seats)each $10,000.00 2 $20,000 i trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 j drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 k restroom facility, sani-can w/conc platform sq ft $2,250.00 2 $4,500 l bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 m parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 35 spacessq ft $9.00 10,500 $94,500 n wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 35 $7,875 o access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 p water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 q water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per field $814,898 Estimating contingency 10%10%$81,490 Total construction cost per field $896,388 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$80,675 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$107,567 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$86,770 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$117,140 Total development cost per field $1,288,540 Baseball field - 200' with dirt surface unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 1.2 $4,800 b earthwork for field, structures, parking, roadcu yd $15.00 2,586 $38,790 c infield mix w/subdrain cu yd $55.00 133 $7,333 d backstop, 3"pipe posts w/supports, 2"chain linkeach $12,500.00 1 $12,500 e players bench, w/conc support each $1,600.00 4 $6,400 f spectator stands, movable metal (50 seats)each $10,000.00 2 $20,000 g trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 h drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 i restroom facility, sani-can w/conc platform sq ft $2,250.00 2 $4,500 j bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 k parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 35 spacessq ft $9.00 10,500 $94,500 l wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 35 $7,875 m access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 n water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 o water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per field $305,298 Estimating contingency 10%10%$30,530 Total construction cost per field $335,828 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$30,225 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$40,299 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$32,508 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$43,886 Total development cost per field $482,746 G.1-9 Baseball field - 250' with grass/lights/concession unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 3.1 $12,400 b earthwork for field, structures, parking, roadcu yd $15.00 3,700 $55,500 c infield mix w/subdrain cu yd $55.00 300 $16,500 d outfield, grass turf/12" sand w/subdrain sq ft $12.00 44,700 $536,400 e irrigation system-quick coupler sq ft $2.00 44,700 $89,400 f lighting system, 8 poles w/luminaires system $650,000.00 1 $650,000 g backstop, 3"pipe posts w/supports, 2"chain linkeach $12,500.00 1 $12,500 h players bench, w/conc support each $1,600.00 4 $6,400 i spectator stands, movable metal (50 seats)each $10,000.00 2 $20,000 j trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 k drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 l concession facility, warming and refrigerationsq ft $442.00 250 $110,500 m bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 n parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 35 spacessq ft $9.00 10,500 $94,500 o wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 35 $7,875 p access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 q water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 r water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per field $1,720,575 Estimating contingency 10%10%$172,058 Total construction cost per field $1,892,633 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$170,337 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$227,116 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$183,207 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$247,329 Total development cost per field $2,720,621 Baseball field - 250' w/o lights or concession unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 3.1 $12,400 b earthwork for field, structures, parking, roadcu yd $15.00 3,700 $55,500 c infield mix w/subdrain cu yd $55.00 300 $16,500 d outfield, grass turf/12" sand w/subdrain sq ft $12.00 44,700 $536,400 e irrigation system-quick coupler sq ft $2.00 44,700 $89,400 f backstop, 3"pipe posts w/supports, 2"chain linkeach $12,500.00 1 $12,500 g players bench, w/conc support each $1,600.00 4 $6,400 h spectator stands, movable metal (50 seats)each $10,000.00 2 $20,000 i trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 j drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 k bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 l parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 35 spacessq ft $9.00 10,500 $94,500 m wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 35 $7,875 n access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 o water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 p water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per field $960,075 Estimating contingency 10%10%$96,008 Total construction cost per field $1,056,083 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$95,047 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$126,730 G.1-10 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$102,229 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$138,009 Total development cost per field $1,518,097 Baseball field - 300' w/turf/lights/concession unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 3.5 $14,000 b earthwork for field, structures, parking, roadcu yd $15.00 4,000 $60,000 c infield mix w/subdrain cu yd $55.00 296 $16,296 d outfield, synethetic turf/12" sand w/subdrainsq ft $30.00 38,000 $1,140,000 e irrigation system-quick coupler sq ft $2.00 45,000 $90,000 f lighting system, 8 poles w/luminaires system $650,000.00 1 $650,000 g backstop, 3"pipe posts w/supports, 2"chain linkeach $12,500.00 1 $12,500 h players bench, w/conc support each $1,600.00 4 $6,400 i spectator stands, movable metal (50 seats)each $10,000.00 2 $20,000 j trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 k drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 l concession facility, warming and refrigeration w/pa systemsq ft $442.00 250 $110,500 m bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 n parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 50 spacessq ft $9.00 15,000 $135,000 o wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 35 $7,875 p access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 q water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 r water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per field $2,371,171 Estimating contingency 10%10%$237,117 Total construction cost per field $2,608,288 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$234,746 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$312,995 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$252,482 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$340,851 Total development cost per field $3,749,362 Baseball field - 300' w/grass/lights/concession unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 3.5 $14,000 b earthwork for field, structures, parking, roadcu yd $15.00 4,000 $60,000 c infield mix w/subdrain cu yd $55.00 296 $16,296 d outfield, grass turf/12" sand w/subdrain sq ft $8.00 38,000 $304,000 e irrigation system-quick coupler sq ft $2.00 45,000 $90,000 f lighting system, 8 poles w/luminaires system $650,000.00 1 $650,000 g backstop, 3"pipe posts w/supports, 2"chain linkeach $12,500.00 1 $12,500 h players bench, w/conc support each $1,600.00 4 $6,400 i spectator stands, movable metal (50 seats)each $10,000.00 2 $20,000 j trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 k drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 l concession facility, warming and refrigeration w/pa systemsq ft $442.00 250 $110,500 m bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 n parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 50 spacessq ft $9.00 15,000 $135,000 o wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 35 $7,875 p access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 q water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 r water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 G.1-11 Subtotal construction cost per field $1,535,171 Estimating contingency 10%10%$153,517 Total construction cost per field $1,688,688 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$151,982 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$202,643 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$163,465 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$220,678 Total development cost per field $2,427,456 Baseball field - 300' w/dirt w/o lights/concession unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 3.5 $14,000 b earthwork for field, structures, parking, roadcu yd $15.00 4,000 $60,000 c infield mix w/subdrain cu yd $55.00 296 $16,296 d backstop, 3"pipe posts w/supports, 2"chain linkeach $12,500.00 1 $12,500 e players bench, w/conc support each $1,600.00 4 $6,400 f spectator stands, movable metal (50 seats)each $10,000.00 2 $20,000 g trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 h drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 i bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 j parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 50 spacessq ft $9.00 15,000 $135,000 k wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 35 $7,875 l access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 m water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 n water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per field $380,671 Estimating contingency 10%10%$38,067 Total construction cost per field $418,738 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$37,686 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$50,249 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$40,534 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$54,721 Total development cost per field $601,928 Softball field - 200-300' w/grass/lights/concession unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 0.8 $3,200 b earthwork for field, structures, parking, roadcu yd $15.00 1,335 $20,025 c infield mix w/subdrain cu yd $55.00 150 $8,250 d outfield, grass turf/12" sand w/subdrain sq ft $8.00 15,950 $127,600 e irrigation system-quick coupler sq ft $2.00 15,950 $31,900 f lighting system, 5 poles w/luminaires system $350,000.00 1 $350,000 g backstop, 3"pipe posts w/supports, 2"chain linkeach $12,500.00 1 $12,500 h players bench, w/conc support each $1,600.00 4 $6,400 i spectator stands, movable metal (50 seats)each $10,000.00 2 $20,000 j trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 k drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 l concession facility, warming and refrigerationsq ft $442.00 250 $110,500 m bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 n parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 35 spacessq ft $9.00 10,500 $94,500 o wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 35 $7,875 p access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 q water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 G.1-12 r water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per field $901,350 Estimating contingency 10%10%$90,135 Total construction cost per field $991,485 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$89,234 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$118,978 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$95,976 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$129,567 Total development cost per field $1,425,240 Softball field - 200-300' w/dirt w/o lights/concession unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear field, structures, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 0.8 $3,200 b earthwork for field, structures, parking, roadcu yd $15.00 1,335 $20,025 c infield mix w/subdrain cu yd $55.00 150 $8,250 d backstop, 3"pipe posts w/supports, 2"chain linkeach $12,500.00 1 $12,500 e players bench, w/conc support each $1,600.00 4 $6,400 f spectator stands, movable metal (50 seats)each $10,000.00 2 $20,000 g trash receptacles w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 h drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 i bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 j parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 35 spacessq ft $9.00 10,500 $94,500 k wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 35 $7,875 l access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 m water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 n water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per field $281,350 Estimating contingency 10%10%$28,135 Total construction cost per field $309,485 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$27,854 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$37,138 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$29,958 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$40,443 Total development cost per field $444,878 Parcourse/ fitness facility - 5 stations/0.25 mile unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/earthwork parcourse corridor sq ft $1.75 8,070 $14,123 b crushed rock, 6"depth, 4'wide, 3/8" minus sq ft $4.00 5,380 $21,520 c station equipment and sign each $4,600.00 5 $23,000 d bench, 8"x8"x10'wood beams w/conc supporteach $2,400.00 2 $4,800 e trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 Subtotal construction cost per facility $68,243 Estimating contingency 10%10%$6,824 Total construction cost per facility $75,067 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$6,756 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$9,008 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$7,266 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$9,810 Total development cost per facility (5 stations)$107,907 G.1-13 Jogging track - 0.25 mile w/starting spur unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear track, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 0.9 $3,600 b earthwork for track, parking, access road cu yd $15.00 1,532 $22,980 c 12'track, 1"rubber/4"cinder/4"crushed rock sq ft $6.50 18,464 $120,017 d bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 e trash receptacles each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 f drinking fountain, precast concrete each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 g bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 h parking, 2"asphalt/4"crushed rock, 10 spacessq ft $9.00 3,000 $27,000 i wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 10 $2,250 j access road, 2"asphalt/4"crushed rock, 24'x50'sq ft $8.00 1,200 $9,600 k water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 100 $9,000 l water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per track $224,447 Estimating contingency 10%10%$22,445 Total construction cost per track $246,892 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$22,220 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$29,627 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$23,899 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$32,264 Total development cost per track $354,902 Picnic site - 25 table capacity w/o shelter unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear picnic sites, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 2.3 $9,200 b earthwork for sites, parking, access road cu yd $15.00 3,748 $56,220 c picnic tables w/conc support each $3,200.00 25 $80,000 d barbecue stand, metal with iron grill each $1,400.00 12 $16,800 e group barbecue iron grill each $2,200.00 2 $4,400 f trash receptacle, coated metal each $2,400.00 12 $28,800 g drinking fountain each $6,000.00 2 $12,000 h parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4" crushed rock (50 cars)sq ft $9.00 15,000 $135,000 i wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 50 $11,250 j access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x1,000'sq ft $8.00 24,000 $192,000 k water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 1,000 $90,000 l water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost for 25 tables $647,670 Estimating contingency 10%10%$64,767 Total construction cost for 25 tables $712,437 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$64,119 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$85,492 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$68,964 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$93,101 Total development cost for 25 tables $1,024,114 Prorated per table $40,965 G.1-14 Picnic site - shelter unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a picnic shelter sq ft $150.00 600 $90,000 Total construction cost for 25 tables $90,000 b construction sales tax (const)9.0%$8,100 c design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$10,800 d financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$8,712 e contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$11,761 Total development cost for 1 shelter $129,373 Swimming beach - 100 swimmer capacity unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear site for improvements acre $4,000.00 0.3 $1,200 b earthwork for site improvements cu yd $15.00 511 $7,665 c beach sand, 12"depth of area 200'x50'cu yd $38.00 400 $15,200 d safety markers, pilings w/nylon ropes and buoyseach $1,600.00 4 $6,400 e diving/swimming platform, 2"x6"wood over buoyssq ft $80.00 80 $6,400 f lifeguard stand each $3,000.00 1 $3,000 g exterior shower facilities each $6,500.00 1 $6,500 h drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 i restroom/changing facility, 6 stalls w/4 sinkssq ft $450.00 600 $270,000 j parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4" crushed rock (40 cars)sq ft $9.00 12,000 $108,000 k wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 30 $6,750 l access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 m water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 400 $36,000 n sewer line, 8"service line lr ft $48.00 400 $19,200 o fire hydrants each $6,500.00 1 $6,500 p water meter, 2" size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 q trash receptacles each $2,400.00 4 $9,600 Subtotal construction cost per site $558,815 Estimating contingency 10%10%$55,882 Total construction cost per site $614,697 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$55,323 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$73,764 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$59,503 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$80,329 Total development cost per site $883,614 Prorated per parking space (2.5 swimmers/car=40 spaces)$22,090 Fishing from a bank or dock - 25 car capacity unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear site improvements acre $4,000.00 0.3 $1,000 b earthwork for site improvements cu yd $15.00 550 $8,250 c pier supported dock, 12'x100'sq ft $120.00 1,200 $144,000 d fishing platform, 12'x20'sq ft $90.00 240 $21,600 e parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock - 25 spacessq ft $9.00 7,500 $67,500 f wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 25 $5,625 g access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $9.00 4,800 $43,200 h picnic tables, w/concrete platform each $3,200.00 8 $25,600 i restroom facility, sanican w/concrete platformeach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 j trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 Subtotal construction cost per site $326,075 G.1-15 Estimating contingency 10%10%$32,608 Total construction cost per site $358,683 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$32,281 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$43,042 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$34,720 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$46,873 Total development cost per facility $515,599 Prorated per parking space $20,624 Boat launch - 25 boat capacity unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear site improvements acre $4,000.00 0.4 $1,400 b earthwork for site improvements cu yd $15.00 2,400 $36,000 c boat access ramp, precast concrete ramp unitseach $36,000.00 1 $36,000 d mooring platform, sq ft $90.00 400 $36,000 e bank stablization/landscape plantings each $18,000.00 1 $18,000 f marker buoys and signage each $600.00 4 $2,400 g car/trailer parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rocksq ft $9.00 12,500 $112,500 h wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 25 $5,625 i access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 j trash receptacles each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 Subtotal construction cost per site $291,125 Estimating contingency 10%10%$29,113 Total construction cost per site $320,238 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$28,821 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$38,429 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$30,999 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$41,849 Total development cost per ramp $460,335 Prorated per boat trailer parking stall $18,413 Handboat launch - 10 car capacity unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear site improvements acre $4,000.00 0.3 $1,000 b earthwork for site improvements/launching rampcu yd $15.00 2,400 $36,000 c concrete launching ramp each $36,000.00 1 $36,000 d launching platform 10'x20'sq ft $90.00 200 $18,000 e landscape/bank stabilization plantings each $18,000.00 1 $18,000 f parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock - 10 spacessq ft $9.00 3,000 $27,000 g wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 10 $2,250 h access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x100'sq ft $8.00 2,400 $19,200 i restroom facility, sanican w/concrete platformeach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 j trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 Subtotal construction cost per site $166,750 Estimating contingency 10%10%$16,675 Total construction cost per site $183,425 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$16,508 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$22,011 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$17,756 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$23,970 Total development cost per facility $263,670 Prorated per parking space $26,367 G.1-16 Tent camping - 25 campsite capacity unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear camping area, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 5.6 $22,400 b earthwork in camping area, parking, access roadcu yd $15.00 9,157 $137,355 c campsite parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rocksq ft $9.00 20,000 $180,000 d picnic tables w/conc support each $3,200.00 25 $80,000 e metal fire ring with iron grill each $800.00 25 $20,000 f camp shelter cedar pole w/shake roof sq ft $60.00 150 $9,000 g trash receptacle each $2,400.00 25 $60,000 h restroom/showering fclty, 6 stalls/4 sinks/4 showsq ft $450.00 850 $382,500 i camp directory signs each $600.00 20 $12,000 j access road, 6"crushed rock, 24'x5,380'sq ft $6.50 129,120 $839,280 k water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 5,380 $484,200 l sewage disposal, campgrnd septic tank drainfieldeach $50,000.00 1 $50,000 m fire hydrant each $6,500.00 1 $6,500 n water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost for 25 campsites $2,295,235 Estimating contingency 10%10%$229,524 Total construction cost per site $2,524,759 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$227,228 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$302,971 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$244,397 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$329,935 Total development cost for 25 campsites $3,629,290 Prorated per campsite $145,172 Group daycamping facility - 100 person capacity unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear camping site, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 3.1 $12,400 b earthwork for sites, parking, access road cu yd $15.00 5,134 $77,010 c group campfire/amphitheater,stage/bencheseach $70,000.00 1 $70,000 d camp directory signs, 4"x4"cedar pole framedeach $800.00 20 $16,000 e group cooking, 4'x12' each $4,500.00 2 $9,000 f eating shelter (30'x30'), cedar pole w/shake roofsq ft $150.00 900 $135,000 g picnic tables w/conc support each $3,200.00 25 $80,000 h trash bin, metal dumpster w/wood fence screeneach $4,000.00 3 $12,000 i restroom facility, 6 stalls w/4 sinks sq ft $450.00 600 $270,000 j drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 k parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 50 carssq ft $9.00 15,000 $135,000 l wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 50 $11,250 m access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x1,000'sq ft $8.00 24,000 $192,000 n water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 1,000 $90,000 o sewage disposal, septic tank w/drainfield system $50,000.00 1 $50,000 p fire hydrant each $6,500.00 1 $6,500 q water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost per group camp $1,184,160 Estimating contingency 10%10%$118,416 Total construction cost per group camp $1,302,576 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$117,232 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$156,309 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$126,089 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$170,221 Total development cost per group camp $1,872,427 G.1-17 Prorated per person $18,724 Recreational vehicle camping - 25 campsite capacity unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear campsite, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 10.1 $40,400 b earthwork for campsite, parking, access roadcu yd $15.00 16,460 $246,900 c campsite parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rocksq ft $9.00 30,000 $270,000 d picnic tables w/conc support each $3,200.00 25 $80,000 e metal fire ring with iron grill each $800.00 25 $20,000 f drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 g trash receptacle each $2,400.00 25 $60,000 h sanitary dump facility, 2 stalls each $50,000.00 1 $50,000 i camp directory signs, 4"x4"cedar pole framedeach $800.00 20 $16,000 j access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x8,070'sq ft $8.00 193,680 $1,549,440 k water service, 3"service line lr ft $42.00 8,070 $338,940 l water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Subtotal construction cost for 25 campsites $2,689,680 Estimating contingency 10%10%$268,968 Total construction cost per group camp $2,958,648 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$266,278 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$355,038 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$286,397 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$386,636 Total development cost for 25 campsites $4,252,997 Prorated per campsite $170,120 Outdoor swim pool - 75'x42'=3,150 sf/294 person capacity unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear pool area, deck, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 1.1 $4,400 b earthwork, 1'depth except pool @5'depth cu yd $15.00 2,370 $35,550 c diving area, 1 meter board sq ft $450.00 628 $282,600 capacity = 3 in pool + 9 in line/board/10'radius = 12 divers/board d swimming area, 50'x42' less diving area reqmntsq ft $450.00 1,472 $662,400 capacity = 27 sq ft/swimmer with 75% of swimmers in pool = 54 in pool + 18 on deck = 72 swimmers e nonswimming area, 25'x42'sq ft $250.00 1,050 $262,500 c diving area, 1 meter board sq ft $450.00 628 $282,600 capacity = 3 in pool + 9 in line/board/10'radius = f pool deck, 10'on sides, 20'on ends, tile/concretesq ft $8.00 1,590 $12,720 g lifeguard stand, galvanized pipe w/2"x4"framingeach $3,000.00 2 $6,000 h drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 i locker/shower facility, 20 showers w/50 lockerssq ft $450.00 1,000 $450,000 j restroom facility, 10 stalls w/6 sinks sq ft $450.00 1,000 $450,000 k concession facility, grill and refrigeration sq ft $442.00 250 $110,500 l bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 3 $7,200 m parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 128 spacessq ft $9.00 38,400 $345,600 2.5 swimmers/car = 118 cars + 10 employees = 128 n wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 128 $28,800 o access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x250'sq ft $8.00 6,000 $48,000 p water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 400 $36,000 q sewer service, 8"side sewer lr ft $48.00 400 $19,200 r fire hydrant each $6,500.00 1 $6,500 G.1-18 s water meter, 8"size each $25,000.00 1 $25,000 t chainlink perimeter fence, 6'lr ft $38.00 317 $12,046 u seed grass over 4"topsoil sq ft $2.50 1,564 $3,910 Subtotal construction cost for 294 swimmers $3,097,526 Estimating contingency 10%10%$309,753 Total construction cost per group camp $3,407,279 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$306,655 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$408,873 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$329,825 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$445,263 Total development cost for 294 swimmers/3,150 sq ft pool)$4,897,895 Prorated per square foot of total pool $1,555 Indoor swim pool - 75'x42'=3,150 sf/294 person capacity unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear pool area, deck, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 1.1 $4,400 b earthwork, 1'depth except pool @5'depth cu yd $15.00 2,370 $35,550 c diving area, 1 meter board sq ft $662.00 628 $415,736 capacity = 3 in pool + 9 in line/board/10'radius = 12 divers/board d swimming area, 50'x42' less diving area reqmntsq ft $662.00 1,472 $974,464 capacity = 27 sq ft/swimmer with 75% of swimmers in pool = 54 in pool + 18 on deck = 72 swimmers e nonswimming area, 25'x42'sq ft $350.00 1,050 $367,500 capacity = 10 sq ft/person with 50% in pool = 105 in pool + 105 on land = 210 persons f pool deck, 10'on sides, 20'on ends, tile/concretesq ft $8.00 1,590 $12,720 g enclosed structure for pools et.al.sq ft $250.00 4,740 $1,185,000 h lifeguard stand each $3,000.00 2 $6,000 i drinking fountain each $6,000.00 1 $6,000 j locker/shower facility, 20 showers w/50 lockerssq ft $450.00 1,000 $450,000 k restroom facility, 10 stalls w/6 sinks sq ft $450.00 1,000 $450,000 l concession facility, grill and refrigeration sq ft $450.00 250 $112,500 m bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 3 $7,200 n parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 128 spacessq ft $9.00 38,400 $345,600 2.5 swimmers/car = 118 cars + 10 employees = 128 o wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 128 $28,800 p access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x250'sq ft $8.00 6,000 $48,000 q water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 400 $36,000 r sewer service, 8"side sewer lr ft $48.00 400 $19,200 s fire hydrant each $6,500.00 1 $6,500 t water meter, 8"size each $25,000.00 1 $25,000 u chainlink perimeter fence, 6'lr ft $38.00 317 $12,046 v seed grass over 4"topsoil sq ft $2.50 1,564 $3,910 Total construction cost for 294 swimmers $4,552,126 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$409,691 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$546,255 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$440,646 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$594,872 Total development cost for 294 swimmers/3,150 sq ft pool)$6,543,590 Prorated per square foot of total pool $2,077 Community center - 250 person capacity G.1-19 unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear building site, parking, access road acre $4,000.00 3 $12,000 b earthwork for structure, parking, access roadcu yd $15.00 1,613 $24,200 c gymnasium, 2 full basketball courts sq ft $552.00 11,280 $6,226,560 d racquetball courts sq ft $552.00 3,680 $2,031,360 e kitchen facility sq ft $450.00 360 $162,000 f game/classroom sq ft $475.00 960 $456,000 g exercise/aerobics room, 50 persons sq ft $552.00 5,000 $2,760,000 h physical conditioning/hydro/wellness facilitysq ft $552.00 2,745 $1,515,240 i office and reception area sq ft $400.00 1,000 $400,000 j multipurpose, restroom, locker room, showerssq ft $442.00 3,400 $1,502,800 k bike rack each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 l parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 175 carssq ft $9.00 52,500 $472,500 m wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 75 $16,875 n access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x250'sq ft $8.00 6,000 $48,000 o water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 400 $36,000 p sewage disposal, 8"service line lr ft $48.00 400 $19,200 q fire hydrant each $6,500.00 1 $6,500 r water meter, 8"size each $25,000.00 1 $25,000 s parking lot lighting, 10 poles system $220,000.00 1 $220,000 t art sculpture each $8,000.00 1 $8,000 Total construction cost per center $15,944,635 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$1,435,017 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$1,913,356 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$1,543,441 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$2,083,645 Total development cost per center $22,920,094 Prorated per square foot $806.34 Restroom/support facilities unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a restroom facility, 4 stalls w/2 sinks sq ft $442.00 500 $221,000 b sewer service, 8"side sewer lr ft $48.00 500 $24,000 c water service, 8"service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 d fire hydrant each $6,500.00 1 $6,500 e water meter, 2"size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 Total construction cost per facility/6 fixtures $308,500 a construction sales tax (const)9.0%$27,765 b design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$37,020 c financing costs (const, tax, design)8.0%$29,863 d contingency (const, tax, design, financing)10.0%$40,315 Total development cost per 4 stall facility $443,463 Prorated cost per fixture $73,910 Source: the Beckwith Consulting Group, JKLA Landscape Architects, ARC Architects Feb 2022 G.2-1 Appendix G.2: Prototype trail development costs Multipurpose trail - 8 foot crushed rock (5 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along trail corridor - 12' widesq ft $1.50 322,800 $484,200 b crushed rock, rolled to 4", 3/8" minus - 8' widesq ft $3.00 215,200 $645,600 c trail directory, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 20 $24,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 5 $12,000 e trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 f restroom facilities, sanican w/concrete platformseach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 g parking, 2" asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (30 cars)sq ft $9.00 9,000 $81,000 h wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 30 $6,750 i access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 Total construction cost per 5 miles $1,320,450 j construction sales tax (const)9.0%$118,841 k design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$158,454 l financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$127,820 m contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$258,835 Total development cost per 5 miles $1,984,399 Prorated per mile $396,880 Multipurpose trail - 8 foot asphalt (5 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along trail corridor - 12' widesq ft $1.50 322,800 $484,200 b 2"asphalt over 4"crushed rock - 8' wide sq ft $12.00 215,200 $2,582,400 c trail directory, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 20 $24,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 5 $12,000 e trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 f restroom facilities, sanican w/concrete platformseach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 g parking, 2" asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (30 cars)sq ft $9.00 9,000 $81,000 h wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 30 $6,750 i access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 Total construction cost per 5 miles $3,257,250 j construction sales tax (const)9.0%$293,153 k design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$390,870 l financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$315,302 m contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$638,486 Total development cost per 5 miles $4,895,060 Prorated per mile $979,012 Multipurpose trail - 10 foot crushed rock (5 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along trail corridor - 14' widesq ft $1.50 376,600 $564,900 b crushed rock, rolled to 4", 3/8" minus - 10' widesq ft $3.00 269,000 $807,000 c trail directory sign each $1,200.00 20 $24,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 5 $12,000 e trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 f restroom facilities, sanican w/concrete platformseach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 g parking, 2" asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (30 cars)sq ft $9.00 9,000 $81,000 h wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 30 $6,750 i access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 Total construction cost per 5 miles $1,562,550 j construction sales tax (const)9.0%$140,630 G.2-2 k design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$187,506 l financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$151,255 m contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$306,291 Total development cost per 5 miles $2,348,231 Prorated per mile $469,646 Multipurpose trail - 10 foot asphalt (5 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along trail corridor - 14' widesq ft $1.50 376,600 $564,900 b 2"asphalt over 4"crushed rock - 10' wide sq ft $12.00 269,000 $3,228,000 c trail directory, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 20 $24,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 5 $12,000 e trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 f restroom facilities, sanican w/concrete platformseach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 g parking, 2" asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (30 cars)sq ft $9.00 9,000 $81,000 h wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 30 $6,750 i access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 Total construction cost per 5 miles $3,983,550 j construction sales tax (const)9.0%$358,520 k design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$478,026 l financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$385,608 m contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$780,855 Total development cost per 5 miles $5,986,559 Prorated per mile $1,197,312 Park walk trail class 1 - crushed rock (1 mile w/o svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork trail corridor - 10' widesq ft $1.50 53,800 $80,700 b crushed rock, 6"depth, 3/8" minus - 6' wide sq ft $4.00 32,280 $129,120 c interpretative signs each $2,000.00 5 $10,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 e trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 Total construction cost per mile $248,620 f construction sales tax (const)9.0%$22,376 g design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$29,834 h financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$24,066 i contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$48,734 Total development cost per mile $373,631 Park walk trail class 1 - asphalt (1 mile w/o svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork trail corridor - 10' widesq ft $1.50 53,800 $80,700 b 2"asphalt over 4"crushed rock - 6' wide sq ft $12.00 32,280 $387,360 c interpretative signs, 4"x4"cedar framed each $2,000.00 5 $10,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 e trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 Total construction cost per mile $506,860 f construction sales tax (const)9.0%$45,617 g design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$60,823 h financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$49,064 i contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$99,355 Total development cost per mile $761,719 G.2-3 Park walk trail class 2 - crushed rock (1 mile w/o svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork trail corridor - 8' widesq ft $1.50 43,040 $64,560 b crushed rock, 6"depth, 3/8" minus - 5' wide sq ft $4.00 26,900 $107,600 c interpretative signs, 4"x4"cedar framed each $2,000.00 5 $10,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 e trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 Total construction cost per mile $210,960 f construction sales tax (const)9.0%$18,986 g design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$25,315 h financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$20,421 i contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$41,352 Total development cost per mile $317,035 Park walk trail class 2 - asphalt (1 mile w/o svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork trail corridor - 8' widesq ft $1.50 43,040 $64,560 b 2"asphalt over 4"crushed rock - 5' wide sq ft $12.00 26,900 $322,800 c interpretative signs, 4"x4"cedar framed each $2,000.00 5 $10,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 e trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 Total construction cost per mile $426,160 f construction sales tax (const)9.0%$38,354 g design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$51,139 h financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$41,252 i contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$83,536 Total development cost per mile $640,442 Day hike trail class 3 - crushed rock (5 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along trail corridor - 6' widesq ft $1.50 161,400 $242,100 b crushed rock, rolled to 4", 3/8" minus - 4' widesq ft $3.00 107,600 $322,800 c trail directory, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 20 $24,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 5 $12,000 e trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 f restroom facilities, sanican w/concrete platformseach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 g parking, 2" asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (30 cars)sq ft $9.00 9,000 $81,000 h wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 30 $6,750 i access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 Total construction cost per 5 miles $755,550 j construction sales tax (const)9.0%$68,000 k design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$90,666 l financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$73,137 m contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$148,103 Total development cost per 5 miles $1,135,456 Prorated per mile $227,091 G.2-4 Day hike trail class 3 - asphalt (5 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along trail corridor - 6' wideacre $1.50 161,400 $242,100 b 2" asphalt over 4" crushed rock - 4' wide sq ft $12.00 107,600 $1,291,200 c trail directory, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 20 $24,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 5 $12,000 e trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 f restroom facilities, sanican w/concrete platformseach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 g parking, 2" asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (30 cars)sq ft $9.00 9,000 $81,000 h wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 30 $6,750 i access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 Total construction cost per 5 miles $1,723,950 j construction sales tax (const)9.0%$155,156 k design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$206,874 l financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$166,878 m contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$337,929 Total development cost per 5 miles $2,590,787 Prorated per mile $518,157 Day hike trail class 4 - crushed rock (5 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along trail corridor - 5' widesq ft $1.50 134,500 $201,750 b crushed rock, rolled to 4", 3/8" minus - 3' widesq ft $3.00 80,700 $242,100 c trail directory, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 20 $24,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 5 $12,000 e trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 f restroom facilities, sanican w/concrete platformseach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 g parking, 2" asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (30 cars)sq ft $9.00 9,000 $81,000 h wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 30 $6,750 i access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 Total construction cost per 5 miles $634,500 j construction sales tax (const)9.0%$57,105 k design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$76,140 l financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$61,420 m contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$124,375 Total development cost per 5 miles $953,539 Prorated per mile $190,708 Day hike trail class 5 - compacted dirt (10 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along trail corridor - 4' widesq ft $1.50 215,200 $322,800 b finish grade compacted dirt trail - 2' wide sq ft $0.75 107,600 $80,700 c trail directory, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 40 $48,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 e trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 20 $48,000 f restroom facilities, sanican w/concrete platformseach $2,250.00 4 $9,000 g parking, 2" asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (30 cars)sq ft $9.00 9,000 $81,000 h wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 30 $6,750 i access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 Total construction cost per 10 miles $658,650 j construction sales tax (const)9.0%$59,279 k design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$79,038 G.2-5 l financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$63,757 m contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$129,109 Total development cost per 10 miles $989,832 Prorated per mile $98,983 Shoreline hike trail - access only (5 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork for site improvementssq ft $1.50 10,890 $16,335 b landscape/bank stabilization plantings about access sitesq ft $10.00 2,723 $27,225 c picnic tables w/conc support each $3,200.00 3 $9,600 d metal fire ring with iron grill each $800.00 3 $2,400 e trail shelter (10'x6'), cedar pole w/shake roofsq ft $150.00 60 $9,000 f trail directory signs, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 10 $12,000 g parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock - 10 spacessq ft $9.00 3,000 $27,000 h wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 10 $2,250 i access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x100'sq ft $8.00 2,400 $19,200 j restroom facility, sanican w/concrete platformeach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 k trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 Total construction cost per 5 miles $134,310 l construction sales tax (const)9.0%$12,088 m design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$16,117 n financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$13,001 o contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$26,327 Total development cost per 5 miles $201,844 Prorated per mile/access site $40,369 Off-road mtn bike trail class 1 - dirt (10 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along trail corridor - 6' widesq ft $1.50 322,800 $484,200 b finish grade bike trail - 2' wide sq ft $0.75 107,600 $80,700 c trail directory, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 10 $12,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 e bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 f trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 5 $12,000 g restroom facilities, sani-can w/concrete platformeach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 h parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (20 cars)sq ft $9.00 6,000 $54,000 i wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 20 $4,500 j access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 Total construction cost per 10 miles $716,700 k construction sales tax (const)9.0%$64,503 l design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$86,004 m financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$69,377 n contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$140,488 Total development cost per 10 miles $1,077,071 Prorated per mile $107,707 G.2-6 Off-road mtn bike trail class 2 - dirt (20 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along trail corridor - 5' widesq ft $1.50 538,000 $807,000 b finish grade bike trail - 1.5' wide sq ft $0.75 161,400 $121,050 c trail directory, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 20 $24,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 15 $36,000 e bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 f trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 g restroom facilities, sani-can w/concrete platformeach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 h parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (20 cars)sq ft $9.00 6,000 $54,000 i wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 20 $4,500 j access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 Total construction cost per 20 miles $1,118,250 k construction sales tax (const)9.0%$100,643 l design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$134,190 m financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$108,247 n contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$219,199 Total development cost per 20 miles $1,680,528 Prorated per mile $84,026 Off-road mtn bike trail class 3 - dirt (25 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along trail corridor - 4' widesq ft $1.50 538,000 $807,000 b finish grade bike trail - 1' wide sq ft $0.75 134,500 $100,875 c trail directory, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 25 $30,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 20 $48,000 e bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 3 $7,200 f trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 15 $36,000 g restroom facilities, sani-can w/concrete platformeach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 h parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (20 cars)sq ft $9.00 6,000 $54,000 i wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 20 $4,500 j access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 Total construction cost per 25 miles $1,130,475 k construction sales tax (const)9.0%$101,743 l design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$135,657 m financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$109,430 n contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$221,596 Total development cost per 25 miles $1,698,900 Prorated per mile $67,956 Off-road bike trail AASHTO 1 - crushed rock (5 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along trail corridor - 14' widesq ft $1.50 376,600 $564,900 b crushed rock, rolled to 4", 3/8" minus - 10' widesq ft $3.00 269,000 $807,000 c trail directory, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 20 $24,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 e bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 f trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 g restroom facilities, sani-can w/concrete platformeach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 h parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (30 cars)sq ft $9.00 9,000 $81,000 i wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 30 $6,750 j access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 G.2-7 Total construction cost per 5 miles $1,576,950 k construction sales tax (const)9.0%$141,926 l design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$189,234 m financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$152,649 n contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$309,114 Total development cost per 5 miles $2,369,872 Prorated per mile $473,974 Off-road bike trail AASHTO 1- asphalt (5 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along trail corridor - 14' widesq ft $1.50 376,600 $564,900 b class 2 asphalt 4"crushed rock - 10'wide sq ft $12.00 269,000 $3,228,000 c trail directory, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 20 $24,000 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 e bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 f trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 10 $24,000 g restroom facilities, sani-can w/concrete platformeach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 h parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (30 cars)sq ft $9.00 9,000 $81,000 i wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 30 $6,750 j access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 Total construction cost per 5 miles $3,997,950 k construction sales tax (const)9.0%$359,816 l design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$479,754 m financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$387,002 n contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$783,678 Total development cost per 5 miles $6,008,199 Prorated per mile $1,201,640 On-road bike tour AASHTO 2 - 2 lanes (10 miles w/o svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along road shoulder - 8' widesq ft $1.50 860,800 $1,291,200 b asphalt, 2"class 1/4"crushed rock - 6' wide sq ft $12.00 645,600 $7,747,200 c pavement markings, paint stripes and symbolslr ft $4.00 107,600 $430,400 d route directory, steel post w/reflective sign each $250.00 80 $20,000 Total construction cost per 10 miles $9,488,800 e construction sales tax (const)9.0%$853,992 f design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$1,138,656 g financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$918,516 h contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$1,859,995 Total development cost per 10 miles $14,259,958 Prorated per mile $1,425,996 G.2-8 On-road bike tour AASHTO 3 - 2 shlders (10 miles w/o svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along road shoulder - 6' widesq ft $1.50 645,600 $968,400 b asphalt, 2"class 1/4"crushed rock - 4' wide sq ft $12.00 430,400 $5,164,800 c pavement markings, paint stripes and symbolslr ft $4.00 107,600 $430,400 d route directory, steel post w/reflective sign each $250.00 80 $20,000 Total construction cost per 10 miles $6,583,600 e construction sales tax (const)9.0%$592,524 f design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$790,032 g financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$637,292 h contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$1,290,517 Total development cost per 10 miles $9,893,966 Prorated per mile $989,397 On-road bike tour AASHTO 4 - in lane (10 miles w/o svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a pavement markings, paint symbols and occassional stripslr ft $4.00 107,600 $430,400 b route directory, steel post w/reflective sign each $250.00 80 $20,000 Total construction cost per 10 miles $450,400 c construction sales tax (const)9.0%$40,536 d design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$54,048 e financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$43,599 f contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$88,287 Total development cost per 10 miles $676,870 Prorated per mile $67,687 On-road bike tour - backcountry (10 miles w/o svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a route directory, steel post w/reflective sign each $250.00 80 $20,000 Total construction cost per 10 miles $20,000 b construction sales tax (const)9.0%$1,800 c design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$2,400 d financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$1,936 e contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$3,920 Total development cost per 10 miles $30,056 Prorated per mile $3,006 G.2-9 Horse trail - seperate trail (5 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork along trail corridor - 6' widesq ft $1.50 32,280 $48,420 b finish grade horse trail, compacted - 2' widesq ft $0.75 10,760 $8,070 c trail directory, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 20 $24,000 d hitching posts, galvanized pipe w/cedar postseach $1,000.00 10 $10,000 e trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 4 $9,600 f restroom facilities, sanican w/concrete platformeach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 g trailer parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (20 stalls)sq ft $9.00 10,000 $90,000 h wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 20 $4,500 i access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 Total construction cost per 5 miles $237,490 j construction sales tax (const)9.0%$21,374 k design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$28,499 l financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$22,989 m contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$46,553 Total development cost per 5 miles $356,905 Prorated per mile $71,381 Water trailhead - launch and campsite (5 miles w/svs) unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork for site improvementssq ft $1.50 10,890 $16,335 b landscape/bank stabilization plantings about sitesq ft $10.00 2,723 $27,225 c picnic tables w/conc support each $3,200.00 3 $9,600 d metal fire ring with iron grill each $800.00 2 $1,600 e camp shelter cedar pole w/shake roof sq ft $150.00 60 $9,000 f camp directory signs, 4"x4"cedar pole framedeach $1,200.00 10 $12,000 g restroom facility, sanican w/concrete platformeach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 h trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 i parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock - 10 spacessq ft $9.00 3,000 $27,000 j wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 10 $2,250 k access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x100'sq ft $8.00 2,400 $19,200 Total construction cost per 5 miles $133,510 l construction sales tax (const)9.0%$12,016 m design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$16,021 n financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$12,924 o contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$26,171 Total development cost per 5 miles $200,641 Prorated per mile/access site $40,128 Trailhead - w/sanican svs unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork for site improvementssq ft $1.50 10,890 $16,335 b landscape/bank stabilization plantings about sitesq ft $10.00 2,723 $27,225 c trail directory, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 2 $2,400 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 3 $7,200 e bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 f trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 g restroom facilities, sani-can w/concrete platformeach $2,250.00 2 $4,500 h parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (30 cars)sq ft $9.00 9,000 $81,000 i wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 30 $6,750 j access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 G.2-10 Total construction cost per site $191,010 k construction sales tax (const)9.0%$17,191 l design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$22,921 m financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$18,490 n contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$37,442 Total development cost per site $287,054 Trailhead - w/permanent restroom facilities unit unit cost qnty qnty cost a clear/grade/earthwork for site improvementssq ft $1.50 10,890 $16,335 b landscape/bank stabilization plantings about sitesq ft $10.00 2,723 $27,225 c trail directory, 4"x4"cedar pole framed each $1,200.00 2 $2,400 d trail bench, w/conc support each $2,400.00 3 $7,200 e bike rack, prefab galvanized pipe each $2,400.00 1 $2,400 f trash receptacles w/concrete support each $2,400.00 2 $4,800 g restroom facility, 4 stalls w/2 sinks sq ft $442.00 500 $221,000 h sewer service, 8" side sewer lr ft $48.00 500 $24,000 i water service, 8" service line lr ft $90.00 500 $45,000 j fire hydrant each $6,500.00 1 $6,500 k water meter, 2" size each $12,000.00 1 $12,000 l parking, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock (30 cars)sq ft $9.00 9,000 $81,000 m wheel stops, 10"x6"x8'precast concrete each $225.00 30 $6,750 n access road, 2"asphalt concrete/4"crushed rock, 24'x200'sq ft $8.00 4,800 $38,400 Total construction cost per site $495,010 o construction sales tax (const)9.0%$44,551 p design/engineering fees (const)12.0%$59,401 q financing costs (const,tax, design)8.0%$47,917 r contingency (const, tax, design, financing)15.0%$97,032 Total development cost per site $743,911 Source: Beckwith Consulting Group & JKLA Landscape Architects February 2022 SEPA Checklist City of Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) 2023 And Comprehensive Plan Chapter 7 – Parks, Recreation and Open Space Element Arlington, Washington Prepared by: City of Arlington Department of Parks & Recreation 238 North Olympic Avenue Arlington, WA 98223 January 20, 2022 Arlington Parks &, Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) SEPA Checklist: Page 1 of 15 Introduction This document addresses the items of Washington’s State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) environmental checklist, as identified in Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 197-11-960. The information provided herein has been carefully considered and is accurate to the best of our knowledge. A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Parks, Recreation & Open Space Element and Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) and Comprehensive Plan Chapter 7 Update 2. Date checklist prepared: January 2022 3. Agency requesting checklist: City of Arlington Department of Parks & Recreation 238 North Olympic Avenue Arlington, WA 98223 4. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) provides the foundation for the acquisition and development of park and recreation facilities within and recreation programming for the city of Arlington. It includes a discussion of facility needs over the next 20 years and presents a 6-year capital facilities program. The 6-year CFP identifies the costs for implementation and the potential source(s) of funding. Individual projects will undergo additional SEPA review as necessary prior to master planning, design, and construction. 5. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansions, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Yes. The PRMP will be reviewed and adopted as an element of the overall city Comprehensive Land Use Plan. In addition, the PRMP will likely be updated every 5 to 6 years in conjunction with updates to the City Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) will likely be updated annually and guide future budget discussions. Specific proposals will be developed for individual planned park projects. 6. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. The PRMP relies on previous, community-based plans to ensure consistency and avoid duplication. Recent plans include the 2019 Arlington Comprehensive Plan and Capital Facilities Plan (currently being updated) and the 2016 Arlington Parks & Recreation Master Plan (PRMP). Additional environmental studies will be conducted on various projects as they are proposed for development. These additional environmental studies could include wetland assessments and/or delineations, archaeological site surveys, slope stability studies, and project specific SEPA compliance. 7. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. The PRMP’s 6-Year Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) identifies projects that have received budget appropriations but that have not been fully implemented. These are mostly neighborhood and community parks enhancements that are funded or will be funded by the local general fund and/or grants. Arlington Parks &, Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) SEPA Checklist: Page 2 of 15 8. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. The PRMP must be reviewed and adopted by the Arlington City Council by ordinance. In addition, various approvals or permits could be required for individual park projects at the time of implementation. These may include federal, state, and local fisheries hydraulics, grading, shoreline, floodplain, endangered species act, and/or wetlands permits and approvals. Some projects may involve the submittal of grant applications and similar documents that would be approved by the Arlington City Council. 9. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) This project involves adoption of the PRMP by the Arlington City Council. The PRMP gives an overview of parks and recreation planning in the Arlington urban growth area - identifying a system of parks, open spaces, trails, and special facilities. The plan identifies benefits of the parks system, lists park goals, objectives, and policies, and proposes a 6-20-year schedule of park projects. The purpose of the plan is to identify a park system throughout the Arlington area that addresses citizens’ needs and interests and environmental concerns. The plan focuses on providing urban parks and facilities within walkable distances of residential areas. The PRMP requires minor updates to Chapter 7 – Parks, Recreation and Open Space Element of the Comprehensive Plan to utilize the new master plan. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. SOILS a. General description of the site (underline one): flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other . The planning area for this project covers the City of Arlington, located in the northwestern part of Snohomish County, Washington. The Arlington urban growth area has moderate topographic changes with steep bluffs overlooking the Stillaguamish River and rolling hills on plateaus 100 to 200 feet above sea level. Flood plains and riparian areas associated with Portage, Prairie, Kruger, Quilceda, Eagle, and March Creeks occupy a portion of the UGA. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Since the plan identifies general locations for many projects rather than specific park locations, the steepness of specific park projects cannot be identified at this time. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them, and note any prime farmland. The USDA soils classification system identifies a wide variety of soil types for Snohomish County. These soil types may be classified under two major associations for the Arlington area. These are Alderwood and Everett. Since the plan identifies general locations for many projects rather than specific park locations, soil type(s) of specific projects cannot be identified at this time. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Since the plan identifies general locations for many projects rather than specific park locations, soil stability of particular projects cannot be identified at this time. Arlington Parks &, Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) SEPA Checklist: Page 3 of 15 e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Specific plans for earthmoving and fill will be developed as individual parks or trails are proposed. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. The development of parks or trails could cause some amount of erosion during clearing and/or construction. Detailed engineering plans will be prepared to avoid and/or minimize impacts to potentially unstable slopes, and erosion control plans will be submitted when construction of the specific projects are proposed. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construc- tion (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Park improvements may include some impervious surfaces. Fully developed parks typically have hard-surface paths and play areas, as well as parking areas and restroom structures. Trail corridors may be paved or built with a compacted, impervious surface. Specific areas affected will be determined during master planning and design of specific sites. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Detailed design plans will be submitted when specific parks are proposed, including drainage and erosion control plans. Geotechnical studies will be completed for projects within potentially unstable slope areas. All designs will comply with or exceed the standards of the city erosion control ordinances. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities, if known. Dust and automotive exhaust would likely be released during construction of parks. However, emissions will be temporary, lasting only for the duration of construction. Dust is expected to be minimal and localized at the point of active construction. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Since the plan identifies general locations for many projects rather than specific projects, off- site sources of emissions or odor cannot be identified. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: The use of dust suppressants, such as periodic watering or watering of traveled areas, will occur on a routine basis to minimize particulate matter during construction. In addition, equipment not in use will be shut off, and all trucks transporting materials capable of producing fugitive dust will use appropriate covers. Disturbed soil areas with the potential for generating fugitive dust will be stabilized with mulch and vegetation cover following construction. Specifications will be included in the proposed project construction contract provisions to ensure all regulations related to the control of fugitive dust will be met. In addition, dust control measures will be implemented in conformance with appropriate erosion control measures and other applicable regulations. Arlington Parks &, Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) SEPA Checklist: Page 4 of 15 3. WATER a. Surface: (1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year- round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe the type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The plan proposes park improvements, trails, natural areas, and greenspaces, and/or habitat areas along water bodies in the Arlington urban area including portions of Portage, Prairie, Kruger, Quilceda, Eagle, and March Creeks. In addition, wetland areas that might be impacted by proposed parks will be identified when specific park locations are proposed. Wetland assessments and/or delineations will be conducted within these areas prior to site-specific planning as appropriate. (2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Several projects identified in the PRMP are located adjacent to or in close proximity to water features, such as the proposed Portage, Kruger, Quilceda, and March Creek trails. Park and trail improvements will be designed to minimize impacts to water features, shorelines, and other sensitive resources. Final design for specific projects would be subject to review under SEPA, Shoreline Management, and other federal, state, and local permit and approval/review processes. (3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Individual trail segments or other park improvements could require grading, leveling, filling, and related activities. Detailed engineering plans, including quantities, will be prepared at the time of site-specific planning. (4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. The development of individual trail segments or other park improvements may involve some level of surface water diversion. Detailed engineering plans will be prepared at the time of site-specific planning, and efforts will be made to minimize impacts to surface water resources. (5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note the location on the site plan. The plan identifies trail corridors and parks with segments that will likely lie within the 100- year flood plain. Detailed locations will be identified when specific parks or trail segments are proposed for development. Most parks and trail segments will not involve structures or fill that would cause flood plain impacts; however, where park or trail development might cause impacts, all federal, state and local flood plain provisions will be met. (6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. None anticipated, other than surface water runoff. b. Ground: (1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. Since the plan identifies general locations for many projects rather than specific projects, the withdrawal or discharge of groundwater cannot be identified at this time. Arlington Parks &, Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) SEPA Checklist: Page 5 of 15 (2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals…; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Public restrooms may be constructed within parks and at trail entry points in some unserved locations. Portable/pumped and self-composting facilities for human waste are two alternatives, along with permanent/ pumped, septic, or sewer facilities. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): (1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Surface water runoff will be generated from impervious parking areas, trail surfaces, restroom facilities, and shelters. Detailed drainage plans will be submitted at the time of site- specific planning. (2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No specific development plans exist that would facilitate wastewater entering ground or surface waters. The future use of septic systems would require extraordinary circumstances and would be regulated by the Snohomish County Public Health Department. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Detailed drainage plans will be submitted at the time of site-specific planning. Public restroom facilities will comply with all local and state requirements. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:  Deciduous tree: alder, maple, cottonwood, other  Evergreen tree: fir, cedar, other  Shrubs  Grass  Pasture  Crop or grain  Wet soil plants  Water plants  Other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Since the PRMP proposes development of park and trail facilities, vegetation is likely to be removed, but detailed plans are unavailable at this time. Clearing, grading, construction, and landscaping details will be addressed in the site plan design. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. The identification of threatened or endangered plant species will occur through site-specific development proposals. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any. The PRMP proposes acquisition and development of parks and urban trails. Site plans developed at the time of facility design will consider planting programs and mitigation requirements. Special consideration will be given to the enhancement of the natural shoreline, water quality protection/enhancement, wetlands, and habitat enhancement. State and federal agencies will be consulted to identify and protect threatened and/or endangered species. Arlington Parks &, Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) SEPA Checklist: Page 6 of 15 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. There are currently several threatened or endangered species that may be found in Snohomish County and in the Arlington UGA. The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Species of Concern (SOC) List identifies animal species designated by the State as Endangered, Threatened, Sensitive, or Candidates for listing including bald eagle, chinook salmon, chum salmon, coho salmon, and steelhead trout. The presence of any endangered, threatened, or sensitive species will be confirmed during the planning and design phase of each individual project. Projects developed under the PRMP will be designed to avoid and minimize impacts to state and federally listed species to the greatest extent practicable. Projects involving unavoidable impacts to listed species or habitat will be permitted in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Yes, the planned area is part of migration routes for the following species: Anadromous Fish. The Puget Sound provides highly important habitat for a variety of migratory fish species including salmon and steelhead populations. Snohomish County contains numerous rivers and streams that have historically supported these species. Each of these waterways continues to provide habitat to these species and the continued health and/or recovery of these waterways will be an important factor in the recovery of these species. Migratory Birds. Snohomish County is located along an avian migratory corridor known as the Pacific Flyway, which extends from the Bering Sea in Alaska along the Pacific Coast to South America. Snohomish County provides significant habitat (e.g., lakes, wetlands, floodplain, and forests) for migrating and wintering waterfowl, neotropical migrant birds, and others. Terrestrial Wildlife. Snohomish County contains numerous important wildlife corridors. These areas provide a means for wildlife movement and migration patterns between breeding and wintering areas. Primary wildlife corridors within the Arlington UGA are located within the riparian corridors associated with the area’s creeks and river. These corridors are important in that they maintain connectivity between habitat and open space areas that are located throughout the city. These corridors also often provide the only means for terrestrial wildlife to move through urban areas and other areas disturbed by development activities. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Implementation of the plan will have positive long-term beneficial effects on wildlife. The PRMP proposes projects that involve acquisition of parcels for management as natural areas and open space. Acquisition and designation of such areas will act to protect and conserve environmentally sensitive areas, including habitat for sensitive plant, fish, and terrestrial wildlife species. There could be short term impacts because of the construction of some park/facility development projects. Project impacts will be assessed on a project specific basis. Construction practices best suited to minimize impacts to plant and animal species will be specified. Projects identified in the PRMP will be constructed in a manner that limits disturbance and minimizes impacts to riparian and stream habitat as much as possible. For example, construction limits will be clearly marked in the field to minimize unnecessary disturbance; in- water work will be performed during the WDFW-approved in-water work window; and areas of ground disturbance will be replanted with native species following construction. Arlington Parks &, Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) SEPA Checklist: Page 7 of 15 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electrical service will typically be provided to parks, trailheads, and urban trail corridors where restrooms and safety lighting are required. Electrical service will also be provided for heating, lighting, and operating recreation facilities, such as swimming pools and activity centers. Gas, oil, and electricity will be used during construction of parks and recreation facilities. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. The PRMP recommends park and trail improvements that are not anticipated to affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Not applicable. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. Since the proposal is for urban parks, recreation, and open space plan, environmental health hazards associated with the proposal are not anticipated. (1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. The acquisition and development of parks, trails, and recreation facilities could affect the need for emergency services. Several factors need to be considered, including location of parks and trails, neighboring properties, number of users, user hours, types of activities, transportation systems, parking, and other support facilities. Vehicle patrol would serve parks and trails located along roadways. A trail located away from a transportation corridor may require a specialized program of patrol, such as mountain bike patrols. Park, trail, trailhead, and recreation facility design will consider provisions for emergency services and crime prevention, such as security lighting, emergency phone service, fencing, and access for emergency vehicles. (2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Since environmental health hazards are not anticipated, mitigation measures are not proposed. b. Noise (1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equip- ment, operation, other)? Road systems are located throughout the urban area and will be close to many of the proposed project areas. In addition, equipment noise and truck traffic from various commercial and industrial operations and traffic and railroad noise will affect the proposed parks and trail corridors to varying degrees depending on location. Arlington Parks &, Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) SEPA Checklist: Page 8 of 15 (2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short- term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. The PRMP recommends new park projects. Minimal temporary noise would be created at the time of construction, during normal working hours. Use of trails may trigger low level, pedestrian type noise, the frequency and level of which is difficult to predict but is anticipated to be in the same category found in any area frequented by walkers, hikers, and bike riders. Proposed parks may produce higher noise levels associated with recreation activities such as ball games. Noise impacts will be addressed in detail at the time of development review of individual park projects or trail segments to insure compatibility with adjacent land uses. (3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Restricted hours of construction and use, along with open space buffers, landscaping, and grade changes between the parks and trail routes and adjacent property owners would be some of the measures considered to reduce or control noise impacts and will be presented in detail at the time of development review of individual parks or trail segments. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Proposed projects in the PRMP are distributed widely throughout the city. Current use within project areas also varies. Proposed parks are, by design, located in residential areas. Trails and open space are within or near a wide range of land uses including residential, commercial, and industrial. Recreation facilities, such as swimming pools and community centers, are typically located in commercial areas, although they may also be found in residential and industrial areas. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. The PRMP calls for parks, trails, open space, and recreation facilities in urban areas. Most of this urban land was used historically for agricultural activities but has long since been converted to urban designations and/or uses. In a few areas, farm-related activities continue. c. Describe any structures on the site. Since the parks projects have not been designed, specific on-site structures are not known at this time. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Since the parks projects have not been designed, requirements for demolition of structures are unknown at this time. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Parks, open spaces, trail corridors, and recreation facilities proposed in the PRMP are located within a wide range of zoning areas, including residential and commercial. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Parks, open spaces, trail corridors, and recreation facilities proposed in the PRMP are located within a wide range of comprehensive plan designations. The most common designation is residential for neighborhood and community parks. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Shorelines-of-the-state include portions of Portage, Kruger, Quilceda, and March Creeks. Arlington Parks &, Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) SEPA Checklist: Page 9 of 15 h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes, potential parks, urban open space, greenways, and trail corridors may cover areas with various environmentally sensitive designations. These include: 100-year floodplain, Shoreline Master Program jurisdiction areas, and designated wetlands under SEPA ordinance. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Not applicable. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? No displacement is anticipated because of this plan. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable. l. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The proposed PRMP is consistent with the provisions of the existing Arlington Comprehensive Plan. The proposed plan also supports goals, objectives, and programs that have been identified in preceding updates. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. The PRMP will not result in new housing units. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Specific park plans have not been developed; however, no housing units have been identified for elimination in implementing the plan’s 6-year Capital Facilities Plan (CFP). c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Since no impacts to housing are anticipated, mitigation measures are not proposed. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? Restrooms are typically constructed in developed parks and are considered during the design of trailheads and some special facilities. Picnic shelters are also found in parks. Fencing and interpretive signage may be planned for parks and along specific trail segments. Restrooms would be of concrete block construction, with a maximum height of 15 to 18 feet. Picnic shelters would be constructed of wood/steel and be of similar height. Fences would likely be chain link (or wood, where appropriate), up to 6 feet high. Fencing may be higher if associated with ballfields. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? View impacts will be analyzed when specific park or trail alignments are proposed for development. Detailed plans will be prepared at the time of site-specific planning. Proposed parks and trails could offer the public greater view and access opportunities where there is currently limited or no access. Arlington Parks &, Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) SEPA Checklist: Page 10 of 15 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: With proper and sensitive design relating to landscaping, changes in grade and other mitigation measures, aesthetic impacts will be minimized. Park and trail design will minimize impacts to adjacent residents and ensure privacy with the possible use of fencing, planting, native rock, and grade changes. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Lighting for safety and security will be addressed in the site plan design. Lighting for evening use of athletic fields will be addressed during future site design. Use restrictions on evening use will reduce impacts to residential areas near sports facilities. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Lighting features will be designed to not obstruct views or interfere with traffic safety. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? There are no off-site sources of light or glare that are anticipated to affect this proposal. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Lighting impacts will be addressed at the time of site-specific planning. Lighting systems and hardware will be designed to minimize or eliminate impacts to adjacent residential uses or transportation corridors. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The PRMP identifies acquisition, expansion, and/or development of parks, trails, and natural areas adequate to serve the urban growth area at the standard established in the plan. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. The proposed park system will enhance and create additional recreational opportunities and provide linkages via a system of trails. Federal, state, and local regulations will require management plans to ensure protection of resources, especially in areas that support threatened, endangered, or at-risk species. For example, water-contact activities in these areas may be replaced by interpretative and viewing activities. In some cases, resource protection may require prohibiting access. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: The proposed PRMP provides park facilities and recreation opportunities that help meet the public’s need to recreate. Focusing recreation activities in appropriate areas reduces the use of and potential threat to sensitive wildlife habitat. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No sites located in Arlington are on the National Register of Historic Places or the Washington State Heritage Register. However, historic preservation officials emphasize that comprehensive field investigations of archaeological sites have not been conducted, and that artifacts are probably not confined to sites already identified. b. Generally, describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Not applicable. Arlington Parks &, Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) SEPA Checklist: Page 11 of 15 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Preservation officials have emphasized the need for cultural resource evaluations and inventories on sites that have a greater potential for historic significance. Such surveys will be performed, as appropriate, with avoidance and/or mitigation measures to be identified and implemented on a site-specific basis. SEPA policy addressing archaeological resources would likely require an archaeological survey prior to development of most of the proposed park and trail sites. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The PRMP includes projects that are generally accessible from public streets and roadways. Proposed parks anticipate pedestrian access and accommodate both pedestrian and automobile access. Some facilities, such as trail corridors, have limited access points, which is desirable based on the intended use of the amenity. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? The city is currently served by Community Transit route 220 between Arlington and Mount Vernon and Arlington and Everett. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Parking will be provided at parks and special facilities. Limited parking may be provided at trail entry points. Natural areas will have little or no parking, except for areas intended for interpretation or that provide another amenity. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Parks and special facilities developed in the urban area may require local road improvements, such as half-street improvements on road frontage and ingress/egress improvements. These issues will be resolved during individual planning processes for each site, and through development and transportation review by public agencies. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. The PRMP identifies trails along or near Portage, Kruger, March, and Quilceda Creeks, adjacent to portions of the rail corridor extending south to Marysville, and around the Arlington Municipal Airport. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Vehicular trips will vary with site type, amenities, location, design, use policies, weather, and other factors. Site-specific vehicle trips are unknown at this time but will be assessed during site plan preparation. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Implementation of the trails component of the plan will provide improved non-motorized vehicular access to employment, residential, and recreational facilities. Arlington Parks &, Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) SEPA Checklist: Page 12 of 15 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Developing new parks and special facilities with active recreational uses will attract patrons. This will increase the likelihood that fire, police, and emergency medical services may be needed. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. The greatest sense of safety comes from the presence of public patrons utilizing the parks and trails, and from public stewardship of the parks and trails. Several measures will be considered in the planning stages of an individual project that may reduce or control perceived or potential impacts such as: hours of operation, access gates, emergency service access requirements, and environmental designs utilized for crime prevention. 16. UTILITIES a. Underline utilities currently available in the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. These services are generally available throughout the Arlington UGA. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Trails generally require none of these services; however, portable restrooms may be used at times when trail use reaches high levels. Parks may require electricity for safety lighting and/or irrigation. Parks need water, electricity, and sewage services to operate restrooms. The service needs of recreation facilities, such as swimming pools and community centers, may vary slightly, but will typically need water, electricity, refuse, and sewage services. Specific utility needs will be addressed as individual parks, recreation facilities, or trail segments are designed and engineered. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature _____________________________________________________________ Date Submitted: 01/26/2022 Arlington Parks &, Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) SEPA Checklist: Page 13 of 15 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? The proposed PRMP identifies acquisition, development, and improvement of various types of park facilities. Among these facilities, community parks and recreation facilities have the greatest potential to cause the listed conditions. These facilities may have roadways, parking lots, and buildings with impervious surfaces that concentrate water runoff. Automobile traffic and parking may increase emissions into the air and increase noise levels. Based on facility design and vegetation, fertilizers, and other chemicals may be used during maintenance activity. Dust and automotive exhaust would likely be released during park construction. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Auto emissions and demand for parking at community parks and recreation facilities could be reduced through increased use of nonmotorized transportation. Implementing the proposed trail systems is a measure to reduce use of automobiles to access park facilities 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The PRMP calls for the protection of the area’s most significant natural corridors as greenspace, natural areas, and/or wildlife habitat. These natural corridors include areas that provide important habitat for a variety of plants, animals, and fish, and are found both inside and outside the Arlington UGA. Construction of parks or trails in these areas would increase public access and use. Without proper facility design and management, public use and overuse can harm the value of wildlife habitat. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: The PRMP identifies as one of its goals the statement to “Preserve and protect significant environmental features.” Acquisition and designation of such areas will act to protect and conserve environmentally sensitive areas, including habitat for sensitive plant, fish, and terrestrial wildlife species. Short-term impacts to plants, fish, and wildlife may be avoided or reduced through appropriate design and construction practices, and through adherence to applicable local, state, and federal environmental regulations. Projects developed under the parks plan will be designed to avoid and minimize impacts to federally and state listed species to the greatest extent practicable, and projects involving unavoidable impacts to listed species or habitat will be permitted in accordance with local, state, and federal regulations. The potential for impacts resulting from increased public access and overuse may be avoided by routing access away from the most sensitive areas, utilizing vegetative buffer to protect sensitive habitat, and restricting access to nesting or breeding locations during certain periods. 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? The proposal is not expected to deplete energy or natural resources. Arlington Parks &, Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) SEPA Checklist: Page 14 of 15 Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: The PRMP encourages nonmotorized transportation, which will minimize consumption of petroleum resources. In addition, the proposal encourages the preservation, appreciation, and accessibility of natural resource corridors within the Arlington UGA. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? As noted earlier, parks and trails may be within or adjacent to areas designated as 100-year floodplain, potentially unstable slopes, wetlands, shorelines as governed by the Shoreline Management Act, archaeological or historical resources, and habitat for threatened or endangered species. The PRMP identifies acquisition and designation of these areas as greenspace, natural areas, wildlife habitat and, where appropriate, trail corridors. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: A thorough inventory and analysis of alternative sites will precede final park, trail and/or facility placement. This analysis will consider restrictions resulting from government regulation of wetlands, floodplains, grading, shorelines, hydraulics, and other pertinent government programs and regulations. Individual parks and trail segments will be designed to protect environmentally sensitive areas and will be subject to additional SEPA review. Methods to be used include, but will not be limited to, routing parks and trails away from the most sensitive environmental areas, providing vegetative and earth buffers to screen park and trail users from sensitive habitat features, and incorporating habitat restoration work into the overall park and trail design. Site specific details will be evaluated when individual park and trail segments are proposed for development. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The PRMP supports continued public acquisition of shoreline areas for appropriate recreational uses and development of these sites in a manner that will preserve the natural characteristics of the shoreline. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: Projects proposed and implemented under the PRMP will be subject to further environmental and land use review, as appropriate, to ensure consistency with all local, state, and federal laws and regulations. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? The PRMP calls for a system of neighborhood parks, community parks, trails, and recreation facilities that is designed to accommodate alternative modes of transportation. If successful, there would be a decreasing reliance on the automobile and a corresponding decline in the demands on the existing transportation system. If transportation patterns and modes do not change, new parks and facilities could increase traffic demands on existing transportation facilities. Arlington Parks &, Recreation Master Plan (PRMP) SEPA Checklist: Page 15 of 15 Implementing the PRMP may increase the need for law enforcement services. The type of law enforcement service needs are influenced by several factors, including type, size, and location of parks and trails, levels of development, neighboring properties, number of users, hours of use, transportation systems, parking, and other support facilities. Vehicle patrol would serve parks and trails located along roadways. Parks and trails located away from transportation corridors may require specialized patrols, such as the mountain bike patrols. Park, trail, and trailhead design will consider provisions for crime prevention, such as security lighting, emergency phone service, clearing and pruning landscaping, fencing, a neighborhood watch program and access for emergency vehicles. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: Proposed neighborhood parks are distributed throughout the UGA to enable walking or bicycling to them as a means to reduce demands on the transportation system. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The proposed PRMP is in compliance with local, state and federal regulations, and all development of future parks and trail segments shall also comply with all local, state, and federal regulations. Draft Transportation Master Plan CITY OF ARLINGTON Prepared for: City of Arlington June 2024 Prepared by: 12131 113th Avenue NE, Suite 203 Kirkland, WA 98034-7120 Phone: 425-821-3665 www.transpogroup.com 1.22064.00 © 2024 Transpo Group Draft Transportation Master Plan City of Arlington June 2024 i Table of Contents Chapter 1 Introduction............................................................................................................. 2 Purpose .................................................................................................................................. 2 Study Area ............................................................................................................................. 3 Chapter 2 Goals and Policies ................................................................................................. 5 Chapter 3 Existing Conditions ................................................................................................ 6 Roadway System ................................................................................................................... 6 Public Transportation ........................................................................................................... 18 Non-Motorized Facilities ...................................................................................................... 20 Air Transportation ................................................................................................................ 22 Freight Transportation ......................................................................................................... 22 Transportation Demand Management ................................................................................. 27 Technology .......................................................................................................................... 28 Chapter 4 Future Conditions – 2044 .................................................................................... 29 Travel Forecast Model ......................................................................................................... 29 Forecast Travel Conditions .................................................................................................. 34 Level of Service Standards and Analysis ............................................................................ 34 Chapter 5 Transportation Systems Plan.............................................................................. 42 Transportation Projects and Programs ................................................................................ 42 Streets and Highways .......................................................................................................... 52 Public Transit and Transportation Demand Management ................................................... 58 Non-Motorized Facilities ...................................................................................................... 58 Air Transportation ................................................................................................................ 61 Freight Rail Service.............................................................................................................. 61 Technology .......................................................................................................................... 61 Chapter 6 Financing Program ............................................................................................... 62 Financial Planning and Programming .................................................................................. 62 Funding Strategies ................................................................................................................. 1 Revenue Analysis .................................................................................................................. 3 Project and Program Cost Estimates..................................................................................... 4 Reassessment Strategy ......................................................................................................... 5 Implementation Program ....................................................................................................... 6 Chapter 7 Consistency With Other Agencies ....................................................................... 9 WSDOT Highway Improvement Program & Six-Year Transpiration Improvement Program 9 Connecting Washington Transportation Improvement ........................................................ 10 Puget Sound Regional Council ............................................................................................ 11 Snohomish County and Adjacent Cities .............................................................................. 11 Community Transit ............................................................................................................... 12 Federal and State Air Quality Regulations .......................................................................... 12 City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 1 Appendix List to be provided with finalized document Figures List to be developed Tables List to be developed City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 2 Chapter 1 Introduction The most recent Transportation Master Plan (TMP) was updated in 2017. Changes in land use and projected growth patterns affect the transportation system needs. Planned improvements may no longer be needed, may need revisions, or new projects may be required because of changes in land use and growth. Planned improvements for the City of Arlington’s transportation system are identified for the short- term in the six-year transportation improvement program (TIP) and the long-term in the 20-year TIP. Other agencies also develop improvement plans for transportation facilities in Arlington. The City Comprehensive Plan is being updated for the 2044 condition. This TMP addresses changes in land use projections, the City’s goals, and policies, and meets the current goals and transportation policies established by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). Purpose This TMP provides the link between the City’s Land Use Element and the transportation facilities and services needed to support growth during the next twenty (20) years. It identifies capacity, operational, and safety improvements along City streets and addresses multimodal needs such as transit, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities. The TMP reflects the interdependence of transportation and land use and is influenced by choices made as part of the Land Use Element. Conversely, land uses are influenced by choices and policies made in the TMP. The TMP implements the Arlington Transportation Element, which is a key component of the City of Arlington’s Comprehensive Plan and works together with the other Comprehensive Plan Elements. It also serves as the basis for the City’s long-range TIP and provides the framework for the City’s decisions pertaining to future growth and management of the transportation system. Growth Management Act The Transportation Element (TE) and TMP are developed in accordance with the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA), which requires that transportation planning be directly tied to the City’s land use decisions and fiscal planning. GMA requires, at a minimum, that a transportation plan contain: • Land use assumptions to estimate travel, including impacts to state-owned facilities. • An inventory of air, water, and land transportation facilities and services, including transit alignments, to define existing capital facilities and travel levels as a basis for future planning. • Level of service (LOS) standards for all arterials, transit routes, and state-owned facilities as a gauge for evaluating system performance. These standards should be regionally coordinated. • Specific actions and requirements for bringing into compliance locally owned transportation facilities or services that are below an established level of service standard. • Forecasts of traffic for at least ten years based on the adopted land use plan to provide information on the location, timing, and capacity needs of future growth. • Identification of system expansion needs, and transportation system management needs to meet current and future demands. • An analysis of funding capacity to judge needs against probable funding resources. • A multi-year transportation financing plan. • If probable funding falls short of meeting identified needs, a discussion of how additional funding will be raised or how land use assumptions will be reassessed to ensure that level of service standards will be met. • Intergovernmental coordination efforts, including an assessment of the impacts of the transportation plan and land use assumptions on the transportation systems of adjacent jurisdictions. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 3 • Demand-management strategies. • Local transportation elements must also include the following: o Estimated traffic impacts to State-owned transportation facilities resulting from land-use assumptions. o LOS for state-owned transportation facilities. o Identification and assessment of GMA concurrency and the applicability to highways of statewide significance. o A pedestrian and bicycle component that includes collaborative efforts to identify and designate planned improvements for pedestrian and bicycle facilities and corridors that address and encourage enhanced community access and promote healthy lifestyles. The City of Arlington is a member of the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), and the Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RTPO) for King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish Counties. PSRC is required to certify the transportation-related provisions in local comprehensive plans. By doing so, PSRC assures consistency with the multicounty planning policies in VISION 2050 and the requirements listed above for conformity with GMA. Study Area The TMP study area includes all areas within Arlington City limits. The transportation planning study area is shown on Figure 1-1. The City is adjacent to the City of Marysville and Snohomish County. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 4 Figure 1-1 Study Area City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 5 Chapter 2 Goals and Policies The City has identified a range of goals and policies to implement the Transportation Master Plan efficiently and effectively. The goals and policies are outlined elsewhere in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The transportation goals and policies are organized around the foundational principles and guiding goals of the Arlington Comprehensive Plan including:  Equity: Enable quality, diverse, and efficient residential growth, with an emphasis on homeownership and affordability.  Economic Stability and Vibrancy: Create opportunities for economic stability, vibrancy, sustainability, and resilience.  Climate Adaptation and Resiliency: Develop achievable plans to address climate adaptation and community resilience.  Neighborhoods and Connectivity: Prioritize place-making and neighborhood connectivity.  Healthy Active Lifestyles: Develop recreational and park opportunities for the protection of the quality of life for our residents. The Transportation Element strives to emphasize the importance of pedestrians and bicycles and prioritizing the creation of a network of multimodal transportation-related improvements and policies to ensure that vehicle traffic can coexist with the community’s need for a safe and comfortable active transportation environment. It also recognizes the need for the City to work with other transportation service providers to plan, design, fund, and implement transportation projects and programs to serve the community. The goals and policies provide a framework for decision making related to transportation projects and programs. The transportation goals and policies will be used by the City in deciding how to secure and use funding, decisions related to new land use development applications, and coordination with other City planning objectives. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 6 Chapter 3 Existing Conditions Travel within and around the City of Arlington is served by the existing transportation system, which includes roadways, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and transit facilities and services. These facilities and services provide for daily travel in and around Arlington and to and from adjacent communities and the greater Snohomish County region. The existing conditions of the transportation systems are summarized to provide insights to current issues and constraints to help guide the identification of future potential improvement projects, programs, and policies. Roadway System The roadway system provides the backbone for travel in and around the City of Arlington. The roadways serve cars, freight, pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit. Road Classifications The roadways are classified in a hierarchy based on the intended purpose, desired service for each facility, and surrounding land use. The City of Arlington uses a four-level functional classification system, excluding the freeway/interstate. Freeway/Interstate is under Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) jurisdiction. The classifications are related to the road characteristics of Average Daily Traffic (ADT), number of lanes, lane width, posted speed limit, and pavement thickness. The functional classes are defined in Table 3-1. Table 3-1 Arlington Roadway Functional Classification Roadway Type Description / Purpose Examples Speed ROW ADT1 Freeway/Interstate Freeways are multi-lane, high speed, high-capacity roadways, under WSDOT jurisdiction, connecting the City of Arlington with the Region. Interstate 5 (I-5) 70 mph - >80,000 Connect large subareas of the City. May serve secondary traffic generators and large community. 172nd Street NE/SR 531 Smokey Point Boulevard 35 mph 60-110 feet 1,000 – 2,000+ Promote the flow of vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians from arterial roads to lower-order roads. 188th Street NE 211th Place NE 25 mph 60 feet 1,000 – 2,000 Convey vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles to/from destination points to higher-order roads. 200th Street NE 204th Street NE 25 mph 50 feet 250 or less Paved or unpaved access roads that do not carry through traffic. Provide access to a property or building. - 15 mph 24 feet 250 or less Note: WSDOT = Washington State Department of Transportation 1. ADT = Average daily traffic Table 3-2 summarizes the functional class of State-owned facilities (WSDOT) in the City of Arlington, which include Interstate-5 (I-5), State Route 9 (SR 9), SR 530, and SR 531. I-5 and SR 9 provide north- south connectivity to the region. SR 530 and SR 351 provide east-west connectivity in the City of Arlington. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 7 Table 3-2 WSDOT Facilities in Arlington Functional Classification and Description Roadway WSDOT Classification Primary Direction Speed Limit Interstate 5 (I-5) Interstate North/South 60 to 70 mph Other Freeway/Expressway North/South 55 mph /SR 531 Minor Arterial East/West 35 mph Other Principal Arterial East/West 35 to 55 mph Source: WSDOT, 2023 Note: WSDOT = Washington State Department of Transportation. mph = miles per hour. Table 3-3 summarizes the functional classification of key City-owned roadways. Table 3-3 City of Arlington Key Roadway Functional Classification and Description Roadway Classification Jurisdiction Primary Direction Speed Limit E Burke Avenue Arterial Arlington East/West 25 mph Collector Arlington North/South 25 mph Arterial/Collector1 Arlington East/West 25 mph Arterial Arlington North/South 25 mph Arterial Arlington East/West 25 mph Arterial Arlington North/South 35 to 40 mph Street NE Local Arlington East/West 25 mph Local Arlington East/West 25 mph Arterial Arlington North/South 35 mph Collector/Local2 Arlington East/West 25 mph Collector/Arterial3 Arlington North/South 25 mph Local Arlington East/West 20 mph Collector/Arterial4 Arlington East/West 35 mph Collector Arlington East/West 35 mph Local Arlington North/South 25 mph Airport Boulevard Arterial/Collector5 Arlington North/South 35 mph Local Arlington North/South 25 mph Local Arlington North/South 35 mph Avenue NE Arterial Arlington North/South 35 mph Source: City of Arlington, 2023 Note: WSDOT = Washington State Department of Transportation; mph = miles per hour 1. Arterial west of N Macleod Avenue, collector east of N Macleod Avenue. 2. Collector west of S Stillaguamish Avenue, local street east of S Stillaguamish Avenue. 3. Collector between E 3rd Street and E Highland Drive; arterial south of E Highland Drive. 4. Collector west of 67th Avenue NE, arterial east of 67th Avenue NE. 5. Minor arterial north of 172nd Avenue NE, major collector south of 172nd Avenue NE. Figure 3-1 illustrates the functional classification of roadway system in the City. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 8 Figure 3-1 Functional Classification City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 9 Tribal Roads Adopted regional policy supports meaningful, regular, and ongoing exchange of information and opinions for better informed decision-making and mutual understanding between Indian Tribes as sovereign nations and Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) member jurisdictions. The VISION 2050 policy, MPP- RC-4, directs members of the Puget Sound region to coordinate with Tribes in regional and local planning. The Stillaguamish Tribe (Tribe) and the City of Arlington have been partners in the planning, maintenance, and preservation of Arlington’s surface transportation network. The Tribal Transportation Program (TPP) is a federal program jointly administered by the Federal Highway Administration’s Federals Lands Highway Office and the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) that provides funding for planning, design, construction, and maintenance activities of TPP listed roads. The purpose of the TPP is to provide safe and adequate transportation and public road access to and within tribal lands. Arlington is in the Stillaguamish tribal area. The Tribe and Arlington have identified BIA/Tribal Roads within Arlington city limits. These roads are eligible for TPP funding. shows the BIA/Tribal Roads in Arlington, which includes key corridors such as Smokey Point Boulevard from the city limit to 188th Street NE and 67th Avenue NE from 172nd Street NE (SR 531) to SR 530 and 67th Avenue NE between SR 531 and SR 9. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 10 Figure 3-2 Tribal Roads in Arlington City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 11 Traffic Volumes Existing traffic counts were collected in June and November 2022 for key intersections and roadways within Arlington. The detailed traffic count worksheets are provided in Appendix A. Existing weekday PM peak hour link volumes are summarized in Figure 3-3. As shown on Figure 3-3, the highest traffic levels are along the arterial streets with SR 531 in the City having the highest weekday PM peak hour traffic. Midweek hourly traffic volumes and vehicle classification were also collected for key roadway segments. Exhibit 3-1 provides a summary of the mid-week average volumes for the roadways collected. Exhibit 3-1 Mid-Week Average Volumes As shown in Exhibit 3-1, peak activity occurs during the PM period between 4 and 5 p.m. for all locations. There is additional peaking behavior during the weekday AM commute period, but overall AM peak hour volumes are lower than the PM peak hour. For the roadway segment data collection, the highest traffic volumes are along SR 530. Midday volumes were also collected at the 67th Avenue NE/204th Street intersection between 12 and 2 p.m. The midday volumes are lower than the weekday PM peak hour traffic volumes; however, the number of heavy vehicles at the 67th Avenue NE/204th Street intersection is higher during the midday period. The review of traffic volumes shows the weekday PM peak hour traffic volumes are the highest throughout the day and therefore, this period is the focus of the intersection operations analysis. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 12 Figure 3-3 Existing Weekday PM Peak Hour Volumes City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 13 Traffic Operations Weekday PM peak hour traffic operations were evaluated at the key intersections based on level of service. The LOS analysis method was based on procedures identified in the Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition or 2000 as noted. The analysis uses Synchro 12 for signalized and stop controlled intersections. Roundabout controlled intersections were evaluated utilizing Sidra 9 and the procedures established by WSDOT. The operational characteristics of an intersection are determined by calculating the intersection level of service (LOS). For signalized, roundabout, and all-way stop controlled locations, LOS is measured in average delay per vehicle and is reported for the intersection as a whole. At side-street stop-controlled intersections LOS is measured in average delay per vehicle during the peak hour of traffic and is reported for the worst operating approach or movement of the intersection. Traffic operations and average vehicle delay for an intersection can be described qualitatively with a range of levels of service (LOS A through LOS F), with LOS A indicating free-flowing traffic and LOS F indicating extreme congestion and long vehicle delays. Appendix B contains a detailed explanation of LOS criteria and definitions. The study intersections are in the City of Arlington and WSDOT jurisdictions. The adopted LOS standards are described below. City of Arlington. The City of Arlington has adopted LOS D for City arterials and LOS C for all other streets. The LOS D standard applies to roads that primarily serve its business district or industrial areas. The City of Arlington further recognizes and adopts the most current LOS standard along state highways. WSDOT. Washington State has classified highways that provide transportation functions that promote and maintain statewide travel and economic linkages as being of statewide significance or Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS). HSS facilities include interstate highways and other principal arterials that connect major communities. The designation helps assist with the allocation and direction of funding. The HSS was mandated by the 1998 legislature, and in 1999, legislation was passed that WSDOT update the HSS at least every five years. I-5, SR 530, and SR 9 are defined as HSS in Arlington. I-5 is considered an urban HSS with a LOS D standard to milepost 207.76 in Arlington and a rural HSS with a LOS C standard to the north. SR 9 is an urban HSS through Arlington with a LOS D standard. SR 530 has a LOS D standard between the I-5 interchange and 27th Avenue NE and between SR 9 and the Stillaguamish River, and a LOS C standard between 27th Avenue NE and SR 9 and east of the Stillaguamish River. The region’s Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) also establishes highways of statewide regional significance (HSRS). SR 531 (172nd Street NE) is an HSRS in Arlington. PSRC has three tiers of LOS. Tier 1 is defined as the "inner" urban area and generally defined as a 3-mile buffer around the most heavily traveled freeways; there are no Tier 1 facilities in Arlington. Tier 2 routes serve the outer urban area outside of a three-mile buffer around the most heavily traveled freeways. Tier 3 are rural routes of regional significance that are not in Tier 2. SR 531 is a Tier 2 road with a LOS D standard. Table 3-4 summarizes the existing weekday PM peak hour intersection operations for key intersections within Arlington. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 14 Table 3-4 Existing Weekday PM Peak Hour Level of Service Summary Intersections Traffic LOS 1 2 3 1. SR 9/W Burke Avenue TWSC D D 25.0 WB TWSC D C 16.4 NB Signal D C 30.3 - AWSC D C 18.6 - 67th Avenue NE/Lebanon Street TWSC D C 24.9 NB S Olympic Avenue/E Maple Street AWSC D A 9.2 - I-5 Southbound Ramps/SR 530 Signal C C 25.5 - I-5 Northbound Ramps/SR 530 Signal C F 115.3 - 9. Smokey Point Boulevard/SR 530 TWSC C C 22.0 NBR Smokey Point Boulevard/Smokey Point Boulevard TWSC C A 9.7 EBR SR 530/211th Place NE TWSC C F 157 WB 12. 67th Avenue NE/211th Place NE Signal D B 11.2 - S Stillaguamish Avenue/E Highland Drive AWSC C A 8.7 - 67th Avenue NE/204th Street NE Signal D B 12.8 - SR 9/204th Street NE Signal D D 46.7 - Smokey Point Boulevard/188th Street NE AWSC D C 18 - 18. 67th Avenue NE/188th Street NE TWSC D F 52.8 EBL 19. SR 9/Crown Ridge Boulevard Signal D C 22.7 - Smokey Point Boulevard/Smokey Point Drive Signal D B 12.7 - Airport Boulevard/188th Street NE TWSC D C 15.4 NBL I-5 Southbound Ramps/SR 531 Signal D A 8.3 - I-5 Northbound Ramps/SR 531 Signal D D 44.9 - Signal D D 54.6 - Signal D B 13.5 - Roundabout D A 5.7 0.38 51st Avenue NE/SR 531 Signal D C 21.3 - 59th Avenue NE/172nd Street NE Signal D C 28.9 - 67th Avenue NE/SR 531 Signal D D 51.1 - Gleneagle Boulevard/SR 531 TWSC D B 13.0 SB SR 9/SR 531 Roundabout D A 6.2 0.43 Source: Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), 2022 and Transpo Group, 2023 Notes: Bold indicates LOS standard is not met. 1. Level of service (LOS), based on Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition methodology unless otherwise noted. 2. Average delay in seconds per vehicle. 3. Worst movement reported for unsignalized intersections where EB = eastbound, WB = westbound, SBL = southbound left, NB = northbound, and EBL = eastbound left. 4. Volume to capacity (V/C) ratio for roundabout controlled intersections. 5. Evaluated utilizing HCM 2000 methodology due to limitations in signal timing parameters or the presence of U-turning movements. As shown in Table 3-4, three intersections currently do not meet the LOS standard during the weekday PM peak hour and currently operate at LOS F. The intersections not meeting standard include: • I-5 NB Ramps/SR 530 (signal) • SR 530/211th Place NE (two-way stop-controlled) • 188th Street NE/67th Avenue NE (two-way stop-controlled) Poor operations are known issues at the SR 530 and 188th Street NE/67th Avenue NE intersections. WSDOT completed construction of a compact roundabout at the SR 530/211th Place NE intersection in 2023. Adding a compact roundabout at the SR 530/211th Place NE intersection will improve traffic City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 15 operations and reduce the risk of serious collisions because drivers will no longer have to make turns across lanes of fast-moving traffic. The City’s 6-Year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) also includes improving the 188th Street NE/67th Avenue NE intersection. The City is currently considering a traffic signal at this intersection, which would be constructed as part of planned development in the area. Traffic Safety Collision data for the most recent five-year period for intersections were reviewed to identify potential safety issues within the City. The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) reported collision data was summarized between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2022. Figure 3-4 illustrates collisions have been decreasing over the last 5-years in the City of Arlington. This decrease in collisions is related to improvements that have been occurring in the City including roundabout projects. While collisions have been decreasing, fatal and serious injury collisions have increased. Figure 3-4 Five-Year Summary of Arlington Collisions Figure 3-5 provides a summary of fatal and serious injury collisions within the City. One (1) fatality and 36 serious injury crashes occurred over the 5-year period. Of the fatality or serious injury crashes the most common collision type involved a vehicle hitting a fixed object. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 16 Figure 3-5 Five-Year Fatal and Serious Injury Collision Types Figure 3-6 provides a map of Arlington reported collisions to identify hotspots. A review of Figure 3-6 shows the hotspots for collisions within the City are along SR 531 with the majority near I-5 and Smokey Point Boulevard as well as at 51st Street NE and 67th Avenue NE. WSDOT is planning improvements along SR 531 including the installation of a roundabouts at the 51st Street NE and 67th Avenue NE intersections, which will address safety at these locations. A closer review of the data shows the highest number of collisions occurred at the Smokey Point Boulevard/SR 531 intersection with an average of 37.4 collisions per year. This area has the highest traffic volumes in the City and the City is aware of safety issues. While this is a WSDOT controlled intersection, the City continues to evaluate potential improvements to the Smokey Point Boulevard/SR 531 intersection especially as development occurs in the area. No plans have been identified for improvements at Smokey Point Boulevard and SR 531 to date. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 17 Figure 3-6 Collision Summary 2018-2022 City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 18 Public Transportation Transit service to and from Arlington is operated by Community Transit and has been since 1980. Community Transit serves more than 2,100 stops and 22 park and ride facilities within the region. The transit services include local bus, commuter bus, Swift Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), paratransit, and vanpool. The City of Arlington supports Community Transit’s transit LOS standards. Community Transit’s 2023-2028 Transit Development Plan (TDP) proposes aligning and connecting bus service with Sound Transit Lynnwood Link light rail in 2024. The 2024 Community Transit fixed-route network plan provides improved connections between buses and light rail, expands the frequent service network, adjusts service to changing markets and ensures equitable access to service. Community Transit updated the Journey 2050 Long Range Plan in December 2023. The plan provides a vision for future transit improvements in the service area including development of a Swift Gold Line. The Swift Gold Line would provide service between the Smokey Point Transit Center in Arlington and the Everett Station with service planned to start 2027-2029. Link light rail service is anticipated to be extended to the Everett Station by 2041. The transit routes, transit centers, and park and ride facilities in Arlington are depicted on Figure 3-7.The existing Smokey Point Transit Center is served by seven transit routes that provide service throughout the Snohomish County area. Additionally, there are three park and ride facilities in Arlington including: • Smokey Point Community Church (17721 Smokey Point Boulevard) – served by routes 220, 227, and 240 • Arlington Park & Ride (Highway 9 at 4th Street) – served by route 227 • I-5 & Highway 531 Park & Ride (2901 172nd Street NE) – served by route 240 Most of the City’s transit service has headways of about 60 minutes except for the 201/202 route, which has approximately 10-to- 30-minute headways. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 19 Figure 3-7 Transit Routes City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 20 Non-Motorized Facilities The City of Arlington’s non-motorized transportation facilities include bike lanes, multiuse trails, sidewalks, and crosswalks. City non-motorized facilities including trails and sidewalks are shown on Figure 3-8. Arlington is well connected with sidewalks with approximately 85 miles of sidewalk covering 80 percent of the roadway system. The current bicycle system relies primarily on the existing trails within or through the city limits. There are existing bike lanes on part of SR 531 (172nd Street NE) and Airport Boulevard between 188th Street NE and SR 531 (172nd Street NE). The Arlington Complete Streets Program (November 2018) addresses the needs of all users of the transportation system as development and redevelopment occurs within the City. The Complete Streets Program maintains policy documents such as the Bicycle Plan and the Pedestrian Plan. The Pedestrian and Bicycle Plans set citywide direction in key areas related to the walking and biking system and connectivity. The Pedestrian and Bicycle Plans (both dated October 2018) identify connectivity to the Smokey Point Transit Center as a high priority. The projects identified to enhance connectivity to the Smokey Point Transit include sidewalks and trails along SR 531 (172nd Street NE) and construction of sidewalks and bike lanes along Cemetery Road and 188th Street NE. The City has also identified Smokey Point Boulevard, 204th Street NE, and SR 9 as critical to citywide non-motorized connectivity. There are several multiuse trail routes within Arlington. Primary trails include the Centennial Trail and the Airport Trail. The Centennial Trail runs primarily along SR 9 and 67th Avenue NE in Arlington and is approximately 29 miles connecting the cities of Snohomish, Lake Stevens, and Arlington. The path is a 10 to 12-foot-wide paved trail used for walking, bicycling, hiking, and horseback riding. The Airport Trail is an unimproved walking path, which runs around Arlington Airport. Other trails within or connected to the City’s trail network include: • The Whitehorse Trail • Eagle Trail and Stormwater Wetlands Trails • Jensen Park Connector Trail • Zimmerman Hill Climb City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 21 Figure 3-8 Non-Motorized Facilities City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 22 Air Transportation The City owns and operates the Arlington Municipal Airport. The airport is located northeast of 51st Avenue NE/Airport Boulevard, north of SR 531 (172nd Street NE), west of 59th Avenue NE, and south of 188th Street NE. Uses at the airport include general aviation facilities, industrial, commercial, and public uses. The airport currently operates with two runways and accommodates industrial/airport uses such as: • Aerial Photography • Charter Flights • Corporate Hangers • Flight Training • Charter Flights The airport does not have scheduled passenger flights. Vehicular access to the airport is provided via 192nd Street NE, 188th Street NE, and 51st Avenue NE. The Airport Master Plan is currently being updated. Freight Transportation The City’s freight system is made of truck routes and rail corridors. Truck Routes The Washington State Freight and Goods Transportation System (FGTS) is used to classify state highways, county roads, and city streets according to the average annual gross truck tonnage they carry as directed by RCW 47.05.021. The FGTS establishes funding eligibility for the Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB) grants and supports designations of HSS (Highways of Statewide Significance) corridors, pavement upgrades, traffic congestion management, and other state investment decisions. The FGTS classifies roadways using five freight tonnage classifications, T-1 through T-5. Routes classified as T-1 or T-2 are considered strategic freight corridors and are given priority for receiving FMSIB funding. The classifications are as follows: • T-1: Over 10,000,000 annual gross tonnage • T-2: 4,000,000 to 10,000,000 annual gross tonnage • T-3: 300,000 to 4,000,000 annual gross tonnage • T-4: 100,000 to 300,000 annual gross tonnage • T-5: Over 20,000 gross tonnage in a 60-day period. The roadways with the highest classification, and heaviest amount of truck traffic, are I-5, SR 531, 67th Avenue NE, and Smokey Point Boulevard. Figure 3-9 shows the existing freight classification for truck routes in the City. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 23 Figure 3-9 Freight Routes City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 24 Truck Classifications In addition to traffic volumes along key corridors, vehicle classification was collected near existing industrial areas to understand how the intended FGTS classifications compare to the actual vehicle use. The truck corridors reviewed include: • 211th Place NE West of 67th Avenue NE • SR 9 North of W Burke Avenue • SR 530 East of Manhattan Avenue • SR 530 East of Smokey Point Boulevard • 67th Avenue NE North of 204th Street • 204th Street NE West of SR 9 The annual truck tonnage was estimated for the corridors above based on the traffic volume and vehicle class data and using the validated WSDOT method outlined in the Washington State Freight and Goods Transportation System 2021. 211th Place NE is classified as a T-3 freight route, which is intended to carry 300,000 to 4,000,000 annual tons. This road is estimated to carry approximately 1 million tons per year, which is within the range of a T-3 facility. Exhibit 3-2 provides a summary of the mid-week average vehicle classification for 211th Place NE. Exhibit 3-2 Mid-Week Average Vehicle Classification – 211th Place NE West of 67th Avenue NE Although 211th Place NE appears to be appropriately classified based on the truck volumes, it is a two- lane roadway with limited to no shoulder available with inadequate design for trucks. Due to current grades and limited right-of-way, widening 211th Place NE and intersections at SR 530 and 67th Avenue NE to accommodate large trucks may be difficult. The freight classification of the 211th Place NE will be considered with the future transportation system including either changes to the classification and/or improvements to the road for trucks. SR 9 north of W Burke Avenue is also a two-lane facility classified as a T-3 and provides connectivity to the northern portion of Arlington. Exhibit 3-3 provides a summary mid-week average vehicle classification along SR 9 north of W Burke Avenue. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 25 Exhibit 3-3 Mid-Week Average Vehicle Classification – SR 9 North of W Burke Avenue Exhibit 3-3 shows SR 9 north of W Burke Avenue single-unit and larger trucks represent 19 percent of the average daily volumes along the corridor. An annual truck tonnage of 5 million is estimated along SR 9 north of Burke Avenue, which is a million more tons than the T-3 classification. Consideration may need to be given to the freight class of SR 9. SR 530 east of Manhattan Avenue is a two-lane facility and connects northern Arlington to areas northeast of the City. This portion of SR 530 is designated as a T-2 facility where the range for freight is 4 to 10 million annual gross tons. Exhibit 3-4 provides a summary of the vehicle classification along this portion of SR 530. Exhibit 3-4 Mid-Week Average Vehicle Classification – SR 530 East of Manhattan Avenue Exhibit 3-4 shows single unit trucks and larger represents 15 percent of the vehicles during the mid-week along SR 530. SR 530 east of Manhattan Avenue is estimated to carry approximately 6 million annual tons, which is within the range of a T-2 facility. SR 530 east of Smokey Point Boulevard is also a two-lane facility designated as a T-2 roadway and runs east-west along the northern portion of Arlington connecting to I-5 at the western end of the City. Exhibit 3-5 provides a summary of the vehicle class along that portion of SR 530. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 26 Exhibit 3-5 Mid-Week Average Vehicle Classification – SR 530 East of Smokey Point Boulevard Single unit trucks comprise approximately 14 percent of vehicle volumes and double unit or larger trucks represent approximately 3 percent or a total of approximately 3,760 trucks. SR 530 east of Smokey Point Boulevard is estimated to carry over 11 million tons annually, which is higher than the T-2 classification. Consideration may need to be given to the freight class of SR 530 near Smokey Point Boulevard. 67th Avenue NE and 204th Street NE are both three-lane facilities designated at T-3 roadways and provides access to many industrial facilities in northeastern Arlington. Exhibit 3-6 and Exhibit 3-7 provide a summary of the vehicle classification along 67th Avenue NE and 204th Street NE, respectively. Exhibit 3-6 Mid-Week Average Vehicle Classification – 67th Avenue NE North of 204th Street NE City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 27 Exhibit 3-7 Mid-Week Average Vehicle Classification – 204th Street NE West of SR 9 Both roadways are estimated to carry just under 4 million annual tons of freight, which is within the T-3 classification. Rail The City also has two freight rail corridors operated by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad. One BNSF line runs on the west side of the I-5 corridor and carries both freight and passenger rail traffic. Passenger rail is operated by Amtrack and runs from Eugene, Oregon to Vancouver, B.C. The closest passenger stations are in Everett and Stanwood. The second BNSF line is located on the east side of the City and connects Arlington with the I-5 mainline track at approximately 116th Street NE in Marysville. Most rail crossings are at grade in Arlington. These at-grade crossings include west of the 67th Avenue/SR 531 (172nd Street NE) intersection, along 152nd Street NE east of 51st Avenue NE, west of the Smokey Point Boulevard/136th Street NE intersection and along 51st Avenue NE south of 144th Avenue NE. At-grade crossings impact the roadway system within Arlington as well as access to/from Marysville. The presence of trains delays freight movement and increases congestion and safety issues at the crossings. There is a planned improvement to provide a grade separate interchange at I-5 and 156th Street NE in Marysville, which would improve freight and vehicle access in the area. Transportation Demand Management The City of Arlington has adopted a Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) program to comply with the Washington State CTR requiring local jurisdictions to develop and implement plans to reduce drive-alone trips and vehicle miles traveled per capita. The purpose of the CTR program is to reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, preserve roadway capacity, and reduce dependency on fossil fuels. The CTR program applies to any major employer at a single worksite within the City limits. A major employer is one that employs 100 or more full-time employees who are scheduled to begin work during the morning commute times between 6 and 9 a.m. Employers who have implemented a CTR program include Cascade Valley Hospital, AMT Aerospace, and the Arlington Public Schools. City staff attend CTR trainings and participate in bike to work and other events that encourage the use of alternative transportation modes. The need for appropriate transit stops is considered during development review. Transportation solutions are developed in coordination with Community Transit, Snohomish County, WSDOT, and major employers. Some tools identified to promote commute trip reduction include: • Rideshare-on-line • Identifying potential ride share opportunities through neighborhood groups or contacts • Staggered work hours • Payment-in-lieu of CTR City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 28 • Identification of major employers at City Business License application • Growth and Transportation Efficiency Centers (GTEC) • Bus stop and trail connections. The CTR Efficiency Act allows jurisdictions to designate Growth and Transportation Efficiency Centers. A GTEC is a defined, mixed-use urban area that contains employment or housing and supports multiple modes of transportation. The GTEC would allow the City to coordinate complimentary employment sites into one program and allow greater flexibility in administering programs. Arlington may designate activity centers as GTECs and establish a transportation demand management program for the designated area. The State CTR Board has established minimum criteria for GTECs, and the center must be certified by the PSRC. Rather than increasing capacity, Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures are aimed at reducing the transportation demand generated. In addition to physical improvements to the multi-modal network, the City has TDM measures in place that will use existing capacity more efficiently, increase capacity for motorized transportation, or reduce the peak period transportation demands, such as: • Encouraging land use patterns that facilitate multi-purpose trips and reduce trips by single- occupant vehicles • Requiring new construction to include sidewalks, bicycle storage/parking, and access to mass transit where possible • Providing bicycle lanes on arterial and collector streets • Constructing a bicycle path and pedestrian trail that connects schools and downtown area with athletic fields and parks • Working with Community Transit to encourage transit compatibility for new development • Encouraging pedestrian-scale neighborhoods to enhance access and mobility The Cascade Industrial Center (CIC) is an example of where the City is focusing on implementing CRT and TDM measures to reduce drive alone trips and mitigate the impacts of development. Technology The City currently uses transportation technology such as rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB), speed feedback signs, and accessible pedestrian signal (APS) push buttons to improve safety throughout the transportation system. There are only four (4) traffic signals owned by the City, which are maintained by the County through an Interlocal Agreement. As the use of electric vehicles (EVs) continues to grow within transportation systems, the City recognizes the need to establish EV charging infrastructure. There are currently EV charging stations on the Airport property and private property. The City requires new commercial, mixed-use and multifamily development to look at providing on-site EV charging. There is not currently any City-provided charging infrastructure in the right-of-way or on City-owned properties (e.g., public parking lots). City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 29 Chapter 4 Future Conditions – 2044 Arlington’s Transportation Plan is developed based on the evaluation of the existing transportation system and future transportation system needs based on planned future growth. GMA requires that the transportation planning horizon be at least ten years in the future. The City of Arlington selected a 2044 horizon year. Year 2044 provides a long-range look at the transportation system needed to support anticipated growth in the City and other communities in Snohomish County. Travel forecasts have been developed and analysis has been conducted for average weekday conditions during the PM peak hour. The weekday PM peak hour generally has the highest overall traffic volumes in the community and thus provides the basis for identifying capacity related improvement needs. Travel Forecast Model Primary analyses of the 2044 traffic forecasts were initially based on the following travel forecasting assumptions: • Committed Improvement projects in Arlington’s current Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) • Improvement projects in available transportation plans from adjacent jurisdictions • Puget Sound Regional Council’s (PSRC) Transportation Vision 2050 Update Regional Capacity Projects List (as of May 2022) • WSDOT’s 2024-2027 Statewide Transportation Improvement Program • Arlington’s forecast land use data • PSRC 2050 Land Use Targets forecasts and regional trip end data from the 2050 regional travel demand model. Based on these assumptions, travel forecasts were developed using Arlington’s travel demand model. The following provides an overview of the planned improvements, land use assumptions, travel demand model, and the alternatives analysis. The travel forecasts provide a technical basis for identifying the transportation improvement projects in the transportation systems plan. The Transportation Systems Plan is developed based on the evaluation of the baseline transportation system and transportation needs based on growth in travel due to the land use plan. The analysis of the baseline transportation system identified locations with operational, safety, and alternative transportation mode deficiencies. The future conditions analysis evaluates long-term transportation needs with implementation of the planned land use growth for the City of Arlington and the surrounding communities. Travel forecasts were developed using Arlington’s travel demand model. The model is a tool that is used to convert existing and future land uses into weekday PM peak hour vehicle trips. The following provides an overview of the land use and transportation network assumptions used in preparing the travel forecasts. The Arlington travel demand model was updated to reflect existing 2022 conditions and was used as the basis for preparing 2044 travel demand forecasts for the Arlington UGA. Land Use The 2044 household and employment data represent growth forecast for the City of Arlington. Growth information from neighboring cities that may influence the greater model area is also used. For the Arlington UGA, the household and employment growth totals reflect the land-use forecast described in the Land Use Element of the Arlington Comprehensive Plan. The total Arlington growth anticipated is summarized in Table 4-1. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 30 Table 4-1 City of Arlington Land Use Land Use Type Existing 2020 Future 2044 Increase Housing Units 9,120 25,677 +16,557 12,449 25,782 +13,333 Source: OTAK, 2023 As shown in Table 4-1, by 2044 the number of housing units is forecast to increase by approximately 16,557 and the number of jobs is anticipated to increase 13,333. Transportation Network As a part of baseline forecast 2044 conditions, transportation improvements that are planned and funded were included in analysis. These planned improvements include the widening of several roadways, construction of new roadways, construction of new roundabouts, and the addition of two traffic signals. In addition to these improvements, it was assumed that agencies perform regular traffic signal maintenance and timing updates. The transportation improvements assumed for the baseline 2044 analysis are summarized below. • SR 531 (172nd Street NE) – Widening of SR 531 to four lanes between 43rd Avenue NE and SR 9. • 51st Avenue NE – Widening of 51st Avenue NE to a three-lane urban freight corridor between SR 531 and the southern Arlington City Limits. • 43rd Avenue NE – Widening of 43rd Avenue NE to three-lanes from SR 531 to 180th Street NE. • Smokey Point Boulevard – Widening of Smokey Point Boulevard to three-lanes from 200th Street NE to SR 530. • 172nd Street NE – Widening of 172nd Street NE to three-lanes from SR 9 to 91st Avenue NE. • 89th Avenue NE – Widening of 89th Avenue NE to three-lanes within the City Limits. • 59th Avenue NE – Widening of 89th Avenue NE to three-lanes. • 59th Avenue NE/SR 530 – Construct single lane roundabout. • 211th Place NE/SR 530 – Construct single lane roundabout. • Smokey Point Boulevard/174th Street NE – Construct single lane roundabout. • Smokey Point Boulevard/180th Street NE – Construct single lane roundabout. • Smokey Point Boulevard/183rd Street NE – Construct single lane roundabout. • Smokey Point Boulevard/188th Street NE – Construct single lane roundabout. • 67th Avenue NE/188th Street NE – Install a signal. • 74th Avenue NE/204th Street NE – Install a signal. • 183rd Street NE – Extension from Smokey Point Boulevard to Airport Boulevard as 2-3 lanes with roundabouts at all intersecting roadways. • 180th Street NE – Extension from Smokey Point Boulevard to Airport Boulevard as a two-lane urban freight corridor. • 169th Street NE – Extension from 43rd Avenue NE to 38th Avenue NE as a two-lane urban freight corridor. • 47th Avenue NE – Extension from 169th Street NE to the southern Arlington City Limits as a three- lane industrial roadway. • 169th Street NE – Extension from 51st Avenue NE to 59th Avenue NE. • 211th Place NE – Extension from 211th Place to 59th Avenue NE as a two to three lane facility. • 169th Street NE – Extension from 59th Avenue NE to 67th Avenue NE. • 173rd Street NE – Extension from 43rd Avenue NE to Airport Boulevard. • 47th Avenue NE – Extension from 173rd Street NE to Airport Boulevard. • 47th Avenue NE – Extension from 169th Street NE to the southern Arlington City Limits. • 74th Avenue NE – Extension from Portage Creek to Hazel Street. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 31 As part of the baseline transportation improvements, the City also defined a desired future 2044 pedestrian and bike network as shown on Figure 4-1 and Figure 4-2. This desired non-motorized network follows locations where heavy non-motorized use is expected, such as routes connecting residential areas to recreational facilities and schools, and places of employment. Trails are included in both the pedestrian and bike network since these are used by both pedestrians and bicyclists, and these trails help complete the network. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 32 Figure 4-1 Future Pedestrian Network City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 33 Figure 4-2 Future Bicycle Network City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 34 Forecast Travel Conditions Trip generation was developed through the modeling process, which converts estimates of housing and employment (by category) into daily person trips by trip purpose for each Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ). The daily person trips are then converted into weekday PM peak hour vehicle trips based on factors from the PSRC regional travel demand model. Table 4-2 summarizes the weekday PM peak hour trip generation for the alternatives. Table 4-2 City of Arlington Weekday PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trips Existing 2020 Future 2044 Increase 21,328 45,141 23,813 Source: Transpo Group, 2024 The weekday PM peak hour traffic forecasts and average annual growth rate under baseline 2044 conditions are summarized in Table 4-3 for key intersections. Table 4-3 Baseline Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Intersection 2022 Existing PM 2044 Baseline SR 9 & W Burke Ave 1,465 1,735 0.8% E Division St & SR 9 2,305 2,760 0.8% 805 1,140 1.6% -5 SB Ramps & SR 530 1,170 1,460 1.0% -5 NB Ramps & SR 530 2,070 2,695 1.2% Blvd & SR 530 1,735 2,235 1.2% 630 1,585 4.3% 1,090 1,855 2.4% 1,170 1,505 1.2% 695 1,175 2.4% 2,020 3,630 2.7% 1,885 3,600 3.0% 1,025 2,270 3.7% 1,525 3,620 4.0% Source: Transpo Group, 2024 As shown in Table 4-3, average annual growth at key intersections is anticipated to be between approximately 0.8 percent and 4.3 percent. The growth overall represents an increase over existing traffic volumes at key study intersections of between 150 to 2,095 weekday PM peak hour trips. The growth in traffic volumes will result in additional traffic congestion along city streets assuming similar driving behaviors as today. As traffic volumes increase, the number of hours during the day when congestion is experienced may also increase. A review of the roadway system capacity for Arlington shows that additional roadway connections or widening of streets is required to handle this increase in traffic volumes and maintain adopted LOS. Additional analysis is completed in the subsequent section to determine if improvements are needed to intersections with the growth in projected vehicle traffic. Level of Service Standards and Analysis Multimodal level of service standards are required for non-motorized transportation facilities, locally owned arterials, and transit routes that serve urban growth areas, to serve as a gauge to judge system City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 35 performance, and to help achieve the statewide goal of environmental justice. LOS standards establish the basis for the concurrency requirements in the GMA and are used to evaluate impacts as part of the State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA). Agencies are required to show concurrency—i.e., to “adopt and enforce ordinances which prohibit development approval if the development causes the level of service on a transportation facility to decline below the standards adopted in the transportation element of the comprehensive plan, unless transportation improvements or strategies to accommodate the impacts of development are made concurrent with development” (RCW 36.70A.070(6)(b)). Setting the LOS standard is an essential component of regulating development and identifying planned improvements for inclusion in the TMP. The following sections describe the methodology for determining LOS by mode and provides an analysis of the 2044 forecasts for Arlington. Vehicle Level of service is both a qualitative and quantitative measure of roadway and intersection operations. Vehicle level of service uses an “A” to “F” scale to define the operation of roadways and intersections as follows: LOS A: Primarily free flow traffic operations at average travel speeds. Vehicles are completely unimpeded in their ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. Control delays at intersections are minimal. LOS B: Reasonably unimpeded traffic flow operations at average travel speeds. LOS C: Stable traffic flow operations. However, the ability to maneuver and change lanes may be more restricted than in LOS B, and longer queues may contribute to lower-than-average travel speeds. LOS D: Small increases in traffic flow may cause substantial increases in approach delays and decreases in speed. LOS E: Significant delays in traffic flow operations and lower operating speeds. LOS F: Traffic flows at extremely low speeds. Intersection congestion is likely, with high delays and extensive vehicle queuing. As described in Chapter 3, there are adopted LOS standards for the facilities serving Sumner. Arlington LOS Standards The City of Arlington has adopted LOS D for City arterials and LOS C for all other streets. The LOS D standard applies to roads that primarily serve its business district or industrial areas. The City of Arlington further recognizes and adopts the most current LOS standard along state highways. State Highway LOS Standards I-5 has a LOS D standard to milepost 207.76 in Arlington and a rural HSS with a LOS C standard to the north. SR 9 is an urban HSS through Arlington with a LOS D standard. There is also a portion of SR 530, between the I-5 interchange and 27th Avenue NE, which is a HSS and has a LOS D standard. GMA concurrency requirements do not apply to HSS facilities, per State legislation. SR 531 and 530 are State Highway of Regional Significance. The level of service standard for regionally significant state highways in the central Puget Sound region is set by PSRC in consultation with WSDOT and the region’s cities and counties. SR 531 is a Tier 2 road with a LOS D standard. SR 530 is a Tier 3 with a LOS C standard. PSRC notes that it will measure the level of service for regionally significant state highways on a one-hour PM peak period basis. Furthermore, PSRC notes that local agencies will need to decide whether to apply concurrency to state highways of regional significance. Figure 4-3. Illustration of Vehicle LOS City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 36 Traffic Operations Weekday PM peak hour traffic operations were evaluated at 31 intersections for forecast 2044 conditions consistent with existing conditions. The LOS analysis method was based on procedures identified in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The analysis uses Synchro 12 for signalized and stop controlled intersections. Roundabout controlled intersections were evaluated utilizing Sidra 9 and the procedures established by WSDOT. Table 4-4 summarizes the forecast 2044 weekday PM peak hour intersection operations for key intersections within Arlington. Table 4-4 Forecast 2044 Weekday PM Peak Hour Level of Service Summary Intersections Future Traffic Control Current Standard Future 2044 Baseline LOS1 Delay2 WM3 or V/C4 1. SR 9/W Burke Avenue Roundabout D A 7.1 0.71 TWSC D D 30.0 NB 5 Signal D C 30.4 - AWSC D E 37.6 - 5. 67th Avenue NE/Lebanon Street TWSC D F 196.7 NB AWSC D B 11.1 - -5 Southbound Ramps/SR 530 Signal C D 40.2 - -5 Northbound Ramps/SR 530 Signal C F 95.3 - Roundabout D A 8.8 0.81 TWSC D B 13.2 EBR Roundabout C A 8.2 0.89 Avenue NE/211th Place NE Signal D B 18.1 - AWSC C C 20.6 - TWSC D F 362.8 EB 15. 67th Avenue NE/204th Street NE Signal D B 18.1 - Signal D F 123.0 - 17. Smokey Point Boulevard/188th Street NE Roundabout D A 6.3 0.67 Signal D A 8.2 - Signal D C 30.0 - Signal D B 15.8 - Roundabout D A 7.0 0.41 -5 Southbound Ramps/SR 531 Signal D A 7.3 - -5 Northbound Ramps/SR 531 Signal D C 28.9 - 5 Signal D F 91.5 - 25. 40th Avenue NE/SR 5315 Signal D D 50.2 - Roundabout D A 9.5 0.67 Roundabout D B 11.3 0.78 Roundabout D A 7.4 0.68 Roundabout D E 63.5 1.61 30. Gleneagle Boulevard/SR 531 TWSC D F 55.3 SB 31. SR 9/SR 531 Roundabout D F 147.5 1.99 Source: Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), 2022 and Transpo Group, 2023 Notes: Bold indicates LOS standard is not met. 1. Level of service (LOS), based on Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition methodology unless otherwise noted. 2. Average delay in seconds per vehicle. 3. Worst movement reported for unsignalized intersections where EB = eastbound, WB = westbound, SBL = southbound left, NB = northbound, and EBL = eastbound left. 4. Volume to capacity (V/C) ratio for roundabout controlled intersections. 5. Evaluated utilizing HCM 2000 methodology due to limitations in signal timing parameters or the presence of U-turning movements. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 37 As shown in Table 4-4, 10 intersections would not meet the current adopted LOS standards during the weekday PM peak hour and currently operate at LOS E or F. The intersections not meeting current LOS standard include: • N Olympic Avenue/E Division Street (all-way stop-controlled) • 67th Avenue NE/Lebanon Street (two-way stop-controlled) • I-5 Southbound Ramps/SR 530 (signal) • I-5 Northbound Ramps/SR 530 (signal) • Smokey Point Boulevard/200th Street NE (two-way stop-controlled) • SR 9/204th Street NE (signal) • Smokey Point Boulevard/SR 531 (signal) • 67th Avenue NE/SR 531 (roundabout) • Gleneagle Boulevard/SR 531 (two-way stop-controlled) • SR 9/SR 531 (roundabout) Poor operations tend to occur at stop-controlled intersections including N Olympic Avenue/E Division Street, 67th Avenue NE/Lebanon Street, Smokey Point Boulevard/200th Street NE, and Gleneagle Boulevard/SR 531 where growth in traffic an anticipated to occur. The intersection of Smokey Point Boulevard/SR 531 has had historically poor operations for which the City has looked at several different improvement options; however, additional improvement options are limited. All poorly operating intersections will be further reviewed as part of this transportation plan in the next chapter. Non-Motorized The City has established level of service standards for its active transportation network based on the methodology described in Figure 4-4 and the primary and secondary network identified and shown on Figure 4-1 and Figure 4-2. Non-motorized LOS standards were developed based on the future primary and secondary on- sidewalk, pathway, and trail system. This non-motorized system was first identified in coordination with the City and in conjunction with the Complete Streets Program which identifies a Pedestrian Plan and a Bike Plan for the City. The LOS standards are shown in Figure 4-4 and emphasize the systems completion of sidewalks, pathways, or multi-use trails on arterial and collector roadways. The LOS designations are shown in green, orange, and red. The active transportation network has been identified through a series of Primary and Secondary Routes. Corridors identified as Primary or Secondary Routes are not indicative of a hierarchy for future active transportation facility development. Rather, the Primary and Secondary route identification is used to make a distinction between routes that are more regional and extend completely through the community (primary), and those that serve the second leg of the journey and connect to destinations, extend into neighborhoods, or complete a loop (secondary). A green LOS indicates a facility meets adopted roadway standards and has facilities on both sides of the street for primary routes, while a secondary facility may only have facilities on one side of the street. An orange LOS indicates a primary route has facilities on only one side of the roadway, when both sides would be preferred. A red LOS indicates no designated facilities are provided for active transportation users and is considered unacceptable. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 38 Figure 4-4 Non-Motorized Levels of Service Overview Applying the methodology described, the existing non-motorized transportation LOS is shown in Figure 4-4. An orange LOS is the standard for secondary routes, while a green LOS is the standard for primary routes. The City utilizes these standards to prioritize investments in the active transportation network and identify where significant gaps in the system need to be addressed to serve the City’s land use plan. The long-term project list identified in the Transportation Element would implement the green LOS for primary and orange for secondary routes. The pedestrian LOS analysis shows that most of the existing non-motorized transportation network meets standard. There are some key areas that are missing as well as corridors such as Cemetery Road, downtown, and Smokey Point Boulevard that have missing sidewalks. Many of the residential neighborhoods have sidewalks on at least one side of the roadway. The long-term project list identified in the Transportation Plan Recommendations (Chapter 5) would implement changes to improve the network LOS and ensure the City’s standard of green or orange LOS is met. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 39 Figure 4-5 Future Pedestrian Level of Service City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 40 Figure 4-6 Future Bike Level of Service City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 41 Transit The City of Arlington transit service is provided by Community Transit. While Transit service is not under the City’s control, it is an important component of the overall transportation system. As required by GMA, the City supports the transit level of service standards set by Community Transit. Community Transit does not have adopted level of service standards, rather Community Transit defines its service type based on future employment and population densities and a composite equity score. Within their system plan a set of descriptions for each of their service types that identifies frequency and characteristics. The different service types are intended to provide the best service for the population and job densities with higher frequency serving higher population and job densities and more flexible and on- demand service serving lower population and job density areas. Table 4-5 provides a summary of the transit service categories for Community Transit. Table 4-5 Community Transit LOS Standards Description Service Type 1 Regular Bus – Innovative Services, Vanpool, 1 Key Features very frequent very frequent Frequent Fixed- Route - Route On-Demand - Minimum of 30 people and jobs per acre 15 to 30 people and jobs per acre 7 to 15 people and jobs per acre Varies - 10 to 12 minutes 15 to 20 minutes 30 minutes Average wait times throughout the day - 20 minutes 30 minutes 30 to 60 minutes Source: Journey 2050, Community Transit, December 2023 1. BRT = Bus Rapid Transit. DART = Dial-A-Ride Transportation Evaluations by Community Transit based on land use densities and composite equity scores affirmed the corridors with existing or future Swift Lines rank the highest, reinforcing the current and planned Swift Lines. Specifically, Community Transit identified the Smokey Point corridor as a need and has a planned Swift route along the corridor. The future transit network assumes implementation of Community Transit’s 2023-2028 Transit Development Plan (TDP) and the Journey 2050 long-range plan that proposes aligning and connecting bus service with Sound Transit Lynnwood Link light rail in 2024. Service in Arlington is currently provided via regular bus service with a frequency of over 60 minutes except for two routes which provide service every 10 and 30 minutes. Additional rapid service is anticipated by 2029 with the Swift Gold Line which would provide service between the Smokey Point Transit Center and the Everett Station. Link light rail service to the Everett Station is anticipated by 2041. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 42 Chapter 5 Transportation Systems Plan The analysis conducted in Chapter 4 identified needs to support growth and meet LOS standards in 2044. The Arlington Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) is a 20-year plan that includes projects that improve existing intersections or roadways, construction of new roadways, and provides improvements to non- motorized facilities such as sidewalks, paths, or bike lanes. As specific development projects are proposed the City will assess impacts during review of the proposal and determine whether additional improvements are needed. The transportation improvement program is organized by travel mode, although the improvement projects and programs may overlap between modes (e.g., sidewalks are included as part of a roadway widening project). The Plan focuses on recommendations for six components of the transportation system: • Transportation Projects and Programs • Streets and Highways • Public Transit and Transportation Demand Management • Non-Motorized Facilities [Jim – Do you want to call this Non-Motorized or would you prefer to just say pedestrian and bicycle?] • Air Transportation • Freight Rail Transportation Based on the plans/programs, goals, and policies for the six components, an overall multimodal long- range list of transportation projects is recommended to support the transportation needs within the 20- year horizon. Transportation Projects and Programs The existing and future transportation needs analysis and the proposed modal plans for the components described above were utilized to develop a list of multimodal transportation improvement projects to support growth in the City of Arlington. Transportation Projects The improvements address safety, capacity, trail connections, and expanded non-motorized transportation facilities. Improvements also cover upgrades to existing roads and construction of new roadways and interconnected street systems to support the forecast economic development and growth in the City. The roadway and intersection projects incorporate needs for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders that will use the same corridors. The projects were categorized into three primary types: • Spot or intersection improvements • Corridor or roadway improvements • Non-motorized improvements Spot/Intersection Improvements Spot or intersection improvements were identified where existing or forecast operational deficiencies are anticipated with growth in and around the City of Arlington. The projects are intended to improve operations at the identified intersections to meet the City’s LOS standard. Some of the spot/intersection improvements were previously identified as a need in the 6-year transportation improvement program (TIP) and/or the Transportation 2035 Plan, 2017 Update and should continue to be considered to support growth into 2044. There are also new intersection improvements identified to support the Arlington land use plan. Table 5-1 summarizes the spot/intersection improvements. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 43 Table 5-1 2044 Transportation Improvement Project List: Spot/Intersections Project ID Intersection Project Description SP1 SR 9/SR 530/W Division Street Construct roundabout SR 9/W Burke Avenue Construct roundabout SR 530/Smokey Point Boulevard Construct roundabout 67th Avenue NE/188th Street NE -Construct signal -188th Street NE BNSF trail crossing 204th Street NE/74th Avenue NE Construct signal -17B) Smokey Point Boulevard/180th Street NE Construct roundabout Smokey Point Boulevard/183rd Street NE Construct roundabout -17A) Smokey Point Boulevard/188th Street NE Construct roundabout 63rd Avenue NE/SR 531 (172nd Street NE) Construct roundabout Airport Boulevard/188th Street NE Construct roundabout I-5/188th Street New interchange SR 9/SR 531 (172nd Street NE) Construct two-lane roundabout I-5 Ramps/SR 530 Construct roundabouts or SPUI Smokey Point Boulevard/200th Street NE Construct roundabout Notes: BNSF = Burlington Northern Santa Fe; SPUI = Single Point Urban Interchange Corridors/Roadway Improvements Similar to the spot/intersection improvements, some of the roadway improvements were previously identified as part of the 2024-2029 TIP and evaluation of the alternatives indicated continued need for the projects based on operations, safety, and completion of motorized and non-motorized networks. Additionally, new roadway connections were identified to support growth. No new roadway improvement projects are proposed beyond what was already identified on the 6 or 20-year TIP. Table 5-2 summarizes the corridor/roadway improvements. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 44 Table 5-2 2044 Transportation Improvement Project List: Corridor/Roadway Project ID Roadway Extents Project Description RW1 SR 531 (172nd Street NE) widening – Phase 1 43rd Avenue NE to 67th Avenue NE Widen to 4 lanes SR 531 (172nd Street NE) widening – Phase 2 67th Avenue NE to SR 9 -Widen to 4 lanes -Construct a roundabout at Gleneagle Boulevard/SR 531 -Construct NB right-turn lane at 67th Avenue NE/SR 531 Highland Drive SR 9 to Stillaguamish Avenue -Vehicle and non-motorized improvements -Signal improvements Smokey Point Boulevard 174th Avenue NE to 200th Avenue NE Corridor improvements 51st Avenue NE SR 531 (172nd Street NE) to S City Limits Widen to a 3-lane urban freight corridor 204th Street NE 74th Avenue NE to 69th Avenue NE -Corridor improvements to provide an corridor -Construct a multiuse trail 180th Street NE 59th Avenue NE to BNSF ROW -Improve to a 2- with trail along the north side - Street NE 183rd Street NE Extension Smokey Point Boulevard to Airport Boulevard -Extension of a 2/3-lane road section -Construct a multiuse path 59th Avenue Extension 195th Street NE to Cemetery Road 3-lane roadway extension 180th Street NE Smokey Point Boulevard to Airport Boulevard -Construct 2-lane urban freight corridor -Construct a multiuse path -21) 169th Street NE 43rd Avenue NE to 38th Avenue NE Develop of 2-lane urban freight corridor 173rd Street NE 40th Avenue NE to 43rd Avenue NE -Construct a new roadway and pedestrian facilities -Construct a multiuse path 169th Street NE 51st Avenue NE to 59th Avenue NE Construct a new roadway 47th Avenue NE 169th Street NE to the south City limits Construct a 3-lane industrial section 63rd Avenue NE 188th Street NE through HCI property Phases 2-4 complete missing gapes in the roadway network 71st Avenue NE 204th Street NE to Portage Creek Widen to 3-lane facility 43rd Avenue NE SR 531 to 180th Street NE Widen to 3-lane facility Smokey Point Boulevard 200th Street NE to SR 530 Widen to 3-lane facility including sidewalk facilities 172nd Street NE SR 9 to 91st Avenue NE Widen to 3-lane facility 89th Avenue NE 172nd Street NE to 186th Street NE Widen to 3-lanes Tveit Road Stillaguamish Avenue to 87th Avenue NE Widen to 3-lane facility 2 36th Drive NE 183rd St NE to 180th St NE Construct 2-lane facility with sidewalk and multiuse path (one side) 3 211th Place NE Extension 211th Place to 59th Avenue NE Construct 3-lane facility 4 169th Street NE Extension 59th Avenue NE to 67th Avenue NE Construct 2-lane facility 5 173rd Street NE Extension 43rd Avenue NE to Airport Boulevard --Construct 2-lane facility Construct multiuse path Notes: BNSF = Burlington Northern Santa Fe Non-Motorized Improvements While non-motorized improvements will be incorporated into both the spot/intersection and roadway improvements, separate non-motorized specific improvements have been identified. Non-motorized projects have been identified to increase accessibility and connectivity by completing missing links in the City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 45 current trail, pedestrian, and bike systems and to increase opportunities for alternative modes of transportation such as walking and biking and reducing reliance on SOVs. The non-motorized improvements include both projects that are already on the TIP as well as new improvements to support the Arlington land use plan. The non-motorized improvements are summarized in Table 5-3. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 46 Table 5-3 2044 Transportation Improvement Project List: Non-Motorized City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 47 Project ID Roadway Extents Project Description NM1A Cemetery Road Connector 47th Avenue NE to 67th Avenue NE Multiuse trail 47th Avenue NE Cemetery Road to 188th Street NE Multiuse trail 188th Street NE Airport Boulevard to 47th Avenue NE Multiuse trail Downtown Sidewalk Program -N Alcazar Avenue (E Gilman Avenue to E 4th Street) -E 5th Street (N Alcazar Avenue to east end) -N Clara Street (E 5th Street to south end) -E 3rd Street/E Robinhood Drive (N Stillaguamish Avenue to east end) -W Washington Avenue (E 3rd Street to E 2nd Street and missing segment north of E 1st Street) -S Macleod Avenue (E Maple Street to E 2nd Street) -E Maple Street (north side E Maple Street to east end) -87th Avenue NE (west side 215th Street NE to Tveit Road) Complete missing sidewalk connections to schools and hospital Burn Road 307th Street NE to City Limit Complete sidewalk on one side of roadway 188th Street NE City Limits to Airport Boulevard Complete missing sidewalk on south side SR 531 Trail Segment 67th Avenue NE to SR 9 Construct multiuse trail along south side of SR 531 E Gilman Trail Segment Railroad Street to N Alcazar Avenue Connect the Centennial Trail to Country Charm Park 2nd Street Sidewalk Completion French Avenue to Washington Avenue Construct missing sidewalk 59th Avenue Gap Project SR 531 to 192nd Street NE Improve Airport trail (west side) 59th Avenue NE Sidewalk Project SR 531 to 192nd Street NE Connect gaps in sidewalk (east side) - Not 74th Avenue NE Trail 204th Street NE to 197th Place NE Construct missing segment of 12-foot multi-use trail 188th Street NE Trail 67th Avenue NE to 66th Avenue NE Multiuse trail 172nd Street NE Trail 43rd Avenue NE to 67th Avenue NE Multiuse trail Twin Rivers Trail Trail to Park connection Multiuse trail Frontage Trail Trail to Park connection Multiuse trail 43rd Avenue NE 172nd Street to 168th Street Multiuse trail 43rd Avenue NE Airport Boulevard to 172nd Street Multiuse trail 51st Street NE Trail 172nd Street NE to S City Limits Multiuse trail 59th Avenue NE 172nd Street NE to 168th Street NE Multiuse trail 59th Avenue NE 188th Street NE to 172nd Street NE Multiuse trail Edgecomb Trail 172nd Street NE to S City Limits Multiuse trail to match Marysville/Development Frontage Trail 211th Place NE to Portage Creek Wildlife refuge Multiuse trail Gleneagle Trail Neighborhood Trail Multiuse trail Highland Drive S Olympic Avenue to Stillaguamish Avenue Multiuse trail Island Crossing Trail Island Crossing Multiuse trail S Olympic Trail Highland Drive to 204th Street Multiuse trail Smokey Point Boulevard #1 SR 530 to 200th Street NE Multiuse trail City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 48 Project ID Roadway Extents Project Description NM25 Smokey Point Boulevard #2 200th Street NE to 172nd Street NE Multiuse trail Smokey Point Boulevard #3 172nd Street NE to S City Limits Multiuse trail 89th Avenue NE Trail 172nd Street NE to 186th Street NE Multiuse trail 59th Avenue NE 172nd Street NE and 195th Street NE Sidewalk gaps program A summary of the identified spot/intersection, roadway, and non-motorized are summarized on Figure 5-1. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 49 Figure 5-1 20-Year Improvement Projects City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 50 Future Traffic Volumes with Improvement Projects Implementation of the 20-year improvements described above, including new roadway segments, and widening, are anticipated to result in some shifting in traffic. Table 5-4 summarizes the volumes at key intersections with implementation of the Plan. Table 5-4 Plan Weekday PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Intersection 2022 Existing PM Peak Volumes 2044 Baseline 2044 Plan PM Peak Volumes Average Annual Growth PM Peak Volumes Average Annual Growth SR 9 & W Burke Ave 1,465 1,735 0.8% 1,870 1.1% 2,305 2,760 0.8% 2,855 1.0% -5 SB Ramps & SR 530 1,170 1,460 1.0% 1,425 0.9% -5 NB Ramps & SR 530 2,070 2,695 1.2% 2,560 1.0% 1,735 2,235 1.2% 2,600 1.9% 630 1,585 4.3% 1,300 3.3% 1,090 1,855 2.4% 3,340 5.2% 1,170 1,505 1.2% 1,350 0.7% 695 1,175 2.4% 1,195 2.5% 2,020 3,630 2.7% 3,190 2.1% 1,720 3,250 2.9% 2,860 2.3% 1,885 3,600 3.0% 3,435 2.8% 1,025 2,270 3.7% 2,150 3.4% 1,525 3,620 4.0% 3,140 3.3% Source: Transpo Group, 2024 As shown in Table 5-4, with implementation of the Plan, the average annual growth at key intersections is anticipated to be between approximately 0.7 percent and 5.2 percent. The growth overall represents an increase over existing traffic volumes at key study intersections of between 180 to 2,250 weekday PM peak hour trips. The following section summarizes the operations at the study intersections with implementation of the Plan. Future Traffic Operations with Improvement Projects Intersection levels of service were re-evaluated for the 31 study intersections for the 2044 horizon year with the implementation of the transportation improvement projects identified and described above. These improvements, outlined above in Table 5-1 and Table 5-2, vary by location, but typically include conversion to signalized or roundabout controlled intersections, new roadways, and roadway widening. With the addition of multiple new or expanded roundabouts, widened roadways and the addition of the new I-5 Interchange at 188th Street NE, the 2044 improvement plan results in improved operations at all locations where deficiencies were previously shown. Table 5-5 below summarizes the PM peak hour intersection operations at the 31 study intersections under future 2044 conditions without and with plan improvements in place. LOS worksheets are included in Appendix C. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 51 Table 5-5 Forecast 2044 Weekday PM Peak Hour Level of Service Summary Intersections Plan Traffic Control LOS Standard LOS1 Delay2 WM3 or V/C4 LOS Delay WM or V/C 1. SR 9/W Burke Avenue Roundabout D A 7.1 0.71 A 8.2 0.64 Signal D C 30.4 - B 18.8 0.91 AWSC D E 37.6 - D 29.8 - TWSC D F 196.7 NB B 17.4 - Olympic Avenue/E Maple Street AWSC D B 11.1 - B 10.4 - -5 Southbound Ramps/SR 530 Signal C D 40.2 - B 15.5 0.72 -5 Northbound Ramps/SR 530 Signal C F 95.3 - B 13.0 0.94 Roundabout D A 8.8 0.81 A 6.6 0.46 Smokey Point Boulevard/Smokey Point TWSC D B 13.2 EB B 11.3 EB Signal D B 18.1 - B 17.8 - AWSC C C 20.6 - B 13.1 - TWSC D F 362.8 EB A 5.1 0.49 Signal D B 18.1 - B 19.6 - Signal D F 123.0 - F 107.4 - Roundabout D A 6.3 0.67 B 12.7 0.80 Signal D A 8.2 - A 7.6 - Signal D C 30.0 - D 36.9 - Boulevard/Smokey Point Signal D B 15.8 - B 15.0 - Roundabout D A 7.0 0.41 A 5.9 0.42 -5 Southbound Ramps/SR 531 Signal D A 7.3 - A 5.7 - -5 Northbound Ramps/SR 531 Signal D C 28.9 - C 25.3 - Smokey Point Boulevard/SR 5315 Signal D F 91.5 - E 65.1 - Signal D D 50.2 - C 31.8 - Roundabout D A 9.5 0.67 A 6.9 0.52 Roundabout D B 11.3 0.78 A 8.2 0.59 Roundabout D A 7.4 0.68 A 7.2 0.47 Roundabout D E 63.5 1.61 B 11.5 0.70 TWSC D F 55.3 SB A 6.3 0.41 Roundabout D F 147.5 1.99 B 11 0.68 Source: Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), 2022 and Transpo Group, 2023 1. Level of service (LOS), based on Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition methodology unless otherwise noted. 2. Average delay in seconds per vehicle. 3. Worst movement reported for unsignalized intersections where EB = eastbound, NB = northbound, and SB = southbound. 4. Volume to capacity (V/C) ratio for roundabout controlled intersections. 5. Evaluated utilizing HCM 2000 methodology due to limitations in signal timing parameters or the presence of U-turning movements. With the implementation of the Plan improvements described above, all intersections meet the City of Arlington’s adopted LOS standards under future 2044 conditions during the PM peak hour except for 2 intersections. The SR 9/204th Street NE intersection is forecast to operate at LOS F under forecast 2044 conditions. SR 9/204th Street NE is a WSDOT intersection, and it is assumed that WSDOT will assess and address City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 52 operational deficiencies. It is noted; however, that the intersection is forecast to operate with a lower delay with implementation of the Plan improvements. The intersection of Smokey Point Boulevard/SR 531 is forecast to operate at LOS E under future 2044 conditions, an improvement from the Baseline LOS F. The intersection has numerous turn lanes and buildings located adjacent to the roadways. Additional capacity improvements are impractical and could increase difficulty for other modes such as pedestrian crossing the intersection. Plan Recommendation 1. Update LOS standards at this intersection to LOS E. Transportation Programs ADA Transition Plan The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) extended comprehensive civil rights protections to people with disabilities. Title II of the ADA addresses the law’s requirements of local governments in their interactions with people with disabilities. Local governments are required to identify barriers that may limit accessibility for people with disabilities and develop transition plans describing how they will address identified barriers. The City’s ADA Transition Plan is being developed and aims to prioritize areas with higher pedestrian traffic levels, including school zones, hospitals, and areas with a high level of retail uses. The City of Arlington anticipates that annual roadway and pavement preservation projects will also correct ADA accessibility at a number of intersections. Every development project, both City and private, is required to correct all deficiencies within the project limits and upgrade all ADA facilities to current standards to the maximum feasible extent. The City is committed to making all sidewalk, crosswalks, and curb ramp areas accessible to everyone within as short a time as possible to ensure improved mobility for those with special needs. Streets and Highways Streets and highways serving the City of Arlington provide for the general movement of people and goods. They also serve other travel modes, including pedestrians and bicyclists. The street and highway element provides the core system of the Arlington Transportation Improvement Program. The key components of the street and highway element and recommendations are: • Functional classification • Truck routes Functional Classification Roadway functional classification provides for a hierarchy of roadways. These classifications also act as a guide for future development of the overall street system. The classifications range from limited access freeways that support regional through traffic movements to local streets that primarily serve access to individual properties. The system is used to identify the desired function of each roadway regarding the type and level of traffic it would carry, design standards, and eligibility for a range of funding programs. Table 5-6 provides guidelines for the classifications used in the City of Sumner. There are no proposed changes to the guidelines from the 2017 Transportation Plan Update. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 53 Table 5-6 Arlington Roadway Functional Classification Roadway Type Description / Purpose Examples Speed ROW ADT1 Freeway/Interstate Freeways are multi-lane, high speed, high-capacity roadways, under WSDOT jurisdiction, that connect the City of Arlington with the Region. Interstate 5 (I-5) 70 mph - >80,000 Connect large subareas of the City. May serve secondary traffic generators and large community. 172nd Street NE/SR 531 Smokey Point Boulevard 35 mph 60-110 feet 1,000 – 2,000+ Promote the flow of vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians from arterial roads to lower-order roads. 188th Street NE 211th Place NE 25 mph 60 feet 1,000 – 2,000 Convey vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles to/from destination points to higher-order roads. 200th Street NE 204th Street NE 25 mph 50 feet 250 or less Paved or unpaved access roads that do not carry through traffic. Provide access to a property or building. - 15 mph 24 feet 250 or less Note: WSDOT = Washington State Department of Transportation 1. ADT = Average daily traffic Washington State has also classified some highways that provide transportation functions that promote and maintain statewide travel and economic linkages as being of statewide significance or Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS). In Arlington, I-5, SR 530, and SR 9 is designated as an HSS. Because of its designation as an HSS, the State is responsible for setting the level of service standard for the I-5, SR 530, and SR 9 routes. Similarly, SR 531 is a State Highway of Regional Significance. Level of service standards for SR 531 is established by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC), in consultation with WSDOT. Figure 5-5 summarizes the functional classification plan for Arlington. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 54 Figure 5-2 Functional Classification Plan City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 55 Truck/Freight Routes A significant amount of trucking or freight activity occurs in the City consisting of distribution centers, warehousing, and light industrial activity located primarily in the southern and eastern part the City. Trucks have a significant impact on traffic operations, safety, and roadway maintenance. They also impact air quality and noise levels in the City. Figure 5-4 shows the freight routes for Arlington. The truck routes are the same as the 2017 TMP Update and would continue to support future transportation needs. Based on the evaluation of existing vehicle classifications along the transportation network, it was shown that the truck sizes using some of the City freight routes are larger than what the design of the street supports. This Plan implements freight classifications for the freight route network. The classifications define the freight design vehicle on the freight routes within the City. The design vehicles that relate to the freight classifications are based on the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 7th Edition, 2018. The design vehicle represents the maximum allowable vehicle size that is accommodated on the freight route. The classification system provides three levels of design vehicles, which are define as follows: • Level 1 (L1): Maximum WB-67 o A WB-67 is defined as an interstate semi-truck trailer with a length of 73.5 feet. • Level 2 (L2): Maximum WB-50 (inclusive of buses) o WB-50 is defined as an intermediate semi-truck trailer with a length of 55 feet. • Level 3 (L3): Maximum of WB-40 o A WB-40 is defined as an intermediate semi-truck trailer with a length of 45.5 feet. The implementation of the freight classification system will reduce wear and tear and operational impacts to roadways not designed to support larger vehicles. The system can also improve traffic operations for passenger vehicles by decreasing delays associated with turning maneuvers of larger trucks that are not accommodated within the roadway design. The freight classifications are depicted on Figure 5-3. The majority of the existing truck routes would be designated as L1, which has limited restrictions and accommodates the maximum truck size observed on the transportation network today. Restrictions related to the freight classifications are primarily in downtown Arlington and north of the airport. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 56 Figure 5-3 Freight Route Plan City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 57 Figure 5-4 Freight Route Classifications City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 58 Public Transit and Transportation Demand Management The City of Arlington recognizes the importance of transit and travel demand management programs as key elements of a multimodal transportation system. These programs build on regional programs and plans with some refinements to reflect the specific needs of the City. No changes are recommended related to the travel demand management program. Transit The City of Arlington supports Community Transit through implementation on projects to enhance connectivity to transit facilities. Projects are incorporated into the overall TIP to support connectivity and access to transit facilities. Transit objectives for Arlington focus on multimodal connectivity to the park and ride facilities and the Smokey Point Transit Center. Transportation Demand Management The City of Arlington Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategy is multi-pronged and will reduce both local and regional vehicle trips. Projects recently or currently under way in the City include: • New Non-Motorized Facilities. The City has been constructing the regional Centennial Trail as well as local trail networks to encourage increased non-motorized access throughout the City. In addition to the • Transit. Transit service in Arlington is provided by Community Transit which provides seven routes in the City. Additional rapid service is anticipated by 2029 with the Swift Gold Line which would provide service between the Smokey Point Transit Center and the Everett Station. Link light rail service to the Everett Station is anticipated by 2041. • Park & Ride Facilities. Park and ride facilities provide regional benefits as commuters can transfer to public transit or carpool from this location to destinations further west or south along SR-9, SR-530, SR-531, and I-5. The City currently has three park and ride facilities. • Commercial Development with Transit. The City is encouraging commercial areas to include transit facilities as they develop, especially along the well-traveled SR 531 and Smokey Point Boulevard corridors. Non-Motorized Facilities Bicycle, pedestrian, and trail facilities play a vital role in the City’s transportation environment. The Arlington non-motorized transportation system is comprised of facilities that promote mobility without the aid of motorized vehicles. A well-established system encourages healthy recreational activities, reduces vehicle demand on roadways, and enhances safety within the community. Recommendation 2: Adopt the non-motorized system and LOS standards. Monitor implementation and performance of the non-motorized system as an important component of the overall transportation system. The pedestrian and bicycle network identified in the previous chapter was used to confirm specific LOS standards for non-motorized transportation facilities and to identify and develop the long-term non- motorized project list. The future non-motorized transportation system, shown in Figure 5-5, provides a comprehensive network of non-motorized transportation facilities for Arlington. The Plan shows the interconnected system of on-road and off-road facilities, which include sidewalks, pathways, shared-use trails, and bike facilities (e.g., bicycle routes, sharrows, or bike lanes). The system is designed to facilitate non-motorized travel to key destinations within Arlington. The non-motorized projects to achieve the Plan are described above. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 59 The non-motorized plan contains a series of primary or secondary sidewalk routes. Corridors identified as primary or secondary routes are not indicative of a hierarchy for future non-motorized transportation facility development, rather they are used to make a distinction between routes that are more regional or that extend completely through the community (primary), and those that serve to make the second leg of the journey to connect to destinations, extend into neighborhoods, or complete a loop (secondary). Along with the project list, the City has established an ADA Transition Plan, which will help maintain the existing sidewalk system by adding more wheelchair ramps. As part of the planned improvements described above, the Downtown Sidewalk Program has been identified to complete missing links in the downtown sidewalk network, provide ADA improvements, and create safe routes to school. The City works with neighboring property owners on sidewalk construction and maintenance. The sidewalk funding programs help maintain and improve the existing sidewalks already found throughout the city. Recommendation 3: Adopt the Downtown Sidewalk program. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 60 Figure 5-5 Non-Motorized Plan City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 61 Air Transportation The City owns and operates the Arlington Municipal Airport. The airport is located northeast of 51st Avenue NE/Airport Boulevard, north of SR 531 (172nd Street NE), west of 59th Avenue NE, and south of 188th Street NE. Uses at the airport include general aviation facilities, industrial, commercial, and public uses. The airport currently operates with two runways and accommodates industrial/airport uses. The airport does not have scheduled passenger flights. Vehicular access to the airport is provided via 192nd Street NE, 188th Street NE, and 51st Avenue NE. The Airport Master Plan is currently being updated. Freight Rail Service The City also has two freight rail corridors operated by the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad. One BNSF line runs on the west side of the I-5 corridor and carries both freight and passenger rail traffic. Passenger rail is operated by Amtrack and runs from Eugene, Oregon to Vancouver, B.C. The closest passenger stations are in Everett and Stanwood. The second BNSF line is located on the east side of the City and connects Arlington with the I-5 mainline track at approximately 116th Street NE in Marysville. There are no changes to freight rail as part of this Plan. Technology Transportation System Management and Operations (TSMO) is an integrated approach to optimize the performance of existing infrastructure by implementing multimodal, intermodal, and often cross- jurisdictional systems, services, and projects. TSMO seeks to operate the existing transportation system as safely and efficiently as possible, often maintaining or even regaining previous capacity levels and improving safety performance levels. In practice, TSMO is applied on a corridor or in a region as a series of operational strategies. As part of maintaining the City’s transportation system, the City will look for corridor strategies instead of just intersection improvements to provide an integrated multimodal network. The City will continue to coordinate with WSDOT, the City of Marysville and the County in implementing a TSMO approach. In addition, the City will continue to look for strategic locations to install and partner on EV charging infrastructure and support technology advances that help reduce emissions. City of Arlington Draft Transportation Master Plan June 2024 62 Chapter 6 Financing Program The City of Arlington is required to analyze the financial practicality of its 2044 Transportation Improvement Program. The analysis includes needs and resources and contains a multi-year financing plan. If a funding analysis shows that a plan is not affordable or achievable, the plan must discuss how additional funds will be raised, or how land use assumptions will be reassessed. This section demonstrates that the 2044 Arlington Transportation Master Plan is financially constrained and in compliance with state and federal laws. State and federal legislation requires that the transportation plan be financially constrained. Only projects that the City can afford to complete with existing revenues or with revenues that are reasonably expected in the future are included. This requirement helps to ensure that the long-range plan is a realistic plan for transportation policy and investment. The financial forecast must consider the cost to maintain the existing system, as well as the cost to expand the transportation system to meet future demand. Major capacity projects cannot be funded unless they are specifically identified in the Regional Transportation Plan. Regionally significant projects cannot be included in Comprehensive Plans and Capital Facilities Plans unless they are also in the long-range transportation plan. If not, the City is unable to seek development fees, federal grants, or most state grants. Financial Planning and Programming The City uses a variety of criteria to prioritize transportation projects, including safety, mobility, and overall community benefit. The City must also consider the availability of funding and ability to leverage City dollars to raise additional funds. Project prioritization for capital improvements is often partially dependent on the ability to secure outside funding, and maintenance and preservation costs are dependent on the limited tax revenues available to the City. When establishing project costs, the City must consider: • Cost Estimates: Costs provided are planning level estimates. Estimates will be more fully developed during subsequent planning efforts, including development of the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). • Historic Precedence: Assessment of historical trends, such as local revenue attributed to development fees, annual growth rates, etc. • WSDOT Programming: Projects that include improvements to WSDOT facilities must also be included in WSDOT’s 10-year Improvement Program. • Growth: Private sector project contributions assume that the forecasted growth will occur. Funding Strategies Transportation infrastructure construction or rehabilitation is costly, and a transportation project is seldom funded from a single source. To fund transportation improvement projects the City of Arlington, like other municipalities and jurisdictions, looks for funding from various sources. Funding mechanisms the City has identified are summarized below. Transportation Mitigation Fees The transportation improvement fund is the City’s source for transportation system funding. The improvement fund is primarily financed by transportation mitigation fees, though other City funds (REET 1, REET 2, General Fund, etc.) can be used to finance this fund. The GMA allows agencies to develop and implement a transportation impact fee (TIF) program to help fund some of the costs of transportation facilities needed to accommodate growth or new development. State law (Chapter 82.02 RCW) requires that TIFs are: • Related to improvements to serve new developments and not existing deficiencies. • Assessed proportional to the impacts of new developments. • Allocated for improvements that reasonably benefit new development. • Spent on facilities identified in the capital facilities plan (CFP). The City of Arlington allows for the assessment of transportation impact fees in accordance with Arlington Municipal Code (AMC) 20.90. Collected impact fees are used to mitigate impacts to existing facilities caused by the growth; however, fees cannot be used to correct existing deficiencies of public facilities. The City of Arlington allows TIFs to be used for costs associated with transportation system improvements, including, but not limited to, planning, design, engineering, right-of-way acquisition, financing, project administration, construction, and construction engineering. Arlington currently has two adopted TIFs. AMC 20.90.040 establishes the TIF for all new development in the City. AMC 20.90.045 is an additional fee for development projects within the Arlington Cascade Industrial Center (CIC). The funding strategy assumes the TIF program for new development under AMC 20.90.040 is based on the updated 20-year list of improvement projects, as identified on Figure 5-1. State Bill 5452 effective July 23, 2023, amends 82.02.090(7) RCW to include bike and pedestrian facilities designed with the intent of multimodal commuting as part of the definition of public facilities where impact fees are allowed. With this amendment, the City intends to adopt a multimodal transportation impact fee to help fund transportation improvements. The funding strategy assumes that there will be no change to the CIC impact fees. An evaluation and update of the TIF rates was conducted as part of this TMP to reflect adoption of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan and associated transportation and land use plans, goals and policies including new state legislation that allows funding be directed towards non- motorized transportation projects. The projects included on the TIF are a subset of the long- term transportation projects identified on Figure 5-1. Appendix X provides detail on the TIP including project description, costs and portion of costs applied in developing the TIF. Table 6-3 summarizes the potential impact fee rate based on the proposed 20-Year TIP and land use plan. Table 6-1 Potential Transportation Impact Fee Rates Applied TIF Share1 Total New PM Peak Hour Trips (Passenger Car Equivalents) Cost Per New PM Peak Hour Trip $xxxxx 23,813 $xxxxx Notes: 1. Total cost share in 2023 dollars, based on relative impact of the 2023 – 2044 traffic growth on each capacity-added project on a passenger car equivalent basis. The updated transportation impact fees (TIFs) are estimated to account for almost $14.1 million (2023 dollars) in revenues for the 20-year plan. Transportation Benefit District Funding The State of Washington created an option for local governments to fund transportation maintenance and capital improvements through the creation of a Transportation Benefit District (TBD). A TBD is a quasi-municipal corporation with taxing powers that is created for the sole purpose of acquiring, constructing, improving, providing, and funding transportation improvements within the defined district. Many municipalities have formed TBDs to keep pace with the rising costs of maintaining and constructing transportation infrastructure. The citizens of Arlington voted to create a 10-year Transportation Benefit District (TBD) in 2013 for the purpose of maintaining and preserving existing surface transportation infrastructure. In 2023, the citizens voted to renew the TBD for another 10-years. The current TBD can be used to fund traffic congestion relief, traffic slowing/calming projects, sidewalk connections, crossings, and repairs, street and road maintenance, and multi-use trails. Revenue also can be used as matching funds to access larger grants. The governing board ("Board") of the transportation benefit district is the members of the Arlington City Council acting in an ex officio and independent capacity that has the authority to exercise the statutory powers set forth in chapter 36.73 RCW. The Mayor serves as chairperson of the Board. Private Development In addition to traffic impact fees, there are other forms of transportation system funding from private development. Developers and property owners may elect to form a Local Improvement District (LID) as a method of financing capital improvements that provide a special benefit to the properties within the boundary of the LID. Transportation improvements (roads, trails, sidewalks, etc.) constructed can be privately owned and maintained, or they can be dedicated to the City for long term maintenance and operation. If dedicated to the City, they will need to be constructed and inspected in accordance with City standards. Developers may also have a responsibility for constructing partial roads and sidewalks or frontage improvements that abut the development as well as roads internal to the development. Internal roads constructed to City standards and inspected by the City may be dedicated to the City for long term operation and maintenance. State Funding State transportation funding can come from varied sources; the Transportation Improvement Board (TIB), the Community and Economic Redevelopment Board (CERB), WSDOT appropriated funding, and state bond measures are a few. Each of the funding sources carries with it a list of requirements specific to the state funding program and it is the City’s responsibility to match each selected City transportation project with the funding source. Federal Funding Federal transportation funding is offered through a locality’s Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RTPO) as well as grant programs. For Arlington, the RTPO funding would be offered through transportation programs administered by the PSRC. Other federal grant funding is offered through the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) or from a special federal allocation and administered by WSDOT. Federal funding requirements are different than state funding requirements and can be more cumbersome as they require a lot more project reporting. As with state transportation funding, it is the City’s responsibility to match the selected City transportation project with the funding source. Other Funding There are other transportation funding sources, but these sources are limited and typically reserved for specific transportation system components such as complete sidewalks, trails, education, and trip reduction. Though small, these funds, when applied correctly, can contribute to the complete funding of a transportation project. Revenue Analysis The funding strategy described previously shows that the City of Arlington can use a number of fees and tax revenues to construct and maintain their transportation facilities. Funding sources include local tax revenues, grants, partnerships with other agencies, and developer mitigation. Primary City revenues directed toward transportation capital improvement projects include the Real Estate Excise Tax (REET), Transportation Benefit District sales tax, and Transportation Impact Fees (TIF) or other developer mitigation. The City also uses fuel taxes and can direct revenues from its General Fund to transportation capital projects, as needed, to balance its Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The City identifies the most appropriate potential funding sources for each of the improvement projects. For example, grants or other agency funding are assumed to be a greater share of the revenues for funding improvements on SR 531, SR 530, SR 9, and I-5 than on the local arterial improvements. While it is unlikely that implementation of the TMP projects will match the City’s funding assumptions at a project-by-project level, this process does provide for a reasonable estimate of anticipated revenues needed for the overall capital improvement program. It also establishes a level of funding needed through transportation impact fees. Table 6-2 summarizes the anticipated sources of revenues used by the city to fund transportation improvements and programs. Table 6-2 Existing and Projected Revenues Source Annual Projected Revenue1 (2023 Dollars) 2024-2044 20-Year Projected Revenues (2023 Dollars) Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) $2,206,500 $46,340,000 Transfer Funds (Storm Funds and General Funds) $611,500 $12,844,000 Vehicle Fuel Tax and Other State Tax Funds $499,500 $10,488,000 Transportation Impact Fees (TIF)2 $490,500 $10,300,000 Transportation Benefit District (TBD) Sales Tax3 $3,475,000 $72,973,000 Federal State, or Other Grants/Funding Partnership $1,515,000 $30,300,000 Developer Funded $2,463,500 $49,271,000 County Mitigation Fees $63,000 $1,325,000 Total $11,324,500 $233,841,000 Source: City of Arlington 2024 the average annual revenue based on the 20-year forecast. Assumes adoption of the updated impact fee program for the 20-year revenue projection. 3. This is approved by voters through 2033 and the projection assumes it will be extended another 10-years consistent with the horizon of this Transportation Plan. 3. This is approved by voters through 2033 and the projection assumes it will be extended another 10-years consistent with the horizon of this Transportation Plan. As shown in the table, the City is estimating an annual revenue of approximately $11.3 million per year on average over the 20-year period. The TIF are estimated to account for about 4 percent of the overall revenue while the TBD represents about 31 percent. Project and Program Cost Estimates Planning level project cost estimates have been prepared to determine the magnitude of the transportation investments needed over the life of the Plan. Figure 5-1, in the previous chapter, summarizes the capital transportation improvement projects based on the analyses of existing and travel forecasts. Table 6-3 summarizes the planning level capital costs into three primary improvement categories: Spot/Intersections, Roadway Improvements, and Non-Motorized Improvements. Appendix X provides additional detail on project descriptions and cost estimates. The project costs assume that right-of-way will be needed for some projects to match the City street design standards. In addition, Table 6-3 includes a summary of transportation programs, maintenance and operations, and administration costs allocated to the City of Arlington to implement the TMP through 2044. Table 6-3 Transportation Projects and Programs Cost Summary Project/Program Cost (2023 Dollars)1 Transportation Capital Projects Spot/Intersection Improvements $164,463,495 Roadway Improvements $185,471,240 Non-Motorized Improvements $62,830,000 Total $412,764,735 Citywide Transportation Programs Arterial Maintenance/Street Overlay $xxx Roadway Paint Line Application $xx Pavement Repairs $xxx Roadway Plastic Marking Application $xx Chip Seal Application $xx Crack Seal Application $xx Neighborhood Traffic Control Program $xx ADA Transition Plan $xx Sidewalk Maintenance Program $xx Total $xxxx Total Cost (Capital and Programs) $xxx Cost/Year $xx Source: Transpo Group and City of Arlington, 2024 1. Planning level costs in 2023 dollars. Approximately $413 million (2023 dollars) will be needed to fully fund the capital improvements over the 20-year horizon of the Plan. Of these costs, over $164 million are related to intersection improvements, $185 million are related to roadway improvements, and over $63 million are related to non-motorized improvements. In addition, $xxx million is anticipated to implement the citywide transportation programs over the life of the Plan. Combined, the total costs for the Arlington TMP is estimated at approximately $xx million. This equates to an average of approximately $x million each year for the life of the Plan through 2044. Funding the transportation projects and programs will require Arlington to seek outside sources, which is consistent with current practices. Ultimately, the portion of funding that is solely the responsibility of Arlington will vary by project and program and will depend on the availability of grants, partnerships, and other sources. The following section describes the reassessment strategy that can be used in the case the TIF, TBD or other funding source are less than estimated in this initial funding strategy. Reassessment Strategy The funding strategy is based on grants, voter approved and other outside funding that the City does not control. The City is committed to reassessing their transportation needs and funding sources each year as part of their annual Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). This allows the City to match the financing program with the shorter-term improvement projects and funding. The plan also includes goals and policies to periodically review land use growth, adopted level of service standards, and funding sources to ensure they support one another and meet concurrency requirements. To implement the Transportation Element, the City will consider the following principles in its funding program: • As part of the development of the annual Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program, the City will balance improvement costs with available revenues. • Review project design during the development review process to determine whether costs could be reduced through reasonable changes in scope or deviations from design standards. • Fund improvements or require developer improvements as they become necessary to maintain LOS standards to meet concurrency. • Coordinate and partner with WSDOT, Stillaguamish Tribe, Snohomish County and other local agencies and vigorously pursue grants from state and federal agencies to fund and implement improvements to I-5, SR 9, SR 531, and SR 530. • Work with Snohomish County and other agencies to develop multi-agency grant applications for projects that serve growth in the City and its UGA. • Review funding strategy to see if the transportation impact fees should be revised to account for the updated capital improvement project list and revised project cost estimates. • If the actions above are not sufficient, the City could consider changes in its level of service standards and/or possibly limit the rate of growth in the City as part of future updates of its Comprehensive Plan. • Lower priority projects in the Transportation Element may be slid to beyond 2035 or deleted from the program. The City of Arlington will use the annual update of the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to re-evaluate priorities and timing of projects. Throughout the planning period, projects will be completed, and priorities will be revised. This will be accomplished by annually reviewing traffic growth and the location and intensity of land use growth in the City and the UGA. The City will then be able to direct funding to areas that are most impacted by growth or to arterials that may fall below the City’s level of service (LOS) standards. The development of the TIP will be an ongoing process over the life of the TMP and will be reviewed and amended annually. Implementation Program Implementation of the TMP involves several strategies. One strategy includes coordination with developers and partnering with other agencies to construct the transportation improvement projects and expand transit service to the City. Partnering with other agencies and use of grants will be especially critical in the implementation of safety, capacity, and operational improvements along SR 9, I-5, SR 531, and SR 530. Another strategy is re- prioritizing transportation projects as new funding sources become available or by focusing on areas most impacted by new development. The City will also continue to review strategies to phase improvements allowing funding to be spread over a longer time period. In addition, the City will need to review, maintain, and update its Concurrency Management Program, Transportation Impact Fee, and other development review processes to account for the revised multimodal LOS standards and assure that the impacts of growth are mitigated, and transportation improvements are completed concurrent with new development. Partnering with Other Agencies PSRC’s Vision 2050 describes the investments and policies needed to create a safe, clean, and efficient transportation system essential to supporting the region’s quality of life, health and economy as the region continues to grow. The TMP supports the City’s role in the regional transportation strategy through its policies to support and expand use of transit, transportation demand management, and active travel to reduce the number of vehicle trips generated by development in the City. Arlington will need to coordinate with Community Transit, Snohomish County, and other nearby cities to implement facilities and services to meet those objectives. Coordination will also help assure consistency in plans and implementation programs between agencies to meet the goals of the regional plan. The City will continue to partner with WSDOT to implement improvements along both SR 531, SR 9, I-5, and SR 530 consistent with the TMP project list. Projects along the state highways serve regional travel patterns as well as provide local access within Arlington. Without WSDOT as a partner, the City is unable to put a high priority on major capacity improvements along both state highways since the improvements serve significant levels of regional traffic and the projects will cost more than the City can reasonably fund on their own. These projects should be considered for joint submittal of grants, with the local match being combined from benefiting agencies. Partnering with WSDOT will be critical in the implementation of the TMP project list. Other agency partnering opportunities involve Community Transit and Arlington School District. Coordination with both agencies could lead to cost sharing of improvements to construct pedestrian facilities around schools or transit routes. Project Priorities and Timing The City of Arlington will use the annual update of the Six-Year TIP to re-evaluate priorities and timing of projects. Throughout the planning period, projects will be completed, and priorities will be revised. The development of the TIP will also be used to identify potential phasing options to fit within available revenues during that 6-year time horizon. The City will monitor traffic volumes and the location and intensity of land use growth in the City. The City will also need to monitor traffic growth from adjacent communities. Based on this information, the City will then be able to direct funding to areas that are most impacted by growth or may fall below the City’s level of service standard. The development of the TIP will be an ongoing process over the life of the plan and will be reviewed and amended annually. Concurrency Management and Development Review Concurrency refers to the ongoing process of coordinating infrastructure needs with community development. This concept was formalized in the GMA to ensure that adequate public facilities are provided in concert with population and employment growth. For transportation facilities, the GMA requirement is fulfilled if its level of service standards will continue to be met including the additional travel demand generated by each development. Concurrency determinations for the roadway network are closely linked with development review decisions. In addition, the City reviews development applications pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Concurrency and SEPA are primarily focused on a shorter– term timeframe. The City requires payment of transportation impact fees to help fund growth related improvements, both long-term and short-term needs. Projects that result in adverse transportation impacts are required to fund or implement mitigation measures that reduce the impact below a level of significance and/or meet the level of service standard. The City provides credits where developers are required to construct improvements whose costs are included in the transportation impact fee program. The City will need to regularly monitor the level of service of its transportation system as part of its concurrency program. The City will use information from its concurrency program in updating its Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program, grant applications, and coordination with WSDOT and other agencies. As each development application is reviewed, the City will determine if concurrency has been met. If concurrency is not met, then the City will establish conditions of approval. Since I-5, SR 9 and SR 530 (between I-5 and 27th Avenue NE) are a Highway of Statewide Significance, the City cannot use concurrency to deny the development application if the proposal impacts these routes; therefore, conditions of approval will be established through SEPA and in coordination with WSDOT (as applicable) in order to mitigate any potential impacts of the development. The City will monitor the performance of the transportation system throughout the City. The City will apply its multimodal LOS standards and the City’s road standards to evaluate and identify appropriate improvements for mitigating impacts of developments in the City. The City will also conduct its own studies and work with other agencies to define needed improvements to be incorporated into its Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program, which is updated annually. If expected funding for improvements to meet future transportation needs is found to be inadequate and the City will not be able to meet their adopted level of service standards, then the City will need to pursue options as laid out under the Reassessment Strategy, presented previously. Chapter 7 Consistency With Other Agencies Arlington’s transportation system is part of, and connected to, a broader regional highway and arterial system. The GMA works to increase coordination and compatibility between the various agencies that are responsible for the overall transportation system. Since transportation improvements need to be coordinated across jurisdictional boundaries, the Transportation Plan needs to be consistent with and supportive of the objectives identified in the Washington State Transportation Plan, PSRC’s Vision 2050, and the transportation plans or capital improvement plans of the surrounding agencies. Developing the Transportation Plan is primarily a bottoms-up approach to planning, with the City exploring its needs based on the land use plan. Eventually, local projects are incorporated into regional and state plans. A schematic of this approach is shown below in Figure 7-1. The following sections provide a review of this Plan’s consistent with neighboring jurisdictions. Figure 7-1 Transportation Plan Approach WSDOT Highway Improvement Program & Six-Year Transpiration Improvement Program As required by the 1998 amendments to the GMA, the Arlington Transportation Plan addresses the state highway system. Specifically, the Transportation Plan addresses the following elements related to the state highway system: • Inventory of existing facilities – see Chapter 3 • Level of service standards – see Chapters 3, 4 and 5 • Concurrency on state facilities – see Chapters 4 and 5 • Analysis of traffic impacts on state facilities – see Chapters 4 and 5 • Consistency with the State Highway Systems Plan – see Chapter 5 and below Summarized below are the improvements on state facilities listed in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) 2024 – 2027, which are consistent with the Plan identified in Chapter 5. WSDOT maintains two improvements programs, the Highway System Plan (HSP) and the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). WSDOT is currently updating the HSP, which was last updated over 12 years ago. A draft of the HSP has been published and recommends new revenues for state highways be dedicated over the next 20 years. The 2024-2027 STIP was approved in January 2023 and identifies 5 projects in Arlington. Three (3) of the projects are also identified on the PSRC Regional TIP described above and include the roundabouts at the 188th Street and 180th Street intersections with Smokey Point Boulevard and the 74th Avenue Trail. The other project is: • The Division/Broadway Pavement Restoration Project. This project would mill and resurface Broadway Street between SR 530 and E Division Street and E Division Street from Broadway Street to N West Avenue. The roadway would be structurally repaired, where necessary, and replace curb ramps with ADA compliant curb ramps, install high visibility crosswalks and a rectangular rapid flashing beacon (RRFB). Mobility and safety improvements on traffic circles at the Broadway Street/E Division Street and E Division Street/N West Avenue intersections including a raised center median, modification to the splitter island and improved pedestrian crossing facilities would also be constructed. • 169th Street Connecting Segment. Construct a two-lane roadway segment between 43rd Avenue NE and 37th Avenue NE. • 74th Avenue Trail. Construction of a 12-foot-wide multiuse trail segment parallel to 74th Avenue between 197th Place and 204th Street. The design includes streetlights, drainage (where necessary), paved trail, ADA compliant curb ramps, crosswalk striping, and landscaping. The project is anticipated to be completed in 2024. • Smokey Point Boulevard/188th Street. Construction of a roundabout at the intersection. The project is anticipated to be completed in 2024. • Smokey Point Boulevard/180th Street. Construction of a roundabout at the intersection. The project is anticipated to be completed in 2026. Connecting Washington Transportation Improvement Connecting Washington is a 16-year program, funded primarily by an 11.9-cent gas tax increase that was fully phased-in on July 1, 2016. Connecting Washington funding is distributed to projects that help preserve the State highway system and reduce congestion in the central Puget Sound area. Two projects are in or near Arlington that would enhance travel for the city: • SR 531 Widening. This project would widen SR 531 between 43rd Avenue NE and 67th Avenue NE and provide intersection improvements along the corridor. The roadway would be widened to provide an additional lane in each direction resulting in a four-lane cross section with center median. The project would also construct a roundabout at the SR 531 (172nd Street NE) intersections with 51st Avenue NE, 59th Avenue NE, and 67th Avenue NE. Construction of the roundabout at 43rd Avenue NE/SR 531 was recently completed. Construction of the project is anticipated to begin in 2025. The project would help relieve periods of congestion experienced along SR 531 (172nd Street NE) and would help support growth associated with the adopted Cascade Industrial Center (CIC). • I-5/156th Street NE Interchange. While not located in Arlington, the proposed interchange at 156th Street NE with I-5 would result in traffic shifts and could help alleviate congestion and delays along SR 531 (172nd Street NE). Current plans for the improvement include a Single Point Urban Interchange (SPUI) at 156th Street NE. Construction of the project is anticipated to begin in 2025 with completion at the end of 2031. Puget Sound Regional Council The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) maintains the Regional TIP. The Regional TIP must be a 4-year program of projects that is updated at least every 4 years. The TIP ensures that transportation projects meet regional transportation, growth and economic development goals and policies, and clean air requirements. Regional TIP projects are required to meet the following criteria: • Consistency with VISION 2050 and the Regional Transportation Plan • Consistency with local comprehensive plans • Funds are available or expected to be available • Consistency with the region’s air quality conformity determination • Consistency with federal and state requirements such as functional classification • Consistency with PSRC’s project tracking policies The 2023-2026 Regional TIP identifies 4 projects in Arlington including 3 identified above on the WSDOT STIP and the following Community Transit project: • Swift BRT Gold Line. Community Transit bus rapid transit (BRT) between the Everett Station and Smokey Point Transit Center in Arlington with service to Everett Community College, Marysville, and the Cascade Industrial Center. Project will include design, engineering, construction, and purchase of 13 zero emission buses. Planned service start date is 2027 to 2029. This is a multi-year project, and the programming reflects the funds available within the span of the current TIP. Snohomish County and Adjacent Cities Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs) establish a countywide framework for developing and adopting County and City comprehensive plans. The role of the CPPs is to coordinate comprehensive plans of jurisdictions in the same county for regional issues or issues affecting common borders. The Multicounty Planning Policies (MPPs) for transportation call for better integrated land use and transportation planning, with a priority placed on cleaner operations, dependable financing mechanisms, alternatives to driving alone, and lower transportation-related energy consumption. CPPs were last adopted in June 2011 and amended in February 2022 effective March 2022. The County’s and Cities’ comprehensive plans will be made consistent with the vision and policies in the Countywide Planning Policy Update. The City works closely with adjacent jurisdictions to address transportation issues and mitigate impacts. Snohomish County and the City established an interlocal agreement in 1999 to address joint transportation system planning and traffic impact mitigation. The City of Arlington, WSDOT, Snohomish County and Marysville coordinate on the Cascade Industrial Center (CIC). Snohomish County’s six-year TIP (2024-2029) does not have any projects identified in Arlington. The County has identified one intersection improvement in Marysville south of Arlington. The improvement is at the 67th Avenue NE/152nd Street NE intersection and would include installation of a signal or roundabout. This intersection serves the joint Arlington Marysville Cascade Industrial Center (CIC) and helps facilitate north/south movements especially as CIC starts to develop. Community Transit Community Transit is a regional transportation provider that operates 2 swift lines, 26 local routes, 13 commuter routes to Seattle, 5 commuter routes to Northgate Station, and 6 sound transit express routes serving Seattle and Bellevue. Seven routes provide bus service for the City of Arlington. The City supports Community Transit’s strategic plans and coordinates with the agency to identify how transit needs should be addressed, particularly as new development occurs. Federal and State Air Quality Regulations The City of Arlington is required to adopt a transportation plan that conforms with the State Implementation Plan for Air Quality. The City has included the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA) policies in its comprehensive plan to address federal and state clean air legislation and has goals and policies in place to reduce travel demand, reduce vehicle emissions of carbon monoxide and ozone air pollutants. These include support of transportation alternatives through Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) programs for major employers, construction of bikeways, walkways, and trails, as well as intersection and signal improvements that reduce vehicle idling. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has set federal standards for seven air pollutants: fine particulate matter, larger particulate matter, ozone, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and lead. The City of Arlington and all of Snohomish County are in an attainment area for all federally monitored air pollutants. ARLINGTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2024-2029 Presented for Board Approval: July 8, 2024 ARLINGTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2024-2029 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Mary Levesque, President Erica Knapp, Vice President Matt Dimond Sheri Kelly Director District #3 - Vacant SUPERINTENDENT Dr. Chrys Sweeting For information regarding the Arlington Public Schools Capital Facilities Plan, contact the Office of the Superintendent, District Administration Office, 315 N. French Avenue, Arlington, WA 98223. Telephone: (360) 618-6200. Presented to the Board of Directors for Approval on July 8, 2024 1 Table of Contents Page Section 1. Introduction ..............................................................................................................2 Section 2. District Educational Program Standards ..................................................................6 Section 3. Capital Facilities Inventory ......................................................................................9 Section 4. Student Enrollment Projections .............................................................................13 Section 5. Capital Facilities Needs .........................................................................................15 Section 6. Capital Facility Financing Plan ..............................................................................17 Section 7. School Impact Fees ................................................................................................20 Appendix A ……………………………………………...……..Population and Enrollment Data Appendix B ……………………………………………...……………Student Generation Rates Appendix C ……………………………………………...……………..Impact Fee Calculations 2 INTRODUCTION A.Purpose of the Capital Facilities Plan The Washington State Growth Management Act (the “GMA”) includes schools in the category of public facilities and services. School districts have adopted capital facilities plans to satisfy the requirements of the GMA and to identify additional school facilities necessary to meet the educational needs of the growing student populations anticipated in their districts. Arlington Public Schools (the “District”) has prepared this Capital Facilities Plan (the “CFP”) to provide Snohomish County (the “County”) and the City of Arlington (the “City”) with a schedule and financing program for capital improvements over the next six years (2024-2029). In accordance with the Growth Management Act, the Snohomish County Ordinance Nos. 97-095 and 99-107, this CFP contains the following required elements: •Future enrollment forecasts for each grade span (elementary, middle, and high schools). •An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by the District, showing the locations and capacities of the facilities. •A forecast of the future needs for capital facilities and school sites. •The proposed capacities of expanded or new capital facilities. •A six-year plan for financing capital facilities within projected funding capacities, which clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes. The financing plan separates projects and portions of projects which add capacity from those which do not, since the latter are generally not appropriate for impact fee funding. •A calculation of impact fees to be assessed and support data substantiating said fees. In developing this CFP, the District followed the following guidelines set forth in the Snohomish County General Policy Plan: •District should use information from recognized sources, such as the U.S. Census or the Puget Sound Regional Council. School districts may generate their own data if it is derived through statistically reliable methodologies. The information must not be inconsistent with Office of Financial Management (“OFM”) population forecasts. Student generation rates must be independently calculated by each school district. •The CFP must comply with the GMA. •The methodology used to calculate impact fees must comply with the GMA. In the event that impact fees are not available due to action by the state, county or cities within the District, the District in a future CFP update must identify alternative funding sources to replace the intended impact fee funding. •The methodology used to calculate impact fees complies with the criteria and the formulas established by the County and the City. 3 Snohomish County’s Countywide Planning Policies direct jurisdictions in Snohomish County to “ensure the availability of sufficient land and services for future K-20 school needs.” Policy ED- 11. The District appreciates any opportunity for cooperative planning efforts with its jurisdictions. B.Overview of Arlington Public Schools Two-hundred square miles in area, the District encompasses the City of Arlington and portions of unincorporated Snohomish County. The District is bordered by the Conway, Darrington, Granite Falls, Lakewood, Marysville, Sedro-Woolley, and Stanwood-Camano School Districts. The District serves a student population of 5,466 (October 1, 2023 HC enrollment) with four elementary schools (K-5), two middle schools (grades 6-8), one high school (grades 9-12), one alternative high school (grades 9-12), and one support facility for home schooled children (grades K-12). For the purposes of facility planning, this CFP considers grades K-5 as elementary, grades 6-8 as middle school, and grades 9-12 as high school. For purposes of this CFP, enrollment in the Stillaguamish Valley School (a home school support facility serving grades K-12), the alternative high school (Weston), and the Arlington Online Program (AOP) is not included. The District has experienced moderate growth in recent years after a period of declining student population. For a period of years (2012-2015) the District, due to the declining student population, did not prepare an updated Capital Facilities Plan. The District prepared a CFP in 2016 in anticipation of potential growth, enrollment increases, and future capacity needs. Growth has been steady in the District since 2016 and is projected to continue to increase at all grade levels over the six year planning period. Similar to school districts nationwide, the COVID-19 pandemic affected student enrollment. The District saw a drop in enrollment starting in the 2020-21 school year but enrollment has increased each year since. The District anticipates that enrollment will return to pre-pandemic projections and continue to grow over the six-year planning period. This 2024 update builds on the 2022 CFP and identifies growth-related projects at the middle school level. The District in 2022 completed construction of an addition at Arlington High School, which continues to provide new capacity needed to serve students generated from new growth. 4 FIGURE 1 - MAP OF FACILITIES Annotations to District Map: Site Name Site Type Street Address City State Zip District Office Support 315 N French Ave Arlington WA 98223 Support Services, Old High School Building Support 135 S French Ave Arlington WA 98223 Transportation Center Support 19124 63rd Ave NE Arlington WA 98223 Arlington High School Instructional 18821 Crown Ridge Blvd. Arlington WA 98223 Weston High School Instructional 4407 - 172nd Street NE Arlington WA 98223 Stillaguamish Valley Learning Center Instructional 1215 East 5th Street Arlington WA 98223 Haller Middle School Instructional 600 East 1st Street Arlington WA 98223 Post Middle School Instructional 220 East 5th Street Arlington WA 98223 Eagle Creek Elementary Instructional 1216 East 5th Street Arlington WA 98223 Kent Prairie Elementary Instructional 8110 - 207th Street NE Arlington WA 98223 Pioneer Elementary Instructional 8213 Eaglefield Drive Arlington WA 98223 Presidents Elementary Instructional 505 East 3rd Street Arlington WA 98223 5 6 SECTION 2 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM STANDARDS School facility and student capacity needs are dictated by the types and amounts of space required to accommodate the District’s adopted educational program. The educational program standards which typically drive facility space needs include grade configuration, optimum facility size, class size, educational program offerings, classroom utilization and scheduling requirements, and use of relocatable classrooms (portables). In addition to student population, other factors such as collective bargaining agreements, government mandates, and community expectations also affect classroom space requirements. Traditional educational programs are often supplemented by programs such as special education, bilingual education, preschool and daycare programs, computer labs, and music programs. These programs can have a significant impact on the available student capacity of school facilities. A. Districtwide Educational Program Standards Special programs offered by the District at specific school sites include, but are not limited to: • APPLE (formerly named ECEAP); • Elementary program for students with special needs; and • Enhanced Learning Program/Highly Capable; and • English Language Learner Program (Eagle Creek Elementary). District educational program standards may change in the future as a result of various external or internal changes. External changes may include mandates or needs for special programs, or use of technology. Internal changes may include modifications to the program year, class sizes, and grade span configurations. Changes in physical aspects of the school facilities could also affect educational program standards. The school capacity inventory will be reviewed periodically and adjusted for any changes to the educational program standards. These changes will also be reflected in future updates of this CFP. The District educational program standards which directly affect school capacity are outlined below for the elementary, middle, and high school grade levels. Each grade span has a targeted level of service (LOS) which is expressed as a “not to exceed” number. The minimum LOS for each grade span is expressed as “maximum average class size”. This figure is used to determine when another class is added. When this average is exceeded, the District will add additional classes if space is available. Only academic classes are used to compute the maximum average class size. The District has fully implemented full-day kindergarten in and reduced K-3 class size requirements. 7 B. Educational Program Standards for Elementary Schools • Class size for Kindergarten and grades 1-3 is targeted not to exceed 21 students, with a maximum average class size of 21 students; • Class size for grade 4 is targeted not to exceed 25 students, with a maximum average class size of 27 students; • Class size for grade 5 is targeted not to exceed 27 students, with a maximum average class size of 29 students; • Special Education for some students is provided in a self-contained classroom; • Music instruction will be provided in a separate classroom (when available); and • All elementary schools currently have a room dedicated as a computer lab, or have access to mobile carts with laptop computers for classroom use. C. Educational Program Standards for Middle and High Schools • Class size for grade 6 is targeted not to exceed 27 students, with a maximum average class size of 29 students • Class size for middle school grades 7-8 is targeted not to exceed 29 students, with a maximum average class size of 31 students; • Class size for high school grades 9-12 is targeted not to exceed 30 students, with a maximum average class size of 32 students; • It is not possible to achieve 100% utilization of all regular teaching stations throughout the day. Therefore, high school classroom capacity has been adjusted using a utilization factor in the range of 90% to 96% (based on a regular school day). Middle school classroom capacity has been adjusted using a utilization factor of 85%; • Special Education for some students will be provided in a self-contained classroom; and • Identified students will also be provided other programs in classrooms designated as follows: 1. Resource Rooms (i.e. computer labs, study rooms). 2. Learning Support Centers. 3. Program Specific Classrooms (i.e., music, drama, art, home and family education). D. Minimum Educational Service Standards The District will evaluate student housing levels based on the District as a whole system and not on a school by school or site by site basis. This may result in portable classrooms being used as interim housing, attendance boundary changes or other program changes to balance student housing across the system as a whole, while meeting the District’s paramount duties under the State Constitution. A boundary change or a significant programmatic change would be made by the District’s Board of Directors following appropriate public review and comment. The District 8 may also request that development be deferred until planned facilities can be completed to meet the needs of the incoming population; however, the District has no control over the ultimate land use decisions made by the permitting jurisdictions. The District’s intent is to adhere to the target facility service standards noted above without making significant changes in program delivery. At a minimum, average class size in the grade K -8 classrooms will not exceed 26 students and average class size in 9-12 classrooms will not exceed 32 students. For purposes of this determination, the term “classroom” does not include special education classrooms or special program classrooms (i.e. computer labs, art rooms, chorus and band rooms, spaces used for physical education, and other special program areas). Furthermore, the term “classroom” does not apply to special programs or activities that may occur in a regular classroom or to classes held in assembly halls, gyms, cafeterias, or other common areas. The minimum educational service standards are not the District’s desired or accepted operating standard. For the school years of 2021-22 and 2022-23, the District’s compliance with the minimum level of service was as follows 2021-22 School Year LOS Standard MINIMUM LOS# Elementary REPORTED LOS Elementary MINIMUM LOS Middle REPORTED LOS Middle MINIMUM LOS High REPORTED LOS High 26 20.06 26 19.09 32 28.24 * The District determines the reported service level by adding the number of students in regular classrooms at each grade level and dividing that number by the number of teaching stations. 2022-23 School Year LOS Standard MINIMUM LOS# Elementary REPORTED LOS Elementary MINIMUM LOS Middle REPORTED LOS Middle MINIMUM LOS High REPORTED LOS High 26 20.70 26 19.31 32 28.63 * The District determines the reported service level by adding the number of students in regular classrooms at each grade level and dividing that number by the number of teaching stations. Portables are not included in this analysis. 9 SECTION 3 CAPITAL FACILITIES INVENTORY The facilities inventory serves to establish a baseline for determining the facilities necessary to accommodate future demand (student enrollment) at acceptable levels of service. This section provides an inventory of capital facilities owned and operated by the District including schools, relocatable classrooms, undeveloped land, and support facilities. School facility capacity was inventoried based on the space required to accommodate the District’s adopted educational program standards. See Section 2. A map showing locations of District facilities is provided as Figure 1. A. Schools The District maintains four elementary schools, two middle schools, one high school, an alternative high school, and the Stillaguamish Valley School (a Home- School Support center). Elementary schools currently accommodate grades K -5, the middle schools serve grades 6-8, and the high school and alternative high school provide for grades 9-12. The Stillaguamish Valley School serves grades K-12. School capacity was determined based on the number of teaching stations within each building and the space requirements of the District’s adopted educational program. It is this capacity calculation that is used to establish the District’s baseline capacity, and to determine future capacity needs based on projected student enrollment. The school capacity inventory is summarized in Tables 1, 2, and 3. The Stillaguamish Valley School and Weston High School are housed in separate District-owned facilities and are not included in this CFP for the purposes of measuring capacity or projecting enrollment. Relocatable classrooms are not viewed by the District as a solution for housing students on a permanent basis. Therefore, these facilities were not included in the school capacity calculations provided in Tables 1, 2, and 3. Table 1 Elementary School Inventory Elementary School Site Size (Acres) Building Area (Square Feet) Teaching Stations Permanent Capacity Year Built or Remodeled Eagle Creek 23.70 57,362 28 630 1989 Kent Prairie 10.10 57,362 28 630 1993 Presidents 12.40 60,977 31 680 2004 Pioneer 20.60 61,530 25 562 2002 TOTAL 66.80 237,231 112 2,502 10 Table 2 Middle School Inventory Middle School Site Size (Acres) Building Area (Square Feet) Teaching Stations* Permanent Capacity Year Built or Remodeled Post Middle 24.60 76,323 36 757 1993 Haller Middle 25.46 86,002 31 612 2006 TOTAL 50.06 162,325 67 1,369 *Includes a total of six special education classrooms between both schools. Table 3 High School Inventory High School Site Size (Acres) Building Area (Square Feet) Teaching Stations Permanent Capacity Year Built or Remodeled Arlington High 54.00 273,871 63 2,036 2003; 2022 B. Relocatable Classrooms Relocatable classrooms are used on an interim basis to house students until funding can be secured to construct permanent classrooms. The District currently uses seventeen relocatable classrooms at various school sites throughout the District to provide additional interim capacity (an additional 10 relocatables are located at Stillaguamish Valley School). A typical relocatable classroom can provide capacity for a full-size class of students and a single classroom ranges in size from approximately 700 to 900 square feet. See Table 11 for total portable square footage by grade level. The District’s relocatable classrooms have adequate useful remaining life and are evaluated regularly. Current use for the 2023-24 school year of relocatable classrooms throughout the District is summarized in Table 4. 11 Table 4 Relocatable Classroom (Portable) Inventory Elementary School Relocatables Interim Capacity Eagle Creek 6 150 Kent Prairie 4 84 Presidents 2 58 Middle School Relocatables Interim Capacity Post Middle 4 113 High School Relocatables Interim Capacity Arlington High 1 32 TOTAL 17 437 C. Support Facilities In addition to schools, the District owns and operates additional facilities, which provide operational support functions to the schools. An inventory of these facilities is provided in Table 5. Table 5 Support Facility Inventory Facility Building Area (Square Feet) Site Location Address Administration and Special Programs 21,402 Roosevelt Building, Presidents 315 N. French Ave Transportation 41,550 Leased 19124 63rd Ave Ne Support Services 70,991 Old HS “A” Bldg 135 S. French Ave D. Land Inventory & Other Facilities The District owns the following undeveloped sites: • A 167-acre site (“Hwy 530 Site”) located 1.5 miles from the city limits of Arlington adjacent to SR 530. The property is outside of the Urban Growth Area boundary and not serviced by municipal utilities. The District is currently negotiating a sale of this property. • Seven sites ranging from 25 to 160 acres that are managed as forest land by a forestland manager and generally topographically unsuitable for school site development. 12 • An additional 58.9 acres at the Post Middle School site of farmland located in a floodplain and therefore unsuitable for development. The District owns the “A” Building on the former high school campus. The “A” Building has been taken out of educational use and is no longer eligible (by OSPI) for use as for classroom space. The Stillaguamish Valley School, is an alternative learning program serving on-line students and on-site K-8 students, is located on the Eagle Creek Elementary site. This facility consists of 10 portable classrooms and is not considered part of the District’s permanent facility capacity. Additionally, the District leases a 33,000 square foot building on a 10 acre site near the Arlington Airport. This remodeled building houses the (alternative) Weston High School. Since this site houses only alternative educational programs, the building’s capacity is not included as part of the District’s eligible facility inventory1. 1 Students enrolled in these alternative programs are not included in enrollment numbers for the purposes of this CFP update. 13 SECTION 4 STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS A. Projected Student Enrollment 2024-2029 Enrollment projections are most accurate for the initial years of the forecast period. In the past, the District has used the methodology from the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) to determine enrollment projections. The cohort survival method uses historical enrollment data to forecast the number of students who will be attending school the following y ear. The cohort method has not proven to be a reliable measure for the Arlington School District. It uses a weighted average of the most recent years to project enrollment and is not designed to anticipate fluctuations in development patterns or isolated variances in student enrollment. This deficiency is exacerbated by enrollment anomalies that occurred as a result of the COVID pandemic, particularly in 2020. For information purposes only, the OSPI cohort survival projections are included in Appendix A-1. The District prepared modified cohort survival projections using work from 2022 from an outside demographer, FLO Analytics, that considered historic enrollment patterns, demographic and land use analysis based upon information from Snohomish County and the cities of Arlington and Marysville, census data, OFM forecasts, and Washington State Department of Health birth data. It also considered the impacts of the pandemic on enrollment. The District updated that analysis with current information. See Appendix A-2. Using the District’s enrollment projections, the District anticipates an increase in enrollment of approximately 6.92% by the 2029-30 school year, with growth occurring at the elementary and high school grade levels. OFM population-based enrollment projections were estimated for the District using OFM population forecasts as adopted by Snohomish County. Between 2020 and 2023, the District’s enrollment constituted 15.75% of the total population in the District. Using this percentage, a total enrollment of 6,082 HC students is projected in 2029. Table 6 Projected Student Enrollment 2023-2029 * Actual October 2023 HC enrollment The District uses the adjusted District demographer’s enrollment projections for purposes of predicting enrollment during the six years of this Plan. The District will monitor actual enrollment over the next two years and, if necessary, make appropriate adjustments in the next Plan update. Change % Change Projection 2023* 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 23-29 23-29 District 5,466 5,450 5,491 5,591 5,662 5,768 5,844 378 6.92% OFM/County 5,466 5,569 5,672 5,775 5,878 5,981 6,082 616 11% 14 B. 2044 Enrollment Projections Student enrollment projections beyond 2029 are highly speculative. Based on OFM/County data for 2029 and an estimated student-to-population ratio of 15.75%, 7,402 HC students are projected for 2044. The total enrollment estimate was broken down by grade span to evaluate long-term site acquisition needs for elementary, middle, and high school facilities. Enrollment by grade span was determined based on recent and projected enrollment trends at the elementary, middle school, and high school levels. Projected enrollment by grade span for the year 20442 is provided in Table 7. Again, these estimates are highly speculative and are used only for general planning purposes. Table 7 Projected Student Enrollment (Ratio Method – OFM/County) 2044 Grade Span Projected Enrollment Elementary (K-5) 3,257 Middle School (6-8) 1,703 High School (9-12) 2,442 TOTAL (K-12) 7,402 2 Snohomish County Planning & Development Services provided the underlying data for the 2044 projections. 15 SECTION 5 CAPITAL FACILITIES NEEDS Projected available student capacity was derived by subtracting projected student enrollment from existing school capacity (excluding relocatable classrooms) for each of the six years in the forecast period (2024-2029). Capacity needs are expressed in terms of “unhoused students.” Note that the identified capacity needs do not include growth-related capacity needs from recent development. Table 8A below shows future capacity needs assuming no new construction during the planning period. Table 8A Future Capacity Needs Grade Span 2029 Projected Unhoused Students - Total 2029 Projected Unhoused Students – Growth Post- 2021 Elementary (K-5) 129 129 Middle School (6-8) -- -- High School (9-12) --** --** TOTAL (K-12) 129 129 **Growth continues at the 9-12 level but benefits from a recently constructed and front funded addition at Arlington High School. Projected student capacity is depicted on Table 8B. This is derived by applying the projected number of students to the projected capacity. Planned improvements (if any) by the District through 2029 are included in Table 8B. It is not the District’s policy to include relocatable classrooms when determining future capital facility needs; therefore interim capacity provided by relocatable classrooms (including additions and adjustments) is not included. Information on relocatable classrooms and interim capacity can be found in Table 4. Information on planned construction projects can be found in Section 6 and the Financing Plan, Table 9. 16 Table 8B Projected Student Capacity 2024 - 2029 Elementary School Surplus/Deficiency Elementary 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Existing Capacity 2,502 2,502 2,502 2,502 2,502 2,502 2,502 Added Capacity Total Capacity 2,502 2,502 2,502 2,502 2,502 2,502 2,502 Enrollment 2,378 2,351 2,367 2,428 2,466 2,552 2,631 Surplus (Deficiency) 124 151 135 74 36 (50) (129) Middle School Surplus/Deficiency Middle 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Existing Capacity 1,369 1,369 1,369 1,369 1,369 1,369 1,519 Added Capacity 150^ Total Capacity 1,369 1,369 1,369 1,369 1,369 1,519 1,519 Enrollment 1,273 1,249 1,290 1,283 1,292 1,232 1,237 Surplus (Deficiency) 96 120 79 86 77 287 282 ^Replacement and Expansion of Post Middle School High School Surplus/Deficiency High 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Existing Capacity 2,036^ 2,036 2,036 2,036 2,036 2,036 2,036 Added Capacity Total Capacity 2,036 2,036 2,036 2,036 2,036 2,036 2,036 Enrollment 1,815 1,850 1,835 1,880 1,905 1,984 1,975 Surplus (Deficiency) 221 186 201 156 131 52 61 ^Includes Arlington High School Addition – 256 seats (complete summer 2022) 17 SECTION 6 CAPITAL FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN A. Planned Improvements The District has identified several capacity projects within the six year planning period needed to meet growth-related needs: Permanent Capacity Adding Projects: • Replacement of Post Middle School with the addition of 150 new student seats. Temporary Capacity Projects: • The District may add additional portable facilities during the six year planning period of this CFP. The District completed in 2022 an addition to Arlington High School that continues to provide capacity to serve growth projected through the six years of this planning period. The District is also starting to plan for elementary capacity solutions as growth continues at that grade level. Future updates to the CFP will include any specifically planned projects. In the event that planned construction projects do not fully address space needs for student growth and a reduction in interim student housing, the Board could consider various courses of action, including, but not limited to: • Alternative scheduling options; • Changes in the instructional model; • Grade configuration changes; • Increased class sizes; or • Modified school calendar. Funding for planned improvements is typically secured from a number of sources including voter approved bonds, state school construction assistance program funds, and impact fees. Each of these funding sources is discussed in greater detail below. 18 B. Financing Sources 1. General Obligation Bonds/Capital Levies Bonds are typically used to fund construction of new schools and other capital improvement projects, and require a 60% voter approval. Capital levies require a 50% voter approval and can be used for certain capital improvement projects. In February 2020, the District presented and the voters approved a $25.1 million capital levy to its voters to fund, among other things, new classrooms and a science, technology, engineering, art and math (STEAM) workshop wing addition at Arlington High School. In February 2024, the District presented a six-year, $26.3 million capital levy and $95.0 million bond measure to its voters. The voters approved the capital levy, which will provide funding for, among other things, roofing, HVAC, and building preservation projects. The bond proposal included funding for the construction of a new middle school to replace Post Middle School. The bond did not achieve the required 60% minimum for passage. Subject to future Board action, the District anticipates presenting a funding proposal during the six years of this planning period, which would include the replacement/expansion of Post Middle School. 2. State School Construction Assistance Funds State School Construction Assistance funds come from the Common School Construction Fund. The State deposits revenue from the sale of renewable resources from State school lands set aside by the Enabling Act of 1889 into the Common School Account. If these sources are insufficient to meet needs, the Legislature can appropriate General Obligation Bond funds or the Superintendent of Public Instruction can prioritize projects for funding. School districts may qualify for State School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) funds for specific capital projects based on a prioritization system. The District is currently eligible for state school construction assistance funds at the 62.00% level for eligible projects. The Construction Cost Allowance, the maximum cost/square foot recognized for SCAP funding, is established in the State’s biennial budget and currently is $375.00/eligible square foot. 3. Impact Fees Impact fees are a means of supplementing traditional funding sources for construction of public facilities needed to accommodate new development. C. Six-Year Financing Plan Table 9 demonstrates how the District intends to fund new construction and improvements to school facilities for the years 2024-2029. The financing components include current capital levy funds, future capital levy/bond revenue, impact fees, and other future sources. Projects and portions of projects which remedy existing deficiencies are not appropriate for impact fee funding. Thus, impact fees will not be used to finance projects or portions of projects which do not add capacity or which remedy existing deficiencies. 19 Table 9 Capital Facilities Financing Plan Improvements Adding Permanent Capacity (Costs in Millions) Project 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Total Cost Bonds/ Levy/Other Local State Match Impact Fees Elementary Potential Property Purchase TBD X X Middle School Post Middle School Replacement and Expansion $15.830 $15.830 $15.830 $15.830 $15.830 $79.150 X X High School Arlington High School Addition $8.186** $8.186 X X ***Project complete summer 2022; funds reflect total costs with some funds expended in previous years. Improvements Adding Temporary Capacity (Costs in Millions) Project 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Total Cost Bonds/ Levy/Other Local State Match Impact Fees Relocatables – various schools TBD X Noncapacity Improvements (Costs in Millions) Project 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Total Cost Bonds/ Levy/Other Local State Match Impact Fees Various Schools (all grade levels) Roofing, HVAC and paving improvements $6.334 $6.492 $6.654 $6.821 $26.301 X 20 SECTION 7 SCHOOL IMPACT FEES The GMA authorizes jurisdictions to collect impact fees to supplement funding of additional public facilities needed to accommodate new development. Impact fees cannot be used for the operation, maintenance, repair, alteration, or replacement of existing capital facilities used to meet existing service demands. A. School Impact Fees in Snohomish County The Snohomish County General Policy Plan (“GPP”) which implements the GMA sets certain conditions for school districts wishing to assess impact fees: • The District must provide support data including: an explanation of the calculation methodology, a description of key variables and their computation, and definitions and sources of data for all inputs into the fee calculation. • Such data must be accurate, reliable and statistically valid. • Data must accurately reflect projected costs in the Six-Year Financing Plan. • Data in the proposed impact fee schedule must reflect expected student generation rates from at least the following residential dwelling unit types: single family; multi-family/studio or 1-bedroom; and multi-family/2- bedroom or more. Snohomish County and the City of Arlington’s impact fee programs require school districts to prepare and adopt CFPs meeting the specifications of the GMA. Impact fees are calculated in accordance with the formula, which are based on projected school facility costs necessitated by new growth and are contained in the District’s CFP. B. Methodology and Variables Used to Calculate School Impact Fees Impact fees are calculated utilizing the formula in the Snohomish County Impact Fee Ordinance. The resulting figures are based on the District’s cost per dwelling unit to, as applicable, purchase land for school sites, make site improvements, construct schools, and purchase/install relocatable facilities that add interim capacity needed to serve new development. • The Site Acquisition Cost, School Construction Cost, and Temporary/Portable Facility Cost factors are based on planned or actual costs (on/off site improvements) of growth- related school capacity. Costs vary with each site and each facility. See Table 9, Finance Plan. The “Permanent Facility Square Footage” is used in combination with the “Temporary Facility Square Footage” to apportion the impact fee amounts between permanent and temporary capacity figures. A student factor (or student generation rate) is 21 used to identify the average cost per dwelling unit by measuring the average number of students generated by each housing type. A description of the student factor methodology is contained in Appendix B. The District obtained for the first time a data set for multi- family dwelling units of one bedroom and less. However, the low rate of students residing in these units does not generate an impact fee. • Where applicable, credits are applied in the formula to account for State School Construction Assistance funds to be reimbursed to the District and projected future property taxes to be paid by the dwelling unit. See page 18. The tax credit uses the 20-year general obligation bond rate from the Bond Buyer index, the District’s current levy rate for bonds, and average assessed value of all residential dwelling units constructed in the District (provided by Snohomish County) by dwelling unit type to determine the corresponding tax credit. The costs of projects that do not add capacity are not included in the impact fee calculations. Furthermore, because the impact fee formula calculates a “cost per dwelling unit”, an identical fee is generated regardless of whether the total new capacity project costs are used in the calculation or whether the District only uses the percentage of the total new capacity project costs allocated to the Districts growth-related needs, as demonstrated in Table 8-A. For purposes of this Plan, the District has chosen to use the full project costs in the fee formula. Furthermore, impact fees will not be used to address existing deficiencies. See Table 9 for a complete identification of funding sources. The following projects are included in the impact fee calculation: • A capacity addition at Arlington High School (completed in 2022 but continuing to provide capacity for growth) Please see Tables 9 and 11 for relevant cost data related to each capacity project. 22 C. Proposed Arlington School District Impact Fee Schedule Using the variables and formula described in subsection B, impact fees proposed for the District are summarized in Table 10. See also Appendix C. Table 10 School Impact Fees 2024 Housing Type Impact Fee Per Dwelling Unit Single Family $544 Townhomes/Duplexes $441 Multi-Family (2+ Bedroom) $0* Multi-Family (1 Bedroom) No fee ($0) Table 10 reflects a 50% adjustment to the calculated fee as required by local ordinances. *The fee formula generates an $88 fee for Multi-Family 2+ units. However, because Snohomish County charges the District an administrative fee per dwelling units that is nearly equal to this amount, the District is foregoing requesting the fee for this unit type. 23 Table 11: Impact Fee Variables Student Generation Factors – Single Family Average Site Cost/Acre Elementary .265 N/A Middle .112 Senior .168 Total .544 Temporary Facility Capacity Student Generation Factors – Townhomes/Duplexes Capacity 22 Elementary .208 Cost $300,000 Middle .104 Senior .083 SCAP Funding Credit (OSPI) Total .396 Current State Match Percentage 62.00% Current Construction Cost Allocation (CCA) $375.00 Student Generation Factors – Multi Family (2+ Bdrm) Elementary .106 Middle .049 Senior .060 District Average Assessed Value (Snohomish Co.) Total .215 Single Family Residence $588,440 Projected Student Capacity per Facility Townhome/Duplex $242,411 Arlington HS (expansion) - 256 Multi Family (1 Bedroom) $175,133 Multi Family (2+ Bedroom) $242,411 Required Site Acreage per Facility SPI Square Footage per Student (WAC 392-343-035) Facility Construction/Cost Average Elementary 90 Middle 108 Arlington HS (expansion) $8,186,671 High 130 Debt Service Tax Rate for Bonds/Capital Levy (Sno Co.) Current/$1,000 $0.8418972 Permanent Facility Square Footage (ASD Inventory) General Obligation Bond Interest Rate (Bond Buyer) Elementary 237,231 Bond Buyer Index (avg 2/24) 3.48% Middle 162,325 Senior 273,871 Developer Provided Sites/Facilities Total 98.00% 673,427 Value 0 Dwelling Units 0 Temporary Facility Square Footage (ASD Inventory) Elementary 7,560 Middle 3,356 Senior 839 Total 2.00% 11,755 Total Facility Square Footage Elementary 244,791 Middle 165,681 Senior 274,710 Total 100.00% 685,182 APPENDIX A POPULATION AND ENROLLMENT DATA A-1 OSPI Cohort Projections Form 1049 (Printed February 2024) A-2 DISTRICT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS APPENDIX B STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR REVIEW B-1 B-2 APPENDIX C SCHOOL IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS C-1 LAKEWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 306 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2024-2029 Adopted: July 17, 2024 LAKEWOOD SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 306 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2024-2029 BOARD OF DIRECTORS CATHERINE “SANDY” GOTTS, PRESIDENT LEAH TOCCO DANA KRIEGER STEVEN LARSON DAWN TAYLOR SUPERINTENDENT DR. ERIN MURPHY For information regarding the Lakewood School District Capital Facilities Plan, contact the Office of the Superintendent, Lakewood School District, 17110 16th Drive NE, Marysville, WA 98271. (Tel: (360) 652-4500) TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Section 1. Introduction ..............................................................................................................1 Section 2. District Educational Program Standards ..................................................................4 Section 3. Capital Facilities Inventory ......................................................................................8 Section 4. Student Enrollment Projections .............................................................................11 Section 5. Capital Facilities Needs .........................................................................................14 Section 6. Capital Facilities Financing Plan ...........................................................................17 Section 7. School Impact Fees ................................................................................................20 Appendix A ……………………………………………………Population and Enrollment Data Appendix B ………………………………………………...Student Generation Factor Review Appendix C …………………………………………………….School Impact Fee Calculations INTRODUCTION A. Purpose of the Capital Facilities Plan The Washington State Growth Management Act (the “GMA”) includes schools in the category of public facilities and services. School districts have adopted capital facilities plans to satisfy the requirements of the GMA and to identify additional school facilities necessary to meet the educational needs of the growing student populations anticipated in their districts. The Lakewood School District (the “District”) has prepared this Capital Facilities Plan (the “CFP”) to provide Snohomish County (the “County”) and the cities of Arlington and Marysville with a description of facilities needed to accommodate projected student enrollment and a schedule and financing program for capital improvements over the next six years (2024-2029). In accordance with the Growth Management Act, adopted County Policy, the Snohomish County Ordinance Nos. 97-095 and 99-107, the City of Arlington Ordinance No. 1263, and the City of Marysville Ordinance Nos. 2306 and 2213, this CFP contains the following required elements:  Future enrollment forecasts for each grade span (elementary, middle, and high school).  An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by the District, showing the locations and capacities of the facilities.  A forecast of the future needs for capital facilities and school sites.  The proposed capacities of expanded or new capital facilities.  A six-year plan for financing capital facilities within projected funding capacities, which clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes. The financing plan separates projects and portions of projects which add capacity from those which do not, since the latter are generally not appropriate for impact fee funding.  As relevant, a calculation of impact fees to be assessed and supporting data substantiating said fees. In developing this CFP, the District followed the following guidelines set forth in the Snohomish County General Policy Plan:  Districts should use information from recognized sources, such as the U.S. Census or the Puget Sound Regional Council. School districts may generate their own data if it is derived through statistically reliable methodologies. Information must not be inconsistent with Office of Financial Management (“OFM”) population forecasts. Student generation rates must be independently calculated by each school district.  The CFP must comply with the GMA.  The methodology used to calculate impact fees must comply with the GMA. In the event that impact fees are not available due to action by the state, -2- county or cities within the District, the District in a future CFP update must identify alternative funding sources to replace the intended impact fee funding.  The methodology used to calculate impact fees also complies with the criteria and the formulas established by the County. Snohomish County’s Countywide Planning Policies direct jurisdictions in Snohomish County to “ensure the availability of sufficient land and services for future K-20 school needs” and “work with school districts to plan for the siting and improvement of school facilities.” Policy ED-11 and Policy PS-21. The District appreciates any opportunity for cooperative planning efforts with its jurisdictions. B. Overview of the Lakewood School District The Lakewood School District is located along Interstate 5, north of Marysville, Washington, primarily serving unincorporated Snohomish County and a part of the City of Arlington and the City of Marysville. The District is bordered on the south by the Marysville School District, on the west and north by the Stanwood School District, and on the east by the Arlington School District. The District serves a population of 2,614 headcount students, with an FTE enrollment of 2,534 (October 1, 2023, reported OSPI enrollment). The District has three elementary schools, one middle school, and one high school. -3- FIGURE 1 MAP OF FACILITIES -4- SECTION 2 DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM STANDARDS School facility and student capacity needs are dictated by the types and amounts of space required to accommodate the District’s adopted educational program. The educational program standards which typically drive facility space needs include grade configuration, optimum facility size, class size, educational program offerings, classroom utilization and scheduling requirements, and use of relocatable classroom facilities (portables), as well as specific and unique physical structure needs required to meet the needs of students with special needs. In addition to factors which affect the amount of space required, government mandates and community expectations may affect how classroom space is used. Traditional educational programs offered by school districts are often supplemented by nontraditional, or special programs such as special education, expanded bilingual education, remediation, migrant education, alcohol and drug education, AIDS education, preschool and daycare programs, computer labs, music programs, and others. These special or nontraditional educational programs can have a significant impact on the available student capacity of school facilities, and upon planning for future needs. The educational program standards contained in this CFP reflect the District’s implementation of requirements for full-day kindergarten and reduced K-3 class size. Special programs offered by the District at specific school sites include, but are not limited to: Lakewood Elementary School (Preschool through 5th Grades)  Multilingual Education Program  Title 1/Learning Assistance Program  K – 5th Grade Counseling Services  Speech and Language Therapy Services  Early Childhood Education and Assistance Program (ECEAP)  Developmental Preschool Program - Ages 3 to 5 (District Program)  K – 5th Grade Special Education Resource Room Program  K – 5th Grade Highly Capable Program  Occupational Therapy Services  Transitional Kindergarten Program English Crossing Elementary School (Kindergarten through 5th Grades)  K – 5th Grade Special Education Resource Room Program  Multilingual Education Program  K – 5th Grade Counseling Services  Speech and Language Therapy Services  Occupational Therapy Services  Special Education Achieve Program (District Program) -5-  K – 5th Grade Highly Capable Program  Title 1/Learning Assistance Program Cougar Creek Elementary School (Kindergarten through 5th Grades)  Multilingual Education Program  Title 1/Learning Assistance Program  Speech and Language Therapy Services  Occupational Therapy Services  K – 5th Grade Special Education Resource Room Program  K – 5th Grade Special Education Comprehensive Skills Program (District Program)  K – 5th Grade Counseling Services  K – 5th Grade Highly Capable Program Lakewood Middle School (6th through 8th Grades)  Speech and Language Therapy Service  6th – 8th Grade Special Education Program  6th – 8th Grade Special Education Comprehensive Skills Program (District Program)  Multilingual Education Program  Occupational Therapy Services  6th – 8th Grade Achieve Program (District Program)  6th – 8th Grade Counseling Services  6th – 8th Grade Highly Capable Program  Career and Technical Education Lakewood High School  9th – 12th Grade Special Education Program  9th – 12th Grade Special Education Comprehensive Skills Program (District Program)  Multilingual Education Program  Occupational Therapy Services  Speech and Language Therapy Services  9th – 12th Grade Counseling Program  Adult Special Education Independent Living Program (District Program)  9th – 12th Grade Highly Capable Program  Career and Technical Education Variations in student capacity between schools may result from the special or nontraditional programs offered at specific schools. Some students, for example, leave their regular classroom for a short period of time to receive instruction in these special programs. New schools are designed to accommodate many of these programs. However, existing schools often require space modifications to accommodate special programs, and in some circumstances, these modifications may affect the overall classroom capacities of the buildings. -6- District educational program standards may change in the future as a result of changes in the program year, special programs, class sizes, grade span configurations, use of new technology, and other physical aspects of the school facilities. The school capacity inventory will be reviewed periodically and adjusted for any changes to the educational program standards. These changes will also be reflected in future updates of this Capital Facilities Plan. The District educational program standards which directly affect school capacity are outlined below for the elementary, middle, and high school grade levels. Educational Program Standards for Elementary Schools • Class size for grades K – 3rd will not exceed 19 students. • Class size for grades 4th and 5th will not exceed 24 students. • All students will be provided library/media services in a school library. • Special Education for students may be provided in, inclusion, self-contained or specialized classrooms. • All students will be provided music instruction in a separate classroom (except LES due to capacity). • Each classroom will have access to computers and related educational technology. • Optimum design capacity for new elementary schools is 475 students. However, actual capacity of individual schools may vary depending on the educational programs offered. • All students will be provided physical education instruction in a gym/multipurpose room. Educational Program Standards for Middle and High Schools • Class size for middle school grades will not exceed 27 students. • Class size for high school grades will not exceed 29 students. • As a result of scheduling conflicts for student programs, the need for specialized rooms for certain programs, and the need for teachers to have a work space during planning periods, it is not possible to achieve 100% utilization of all regular teaching stations throughout the day. In updating this Capital Facility Plan, a building review of classroom use was conducted in order to reflect the actual classroom utilization in the high school and middle school. Therefore, classroom capacity should be adjusted using a utilization factor of 95% at the middle school and 85% at the high school to reflect the use of classrooms for teacher planning. Special Education for students will be provided in self-contained or specialized classrooms. Inclusion model for qualified students on IEP’s. • Each classroom is equipped with access to computers and related educational-technology. • Identified students will also be provided other nontraditional educational opportunities in classrooms designated as follows: Counseling Offices Resource Rooms (i.e. computer labs, study rooms) Special Education Classrooms Program Specific Classrooms (i.e. music, drama, art, physical education, Industrial Arts and Agricultural Sciences, STEM). -7- • Optimum design capacity for new middle schools is 600 students. However, actual capacity of individual schools may vary depending on the educational programs offered. • Optimum design capacity for new high schools is 800 students. However, actual capacity of individual schools may vary depending on the educational programs offered. Minimum Educational Service Standards The District will evaluate student housing levels based on the District as a whole system and not on a school by school or site by site basis. This may result in portable classrooms being used as interim housing, attendance boundary changes or other program changes to balance student housing across the system as a whole. A boundary change or a significant programmatic change would be made by the Board of Directors following appropriate public review and comment. The District may also request that development be deferred until planned facilities can be completed to meet the needs of the incoming population; however, the District has no control over the ultimate land use decisions made by the permitting jurisdictions. The District’s minimum level of service (“MLOS”) is as follows: on average, K-5 classrooms have no more than 26 students per classroom, 6-8 classrooms have no more than 28 students per classroom, and 9-12 classrooms have no more than 30 students per classroom. The District sets minimum educational service standards based on several criteria. Exceeding these minimum standards will trigger significant changes in program delivery. Minimum standards have not been met if, on average using current FTE figures: K-4 classrooms have more than 26 students per classroom, 5-8 classrooms have more than 28 students per classroom, or 9-12 classrooms more than 30 students per classroom. The term “classroom” does not include special education classrooms or special program classrooms (i.e. computer labs, art rooms, chorus and band rooms, spaces used for physical education and other special program areas). Furthermore, the term “classroom” does not apply to special programs or activities that may occur in a regular classroom. The MLOS is not the District’s desired or accepted operating standard. For 2021-22 and 2022-23, the District’s compliance with the MLOS was as follows (with MLOS set as applicable for those school years): 2021-22 School Year LOS Standard MINIMUM LOS# Elementary REPORTED LOS Elementary MINIMUM LOS Middle REPORTED LOS Middle MINIMUM LOS High REPORTED LOS High 26 20.09 28 21.63 30 24.85 2022-23 School Year LOS Standard MINIMUM LOS# Elementary REPORTED LOS Elementary MINIMUM LOS Middle REPORTED LOS Middle MINIMUM LOS High REPORTED LOS High 26 19.92 28 22.19 30 24.94 * The District determines the reported LOS by adding the number of students in regular classrooms at each grade level and dividing that number by the number of teaching stations (excludes portables). -8- SECTION 3 CAPITAL FACILITIES INVENTORY The facilities inventory serves to establish a baseline for determining the facilities necessary to accommodate future demand (student enrollment) at acceptable levels of service. This section provides an inventory of capital facilities owned and operated by the District including schools, relocatable classrooms, undeveloped land, and support facilities. Facility capacity is based on the space required to accommodate the District’s adopted educational program standards. See Section 2. Attached as Figure 1 (page 3) is a map showing locations of District facilities. A. Schools The District maintains three elementary schools, one middle school, and one high school. Lakewood Elementary School accommodates grades P-5, Cougar Creek Elementary School accommodates grades K-5, and English Crossing Elementary School accommodates grades K-5. Lakewood Middle School serves grades 6-8, and Lakewood High School serves grades 9-12. School capacity was determined based on the number of teaching stations within each building and the space requirements of the District’s adopted educational program. It is this capacity calculation that is used to establish the District’s baseline capacity, and to determine future capacity needs based on projected student enrollment. The school capacity inv entory is summarized in Table 1. Relocatable classrooms are not viewed by the District as a solution for housing students on a permanent basis. Therefore, these facilities are not included in Table 1. Table 1 School Capacity Inventory Elementary School Site Size (Acres) Building Area (Square Feet) Teaching Stations Permanent Capacity Year Built or Remodeled English Crossing * 41,430 20 403 1994 Cougar Creek 10** 44,217 21 424 2003 Lakewood * 45,400 16 323 1958, 1997 TOTAL * 131,047 57 1,150 Middle School Site Size (Acres) Building Area (Square Feet) Teaching Stations Permanent Capacity Year Built or Remodeled Lakewood Middle * 79,945 27 670 1971, 1994, 2002, 2024 High School Site Size (Acres) Building Area (Square Feet) Teaching Stations Permanent Capacity Year Built or Remodeled Lakewood High * 169,000 34 850 2017 *Note: All facilities are located on one 89-acre campus located at Tax Parcel No. 31053000100300. **The Cougar Creek site is approximately 22 acres located at 16216 11 th Ave NE, Arlington, WA 98223. Note that the presence of critical areas on the site does not allow full utilization at this site. -9- B. Relocatable Classrooms Relocatable classrooms are used on an interim basis to house students until funding can be secured to construct permanent classrooms. The District currently uses 19 relocatable classrooms at various school sites throughout the District to provide additional interim capacity. A typical relocatable classroom can provide capacity for a full-size class of students. Current use of relocatable classrooms throughout the District is summarized in Table 2. Table 2 includes only those relocatable classrooms used for regular capacity purposes. The average size of a single relocatable classroom is approximately 896 square feet. See page 22 for total square footage by grade level. The District’s relocatable classrooms have adequate useful remaining life and are evaluated regularly. Table 2 Relocatable Classroom (Portable) Inventory Elementary School Relocatable Classrooms Interim Capacity English Crossing 2 40 Cougar Creek 4 80 Lakewood 10 200 SUBTOTAL 16 320 Middle School Relocatable Classrooms Interim Capacity Lakewood Middle 3 78 SUBTOTAL 3 78 High School Relocatable Classrooms Interim Capacity Lakewood High 0 0 SUBTOTAL 0 0 TOTAL 19 398 -10- C. Support Facilities In addition to schools, the District owns and operates additional facilities which provide operational support functions to the schools. An inventory of these facilities is provided in Table 3. Table 3 Support Facility Inventory Facility Building Area (Square Feet) Administration 1,384 Business and Operations 1,152 Storage 2,456 Bus Garage/Maintenance Shop 7,416 Stadium 14,304 The District is also a party to a cooperative agreement for use of the Marysville School District transportation facility (which is owned by the Marysville School District). D. Land Inventory The District does not own any sites which are developed for uses other than schools and/or which are leased to other parties. E. Leased Facilities The District leases a 900 square foot portable located in the district office compound that hosts the Teaching and Learning Department and Technology Leadership. -11- SECTION 4 STUDENT ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS The District’s October 1, 2023, reported enrollment was 2,614 HC students (2,533.64 FTE). Enrollment projections are most accurate for the initial years of the forecast period. Moving further into the future, more assumptions about economic conditions and demographic trends in the area affect the projection. Monitoring birth rates in Snohomish County and population growth for the area are essential yearly activities in the ongoing management of the capital facilities plan. In the event that enrollment growth slows, plans for new facilities can be delayed. It is much more difficult, however, to initiate new projects or speed projects up in the event enrollment growth exceeds the projection. A. Six Year Enrollment Projections Two enrollment forecasts were conducted for the District: an estimate by the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) based upon the cohort survival method; and a modified cohort enrollment forecast prepared by a demographer. The District also estimated enrollment based upon adopted Snohomish County population forecasts (“ratio method”). Based on the cohort survival methodology, a total of 2,773 students are expected to be enrolled in the District by 2029, a slight increase from the October 2023 enrollment levels. Notably, the cohort survival method is not designed to anticipate fluctuations in development patterns. This deficiency is exacerbated by enrollment anomalies that occurred as a result of the COVID pandemic, particularly in the 2020-21 school year. Historically the OFM numbers and OSPI cohort percentages are lower than the district projections. See Appendix A-1. Snohomish County provides OFM population-based enrollment projections for the District using OFM population forecasts as adopted by the County. The County provided the District with the estimated total population in the District by year. In 2023, the District’s student enrollment constituted approximately 14.60% of the total population in the District. Assuming that between 2024 and 2029, the District’s enrollment will continue to constitute 14.60% of the District’s total population and using OFM/County data, OFM/County methodology projects a total enrollment of 2,850 students in 2029, or an approximately 9.03% increase. The District obtained in May 2023 an updated enrollment forecast from a professional demographer, FLO Analytics. They provided a low, middle and high estimate of students using full-time equivalent (FTE) counts. Based on this analysis, and using the middle numbers, a total enrollment of 2,743 FTE students, or 209 additional students, are expected by the 2029-30 school year. This projection is an increase of approximately 8.25% over 2023 enrollment. Growth is projected at the elementary and middle school levels, with some plateau at the high school level during the six-year planning period, but picking up in the immediate years following. The FLO Analytics forecast utilizes historic enrollment patterns, demographic and land use analysis based upon information from Snohomish County and the cities of Arlington and Marysville, census data, OFM forecasts, and Washington State Department of Health birth data. It also considers the impacts of the pandemic on enrollment. The detailed FLO Analytics forecast report is on file with the District and a grade level analysis is included in Appendix A-2. -12- The comparison of OSPI cohort, District projections, and OFM/County projected enrollments is contained in Table 4. Table 4 Projected Student Enrollment (FTE) 2024-2029 Projection Oct. 2023* 2024 2025 2026 2029 2028 2029 Change 2024-29 Percent Change 2024-29 OFM/County 2,614 2,653 2,692 2,731 2,770 2,809 2,850 236 9.03% OSPI Cohort** 2,614 2,623 2,666 2,678 2,732 2,753 2,773 159 6.08% District*** 2,534 2,567 2,605 2,634 2,697 2,727 2,743 209 8.25% * Actual reported enrollment, October 2023 (headcount for OFM/OSPI; FTE for District) **Based upon the cohort survival methodology; complete projections located at Appendix A.. ***FLO Analytics using FTE; grade level projections located in Appendix A. The District is aware of notable pending residential development within the District. Specifically, nearly 1,100 multi-family units are planned for or currently in construction within the District boundaries as well as nearly 500 single family units. Given the District-specific detailed analysis contained in the FLO Analytics report, the District is relying on the projections in that report for purposes of planning for the District’s needs during the six years of this plan period. The District plans to watch enrollment growth closely as new development continues. Future updates to the Plan will continue to revisit enrollment projections and methodologies. B. 2044 Enrollment Projections Student enrollment projections beyond 2029 are highly speculative. Using OFM/County data as a base, the District projects a 2044 student HC population of 3,517. This is based on the OFM/County data using total population as related to District enrollment. Projected enrollment by grade span for the year 2044 is provided in Table 5. Again, these estimates are highly speculative and are used only for general planning purposes. -13- Table 5 Projected Student Enrollment 2044 Grade Span HC Enrollment – October 2023 Projected Enrollment 2044* Elementary (K-5) 1,182 1,590 Middle School (6-8) 616 829 High School (9-12) 816 1,098 TOTAL (K-12) 2,614 3,517 *Assumes average percentage per grade span remains constant between 2023 and 2044. Note: Snohomish County Planning and Development Service provided the underlying data for the 2044 projections. -14- SECTION 5 CAPITAL FACILITIES NEEDS The projected available student capacity was determined by subtracting projected FTE student enrollment from permanent school capacity (i.e. excluding portables) for each of the six years in the forecast period (2024-2029). Capacity needs are expressed in terms of “unhoused students.” Projected future capacity needs are depicted on Table 6-A and are derived by applying the projected enrollment to the capacity existing in the 2023-24 school year. The method used to define future capacity needs assumes no new construction. For this reason, planned construction projects are not included at this point. This factor, as applicable, is added later (see Table 7). This table shows actual space needs and the portion of those needs that are “growth related” for the years 2024-2029. Note that this chart can be misleading as it reads out growth-related capacity needs related to recent growth within the District. Table 6-A* Additional Capacity Needs*** 2023-2029 Grade Span 2023 2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 Pct. Growth Related Elementary (K-5) Total Growth Related 32 32 18 -- 20 -- 76 44 92 60 103 71 115 83 72% Middle School (6-8) Total Growth Related 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 8 8 100% High School Total Growth Related 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 -- --% *Please refer to Table 7 for capacity and projected enrollment information. **Actual October 2023 Enrollment ***Additional “Growth Related Capacity Needs” equal the “Total” for each year less “deficiencies” existing as of 2023. Existing deficiencies as of 2023 include capacity needs related to recent growth from new development through that date. -15- By the end of the six-year forecast period (2029), additional permanent classroom capacity will be needed as follows: Table 6-B Unhoused Students Grade Span Unhoused Students /Growth Related in Parentheses) Elementary (K-5) 115/(83) Middle School (6-8) 8/(8) High School (9-12) -(-) TOTAL UNHOUSED (K-12) 123/(91) Again, any planned construction projects are not included in the analysis in Table 6-B. In addition, it is not the District’s policy to include relocatable classrooms when determining future capital facility needs; therefore interim capacity provided by relocatable classrooms is not included in Table 6-B. However, Table 6-C incorporates the District’s current relocatable capacity (see Table 2) for purposes of identifying available capacity. Table 6-C Unhoused Students – Mitigated with Relocatables Grade Span 2029 Unhoused Students /Growth Related in (Parentheses) Relocatable Capacity Elementary (K-5) 115/(83) 320 Middle School (6-8) 8/(8) 78 High School (9-12) -/(-) 0 Total (K-12) 123(91) 398 Importantly, Table 6-C does not include relocatable adjustments that may be made to meet capacity needs. For example, the relocatable classrooms currently designated to serve elementary school needs could be used to serve high school capacity needs. Therefore, assuming no permanent capacity improvements are made, Table 6-C indicates that the District will have adequate interim capacity with the use of relocatable classrooms to house students during this planning period. Projected permanent capacity needs are depicted in Table 7. They are derived by applying the District’s projected number of students to the projected capacity. Planned improvements by the District through 2029 are included in Table 7 and more fully described in Table 8. -16- Table 7 Projected Student Capacity 2024-2029 Elementary School Surplus/Deficiency Oct 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Existing Capacity 1,150 1,150 1,150 1,150 1,150 1,150 1,150 Added Permanent Capacity Total Permanent Capacity 1,150 1,150 1,150 1,150 1,150 1,150 1,150 Enrollment` 1,182 1,168 1,170 1,226 1,242 1,253 1,265 Surplus (Deficiency)** (32) (18) (20) (76) (92) (103) (115) * Reported October 2023 FTE enrollment ** Does not include portable capacity Middle School Surplus/Deficiency Oct 2023* 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Existing Capacity 670 670 670 670 670 670 670 Added Permanent Capacity Total Permanent Capacity 670 670 670 670 670 670 670 Enrollment 616 650 652 633 632 625 678 Surplus (Deficiency)** 54 20 18 37 38 45 (8) * Reported October 2023 FTE enrollment **Does not include portable capacity. High School Surplus/Deficiency Oct 2023* 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Existing Capacity 850 850 850 850 850 850 850 Added Permanent Capacity Total Permanent Capacity 850 850 850 850 850 850 850 Enrollment 816 749 784 776 823 849 800 Surplus (Deficiency)** 34 101 66 74 27 1 50 * Reported October 2023 FTE enrollment **Does not include portable capacity See Appendix A for complete breakdown of enrollment projections. See Table 6-A for a comparison of additional capacity needs due to growth versus existing deficiencies. Table 7 does not include existing, relocated, or added portable facilities. -17- SECTION 6 CAPITAL FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN A. Planned Improvements In March 2000, the voters passed a $14,258,664 bond issue for school construction and site acquisition. A new elementary school and a middle school addition were funded by that bond measure. In April 2014, the District’s voters approved a $66,800,000 bond measure to fund improvements, including a capacity addition at Lakewood High School, which opened in the fall of 2017. In the Spring of 2020, the District added a STEM lab and two classrooms at Lakewood Middle School. Currently, the District is assessing future capacity needs and, at the present time, anticipates adding portable capacity to address short term needs with immediate plans to add portables in the summer of 2024 in the space between Lakewood Middle School and Lakewood Elementary School in order to provide K-5 interim capacity at LES. The District is not planning for permanent capacity improvements as a part of this CFP update. However, the District is considering, based on recommendations of the 2023 Citizens’ Facility Advisory Committee, a new middle school with the existing Lakewood Middle School thereafter converted to Lakewood Elementary School to provide additional K-5 capacity. Both facilities would provide capacity to serve growth. The District is in early planning as to this recommendation. Future updates to this CFP, including a potential interim update, will identify updated plans and funding sources. Based upon current needs, the District anticipates that it may need to consider the following acquisitions and/or improvements within the six years of this Plan. Projects Adding Permanent/Temporary Capacity:  Acquisition and siting of portable facilities to accommodate growth needs. Non-Capacity Adding Projects:  None planned Other:  Land acquisition for future sites. In the event that planned construction projects do not fully address space needs for student growth and a reduction in interim student housing, the Board could consider various courses of action, including, but not limited to:  Alternative scheduling options;  Changes in the instructional model;  Grade configuration changes;  Increased class sizes; or  Modified school calendar. Funding for planned improvements is typically secured from a number of sources including voter approved bonds, State School Construction Assistance funds, and impact fees. Where applicable, the potential funding sources are discussed below. -18- B. Financing for Planned Improvements 1. General Obligation Bonds Bonds are typically used to fund construction of new schools and other capital improvement projects. A 60% voter approval is required to approve the issuance of bonds. Bonds are then retired through collection of property taxes. In March 2000, District voters approved a $14,258,664 bond issue for school construction and site acquisition, which included funding of Cougar Creek Elementary School. In April 2014, the District’s voters approved a $66,800,000 bond measure to fund improvements, including a capacity addition, at Lakewood High School. The District does not have current plans for a future bond or capital levy proposal. Future updates to the CFP will include any proposed or in process planning. 2. State School Construction Assistance State School Construction Assistance funds come from the Common School Construction Fund and is administered by the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI). The State deposits revenue from the sale of renewable resources from State school lands set aside by the Enabling Act of 1889 into the Common School Account. If these sources are insufficient to meet needs, the Legislature can appropriate General Obligation Bond funds or OSPI can prioritize projects for funding. School districts may qualify for State School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) funds for specific capital projects based on a prioritization system. The District is eligible for State School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) funds for certain projects at the 59.01% funding percentage level. The current Construction Cost Allowance, the maximum cost/square foot recognized for SCAP funding, is set in the legislature in the biennial budget and currently is $375.00/eligible square foot. The District does not anticipate being eligible for SCAP funds for the projects planned in this CFP. 3. Impact Fees Impact fees are a means of supplementing traditional fundin g sources for construction of public facilities needed to accommodate new development. School impact fees are generally collected by the permitting agency at the time plats are approved or building permits are issued. 4. Six Year Financing Plan The Six-Year Financing Plan shown in Table 8 demonstrates how the District intends to fund new construction and improvements to school facilities for the years 2024-2029. Where applicable, potential financing components include a bond or capital levy, impact fees, and State School Construction Assistance Program funds. Projects and portions of projects which remedy existing deficiencies are not appropriate for impact fee funding. Thus, impact fees will not be used to finance projects or portions of projects which do not add capacity or which remedy existing deficiencies. -19- Table 8 Capital Facilities Plan Improvements Adding Permanent Capacity (Costs in Millions) Project 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Total Cost Bonds/ Levy/ Other Local State Funds Impact Fees Elementary School Middle School High School Portables (all grade levels) $0.50 $0.50 $0.50 $0.50 $0.75 $2.750 X X Site Acquisition $0.775 $0.775 X X Improvements Not Adding Capacity (Costs in Millions) Project 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 Total Cost Bonds/ Levy/ Other Local State Funds Impact Fees Elementary Middle School High School -20- SECTION 7 SCHOOL IMPACT FEES The GMA authorizes jurisdictions to collect impact fees to supplement funding of additional public facilities needed to accommodate new development. Impact fees cannot be used for the operation, maintenance, repair, alteration, or replacement of existing capital facilities used to meet existing service demands. A. School Impact Fees in Snohomish County The Snohomish County General Policy Plan (“GPP”) which implements the GMA sets certain conditions for school districts wishing to assess impact fees:  The District must provide support data including: an explanation of the calculation methodology, a description of key variables and their computation, and definitions and sources of data for all inputs into the fee calculation.  Such data must be accurate, reliable and statistically valid.  Data must accurately reflect projected costs in the Six-Year Financing Plan.  Data in the proposed impact fee schedule must reflect expected student generation rates from at least the following residential dwelling unit types: single family; multi-family/studio or 1-bedroom; and multi-family/2- bedroom or more. Snohomish County established a school impact fee program in November 1997, and amended the program in December 1999. This program requires school districts to prepare and adopt Capital Facilities Plans meeting the specifications of the GMA. Impact fees calculated in accordance with the formula, which are based on projected school facility costs necessitated by new growth and are contained in the District’s CFP, become effective following County Council adoption of the District’s CFP. B. Methodology and Variables Used to Calculate School Impact Fees Impact fees are calculated utilizing the formula in the Snohomish County Impact Fee Ordinance. The resulting figures are based on the District’s cost per dwelling unit to, as applicable, purchase land for school sites, make site improvements, construct schools, and purchase/install relocatable facilities that add interim capacity needed to serve new development.  The Site Acquisition Cost, School Construction Cost, and Temporary/Portable Facility Cost factors are based on planned or actual costs of growth-related school capacity (required on-site/off-site improvements). Costs vary with each site and each facility. See Table 8, Finance Plan. The “Permanent Facility Square Footage” is used in combination -21- with the “Temporary Facility Square Footage” to apportion the impact fee amounts between permanent and temporary capacity figures. A student factor (or student generation rate) is used to identify the average cost per dwelling unit by measuring the average number of students generated by each housing type. A description of the student factor methodology is contained in Appendix B. The District did not update its student generation rates for this CFP given that it is not requesting school impact fees.  Where applicable, credits are applied in the formula to account for State School Construction Assistance funds to be reimbursed to the District and projected future property taxes to be paid by the dwelling unit. See page 18. The tax credit uses the 20-year general obligation bond rate from the Bond Buyer index, the District’s current levy rate for bonds, and average assessed value of all residential dwelling units in the District (provided by Snohomish County) by dwelling unit type to determine the corresponding tax credit. The costs of projects that do not add capacity are not included in the impact fee calculations. Furthermore, because the impact fee formula calculates a “cost per dwelling unit”, an identical fee is generated regardless of whether the total new capacity project costs are used in the calculation or whether the District only uses the percentage of the total new capacity project costs allocated to the Districts growth-related needs, as demonstrated in Table 6-A. When applicable, the District uses the full project costs in the fee formula when calculating school impact fees. Furthermore, impact fees will not be used to address existing deficiencies. See Table 8 for a complete identification of funding sources. The District is not requesting school impact fees as a part of this Capital Facilities Plan update. -22- FACTORS FOR ESTIMATED IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS Student Generation Factors – Single Family Average Site Cost/Acre Elementary .126 N/A Middle .079 High .063 Total .268 Temporary Facility Capacity Student Generation Factors – Multi Family (1 Bdrm) Capacity 20/26 Elementary .026 Cost $250,000 Middle .000 High .000 SCAP Credit (OSPI) Total .026 Current Eligible Cost Percentage 59.01% Current Construction Cost Allocation 375.00 Student Generation Factors – Multi Family (2+ Bdrm) Elementary .101 Middle .038 High .045 District Average Assessed Value (Snohomish Co.) Total .184 Single Family Residence $615,195 Projected Student Capacity per Facility District Average Assessed Value (Snohomish Co.) N/A Multi Family (1 Bedroom) $175,173 Multi Family (2+ Bedroom) $242,411 Required Site Acreage per Facility SPI Square Footage per Student (WAC 392-343-035) Facility Construction/Cost Average Elementary 90 Middle 108 N/A High 130 Debt Service Tax Rate for Bonds (Snohomish Co.) Current/$1,000 $1.12394 Permanent Facility Square Footage (LSD Inventory) General Obligation Bond Interest Rate (Bond Buyer) Elementary 131,047 Bond Buyer Index (avg February 2024) 3.48% Middle 79,945 High 169,000 Developer Provided Sites/Facilities Total 96.0% 379,992 Value 0 Dwelling Units 0 Temporary Facility Square Footage (LSD Inventory) Elementary 14,382 Middle 2,688 High 0 Total 4.0% 17,070 Total Facility Square Footage Elementary 145,429 Middle 82,633 High 169,000 Total 100.00% 397,062 -23- C. Proposed Lakewood School District Impact Fee Schedule The District does not have permanent capacity projects planned as a part of the 2024 CFP. See discussion in Section 6 above. As such, the District is not requesting the collection of school impact fees as a part of this Capital Facilities Plan. The District expects that future project planning and updates to the Capital Facilities Plan will result in a renewed request for impact fees as a part of a future CFP. Table 9 School Impact Fees Snohomish County, City of Arlington, City of Marysville* Housing Type Impact Fee Per Dwelling Unit Single Family $0 Townhome/Duplex $0 Multi-Family (2+ Bedroom) $0 Multi-Family (1 Bedroom/less) $0 *Table 9 reflects a 50% adjustment to the calculated fee as required by local ordinances. APPENDIX A POPULATION AND ENROLLMENT DATA A-1 Table A-1 ACTUAL STUDENT ENROLLMENT 2018-2023 PROJECTED STUDENT ENROLLMENT 2024-2029 Based on OSPI Cohort Survival* Headcount Enrollment A-2 Table A-2 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT BY GRADE SPAN (DISTRICT - FLO Analytics)** APPENDIX B STUDENT GENERATION FACTOR REVIEW B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 APPENDIX C SCHOOL IMPACT FEE CALCULATIONS This section does not updated for the 2024-2029 Capital Facilities Plan since the District is not requesting a school impact fee. Future updates to this CFP may include an impact fee. 11241 Willows Road NE, Suite 200 | Redmond, WA 98052 | Phone 425.822.4446 | otak.com Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Memorandum To: Marc Hayes, Amy Rusko, and Raelynn Jones, City of Arlington From: Brendan Wedderspoon, Cara Donovan, Mandi Roberts Otak, Inc. Copies: File Date: March 19, 2024 Subject: DRAFT Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary 2021-2024 Project No.: 20695 Executive Summary Public engagement and outreach for the Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update began has consisted of several efforts starting in 2021 through 2024: a project kick-off and visioning survey, an online subarea survey and in-person subarea workshop sessions, State Environmental Impact Statement (SEPA) scoping, a community survey, meetings of community-based focus group held regularly during the planning process, and various holiday and special event activities aimed at gathering meaningful input. In addition to these activities, the public will have opportunities to provide comments and input on the draft comprehensive plan and draft Environmental Impact Statement in 2024 when these documents are published for public and agency review. The public, tribes, adjacent jurisdictions, and various agencies and organizations have had multiple opportunities to be engaged and provide comments to help shape the direction for the Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan—Arlington 2044 and Beyond. Short summaries of each engagement effort are provided below with graphics that showcase public interaction. Additionally, the following appendices are provided for further information: ▪ Appendix A: April 2023 Open House Presentation ▪ Appendix B: July 2023 Street Fair Presentation ▪ Appendix C: Subarea In-Person Engagement Results ▪ Appendix D: SEPA Scoping Notice ▪ Appendix E: SEPA Scoping Presentation ▪ Appendix F: SEPA Scoping Engagement Results ▪ Appendix G: Zencity Community Survey Report Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 2 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Arlington Kick-off and Visioning Survey A survey was conducted in the fall of 2022 through spring of 2023. The survey asked a series of questions to gather respondents’ thoughts about Arlington and how the community could be strengthened through implementation of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan. The survey was comprised of five open-ended questions that were able to be accessed by QR code or weblink. The following flyer was prepared to promote the survey: The survey was distributed through and promoted at the following locations and events: ▪ Hometown Halloween on October 29, 2022 ▪ Hometown Holiday Santa Parade on December 3, 2022 ▪ Eagle Festival between February 3 and 4, 2023 ▪ Joint City Council/Planning Commission Meeting on January 23, 2023 ▪ Open House on April 27, 2023 Information on how and where to access the kick-off survey was located or posted at the following locations: ▪ City of Arlington All-Staff Bulletin emailed weekly to employees Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 3 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 ▪ City of Arlington E-News posted on City website and emailed to all registered persons ▪ Comprehensive Plan Update (2024) webpage on City website ▪ City of Arlington Facebook posts ▪ Project postcards which were included with utility bills to all properties within City limits ▪ Project flyers distributed at various locations in Arlington, including at faith organizations ▪ Food banks The City received responses from 96 respondents participating between October 2022 and May 2023. Brief narrative summaries of the most frequently observed themes and a graphic representation of the most common themes seen for each question are featured below. Question 1: What I LOVE most about Arlington is: Respondents noted that they loved the sense of community and hometown and small town feel of Arlington, Old Town, and the overall culture and lifestyle present within the community. Individuals also noted enjoying the parks and trails as well as the natural beauty of the City. Respondents also noted that family and safety were important. Several responses to Question 1 can be seen below along with a summary graph. ▪ “The small town feel and the amazing views pretty much everywhere you go. LOVE being surrounded by full, tall trees and the main reason we moved here.” ▪ “The hometown/ small-town feel of downtown and the welcoming feeling of getting to know people because Arlington is small enough to just run in to them often. “ ▪ “A great place to raise a family! Beautiful nature, clean parks, outdoor recreation, community activities, safe area, and nice people.” ▪ “The small town feel but with all the services and shopping needed. We don't have to go far to get what we might need or want.” ▪ “Community activities! These help us find out about the area, the local businesses, the history and even the future plans.” 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Re s p o n s e s What I love most about Arlington is: Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 4 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Question 2: My favorite place in Arlington is: Responses about favorite places generally fell into three common themes: local businesses, parks and open spaces, and Old Town. Many respondents stated that their favorite place was a local business, be that the iconic Arlington Hardware, or a local restaurant or business. Additionally, the parks and open spaces were listed, as many respondents noted that they enjoyed being outdoors and close to the river. Furthermore, Old Town was mentioned as a popular place in Arlington. Many respondents also stated their enjoyment of the strong sense of community in Arlington. Several responses to Question 2 can be seen below along with a summary graph. ▪ “Olympic street! We love the Stilly Diner and Rocket Alley. We also enjoy other places on Olympic to shop, walk, or hang out.” ▪ “My favorite business is The Bistro. My favorite park is the Centennial Trail. It is a gift that the trail runs through town. Arlington did a nice job with the installed artwork.” ▪ “Locally owned shops.” ▪ “Two favorite places. View of Olympic Ave from the top of the hill. Another favorite place is the old high school on French Street.” ▪ “Legion Park on Farmers Market days tied with the airport! We love housing our private plane and flying out of the Arlington airport!” Question 3: One word to describe Arlington is: “Community” was the most common response to Question 3 followed by “changing.” Many respondents had positive things to say about their community, which was condensed into the “charming” category. A list of common responses to Question 3 is provided below along with a summary graph. ▪ “Community” ▪ “Friendly” ▪ “Quaint” ▪ “Hometown” 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Re s p o n s e s My favorite place in Arlington is: Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 5 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 ▪ “Growing” Question 4: One thing I enjoy about another city is: Respondents placed a high value on a variety of resources being available to the community. Additionally, respondents noted a need for more shopping, entertainment, and recreation options close to home. Many individuals noted having to leave Arlington to access these places. Some respondents also noted the affordability and safety of nearby municipalities as a value. Several responses to Question 4 are listed below along with a summary graph. ▪ “Access to more recreational activities like swimming and indoor recreational sports like basketball and volleyball. Think YMCA or a community recreational complex with indoor and outdoor opportunities.” ▪ “The grocery stores.” ▪ “Everett does their summer concerts on the waterfront every week.” ▪ “Things to do: shopping, variety of restaurants, activities, especially in the wintertime.” ▪ “Movie theater. Sidewalks for easy/safe walking – such as if we had them on Cemetery Road to walk to Kent Prairie.” 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Re s p o n s e s One word to describe Arlington is: Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 6 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Question 5: One thing I would strengthen in Arlington is: New and well-maintained public facilities represented a significant portion of what respondents would like to be strengthened in Arlington. Additionally, 15 respondents indicated a desire for more aesthetically pleasing designs for new developments, represented by the “Design Standards” category below. Concerns for public safety were also frequently mentioned along with a desire for infrastructure updates. Several responses to Question 5 are provided below along with a summary graph. ▪ “Traffic enforcement. (Speed limits, stopping for pedestrians, aggressive driving behavior, throwing car doors open while other vehicles are passing by, jaywalking, and parking in non-designated areas creating unsafe driving conditions.) ▪ “More public recreational opportunities. Also, more connectivity between areas. If one lives in the west side of the airport, there isn’t a safe walking or biking path to downtown.” ▪ “More bike trails connected by bike lanes; make the old high school into an active community center – use the theater for cultural events.” ▪ “Opportunities for kids to be involved (in government, in the community garden, in cleanups).” ▪ “More local businesses on Olympic that aren’t realtors, CPA’s, etc. More shops, restaurants, etc.!” 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Re s p o n s e s One thing I enjoy about another city is: Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 7 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Arlington Subareas Online Survey In October of 2022, the City also launched the subareas survey as a start of community engagement efforts in support of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update. The survey ran for one full year from October 1st, 2022 to October 2nd, 2023. It should be noted that during the course of the survey the term “neighborhood” was changed to “subarea”. The 2024 Comprehensive Plan will discuss neighborhoods at a smaller scale than the subareas outlined in this survey. The survey link and associated QR code were distributed by City staff at the following events: ▪ The City’s Comprehensive Plan Update (2024) webpage ▪ Hometown Halloween on October 29, 2022 ▪ Hometown Holiday Santa Parade on December 3, 2022 ▪ Joint City Council/Planning Commission Meeting on January 23, 2023 ▪ Open House Workshop Sessions on April 27, 2023 ▪ Arlington Street Fair between July 7 and 9, 2023 Information on how and where to access the subareas survey was located or posted at the following locations: ▪ City of Arlington All-Staff Bulletin emailed weekly to employees ▪ City of Arlington E-News posted on City website and emailed to all registered persons ▪ Comprehensive Plan Update webpage on City website ▪ City of Arlington Facebook posts ▪ Project postcards which were included with utility bills to all properties within City limits 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 Re s p o n s e s One thing I would strengthen in Arlington is: Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 8 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 ▪ Project flyers The survey was made up of 17 yes/no questions with room for comments after each question. In total, 107 responses were recorded. Respondents were instructed to identify the subarea where they lived. The largest portion of respondents lived in Old Town, Gleneagle, and West Bluff. Responses to the survey questions are displayed in the graphs below. Topics where respondents agreed or shared similar thoughts are included for some questions below. Question 1: What is the appearance of your neighborhood ? 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Subareas Survey Responses by Neighborhood 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Yes No Potential Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 9 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Question 2: Is your neighborhood walkable? Most respondents found their subareas to be walkable. However, most Smokey Point respondents stated that their subarea was not walkable. Question 3: Are essentials nearby? Most respondents stated that essential services and utilities were not located near their subarea. Many noted that access to essentials was only possible through use of a car rather than walking. Question 4: Is your neighborhood close to employment opportunities? Respondents overall believed that they lived in a subarea that was close to local employment opportunities. Ease of access to other subareas was noted by several respondents. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Yes No 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Yes No Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 10 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Question 5: Is your neighborhood safe? Most respondents stated that they found their subareas to be safe, with Smokey Point, Totem Park, and Pony Estates being the locations where more respondents felt more unsafe than safe. Question 6: Does your neighborhood have easy access to medical services? Generally, respondents noted that most subareas were not located near or had easy access to medical services. Most respondents in Jensen, Old town Residential, Smokey Point, and Hazel responded that they have easy access to medical services. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Yes No 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Yes No Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 11 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Question 7: Does your neighborhood have a variety of housing types? Responses to this question were varied. Many respondents believed that the greatest variety of housing types existed in the Edgecomb, Gleneagle, Haller City, Kent Prairie, Old Town Residential, Smokey Point, and Totem Park subareas. Question 8: Does your neighborhood have public services? Respondents overwhelmingly believed that their subareas included public services. However, many respondents in Smokey Point, Island Crossing, and Hazel stated otherwise. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Yes No 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Yes No Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 12 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Question 9: Does your neighborhood have bus stops? Most respondents located outside Kent Prairie, Old Town Residential, Smokey Point, Totem Parks, and West Bluff stated that their subareas lacked bus stops or public transit opportunities. Some respondents noted that they were uncertain about being able to rely on public transportation to reach their destinations. Question 10: Does your neighborhood have fully improved streets? Most respondents felt that the quality of road infrastructure in their subarea was acceptable; however, several noted that there were insufficient sidewalks and trail connections. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Yes No 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Yes No Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 13 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Question 11: Does your neighborhood have adequate lighting? Many respondents stated that their subareas were generally well lit; however, some noted that there were several streets that would benefit from lighting improvements. Question 12: Does your neighborhood have obvious pedestrian safety concerns? Several notable issues with pedestrian safety were brought up by respondents throughout Arlington. Multiple respondents noted specific concerns about the high speed of traffic, lack of speed bumps, and missing sidewalks. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Yes No 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Yes No Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 14 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Question 13: Is your neighborhood situated to be part of a trail network? Many respondents stated that they do not believe their subareas have access to existing trail networks. Several people also noted that while they may live near resources like the Centennial Trail, they would like to have more connections to existing trails. Question 14: Does your neighborhood have a site for socialization? Collectively, most respondents found that their subareas lacked a site to socialize with Gleneagle being a notable exception. Many noted that there is potential for new public gathering sites to be created. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Yes No 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Yes No Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 15 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Question 15: Does your neighborhood have obvious detractions? Overall, respondents did not think their subareas had detractions. The subareas of note that were thought to have detractions were Kent Prairie and Old Town Residential. Several individuals noted a small number of blighted properties in their vicinity. Question 16: Does your neighborhood have obvious attractions? Respondents believed that many of their subareas lack obvious attractions. Parks and trails were mentioned in several responses as local attractions , along with the qualities of location and affordability. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Yes No Potential 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Yes No Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 16 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Question 17: Does your neighborhood have public art? Many respondents noted a lack of public art in nearly all subareas, aside from Old Town Residential. Many expressed concerns about funding potentially expensive art projects; however, others expressed a passion for public art already present within the community. Arlington Subareas In-Person Engagement In-person engagement for Arlington subareas was conducted at multiple workshops during two events. These events were advertised digitally and through notices on the City’s website and social media platforms. Additionally, events were promoted at events such as the Hometown Halloween Event, Hometown Holidays Santa Parade, and others. 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Yes No 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Yes No Potential Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 17 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 The City’s first open house was hosted on April 27, 2023. The second event, the Arlington Street Fair, took place from Friday July 7th, 2023, through Sunday July 9th, 2023 with the City present on both the 7th and the 8th. Two workshop sessions were held at the open house and one workshop session was held during the Arlington Street Fair. Presentations given at these events covered elements such as the overall Comprehensive Plan Update timeline, information about the community, growth allocations for population, housing, and employment, and went over the framework of the Comprehensive Plan goals. The presentation given on April 27th, 2023 can be found under Appendix A. The presentation given at the Arlington Street Fair can be found under Appendix B. The input gathered for Arlington’s subareas during these events was prompted by slightly different questions than those asked in the online survey. Several boards were displayed at each event that combined adjacent subareas, such as Glendale, Edgecombe, and Hill Top as seen below. In addition, each subarea group had a map available for comment and a poster that asked the following questions: ▪ What is your favorite feature in your neighborhood? ▪ What improvements would benefit your neighborhood? Attendees at the Open House event and correlating workshop sessions were encouraged to add their comments to the physical map or poster provided. Residents were also given a QR code to scan which would allow for them to indicate what subarea they lived or worked in and provide comments on the online subarea survey. In total, nearly 80 comments were collected during these events. The majority of comments were related to the following subareas: Old Town, Haller City, Arlington Terrace, Kent Prairie, Crown Ridge, the Airport, and the Cascade Industrial Center. The most common favorite features listed were: trails, parks, and local business. Improvements requested were varied with common suggestions being lighting, public bathrooms, wheelchair accessibility, multi-transportation improvements, parking, maintenance, a recreation center, increased police presence, and an additional grocery store. The comments can be found in Appendix C. Airport & CIC Accessibility was a big concern from individuals in these subareas. Providing bike-friendly and wheelchair accessible trails and paths were mentioned by several respondents. Concerns were raised about the facilities present on the Airport Trail with people noting a desire for an off-leash dog park in the area. Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 18 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Respondents raised concerns about motorist safety along 204th St with multiple individuals noting that speeding was common along this route. Additional amenities and recreational space were requested with respondents stating a desire for more childcare opportunities, off-leash dog parks, a recreation center, and an increase in public art. Glendale & Edgecomb & Hill Top Interconnectivity along 172nd street was noted by many respondents who desired trail connections, sidewalks, and widening of the road. Several respondents had stated desires for a community public pool facility to be built in this area. Island Crossing & Gateway Only two respondents gave comment on th ese subareas. One individual suggested implementing some form of conservation of farmland. The other comment given was a desire for a freeway on- and off-ramp near the rest stop area. Old Town & Haller City Several respondents noted that their favorite features of these subareas were the parks and Centennial Trail. Additionally, multiple individuals stated that they enjoyed the pedestrian connectivity in the downtown area. Concerns were raised regarding public safety and police presence within downtown. Respondents stated a desire for another grocery store to be built in the downtown area due to the recent amount of population growth. Much like other subareas, there was interest from respondents in the construction of a new recreational facility with a community pool. Smokey Point Respondents noted that public safety was a large concern with several individuals noting that the Park and Ride facilities alongside the parking lots at Safeway and Rite-Aid were not safe. Additionally, respondents noted a lack of accessible sidewalks and parks within the subarea and several individuals requested the presence of more streetlights along the main thoroughfares. Arlington SEPA Scoping Meeting The City hosted a scoping meeting to gather input for the Comprehensive Plan Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), which is a recommended step under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). The scoping meeting was held on November 7th, 2023 to gather additional community input for the Comprehensive Plan and to help guide topics analyzed in the EIS. The City had published a Scoping Notice and Determination of Significance for the Comprehensive Plan update, seen in Appendix D. As a result, the City hosted the scoping meeting to gather input from the public as part of the planning and environmental analysis process. The scoping meeting was advertised on the City’s website and a post card was sent to every property owner within the city limits with the scoping meeting information and website. Topic-specific boards were created for members of the community to post comments on. Context boards were also included to orient attendees to the purpose of scoping, topics to be addressed in the Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 19 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Comprehensive Plan and EIS, and other information relevant to the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update. Two presentations were conducted at separate times during the scoping meetings. The presentation included information about what a comprehensive plan is, why the plan is being updated, what the plan does, and how the plan will be developed (planning process). Additionally, information about SEPA scoping was presented, including details about the purpose of scoping for the EIS. The presentation can be found in Appendix E. The land use board did not receive any comments. The remaining board topics and comments collected are below. Photos of the topic-specific boards can be found in Appendix F. ▪ Economic Development  Issues/Aspirations: More financial incentive/breaks given to small businesses vs. big businesses. ▪ Housing  Issues/Aspirations: More single-family housing, less multi-use especially in Old Town ▪ Capital Facilities and Utilities  Issues/Aspirations: Athletic Facilities and Other “fun” facilities (i.e. indoor go karts, swimming, etc.)  Needs: Hospital will need to be larger to accommodate growth and Larger or another hospital ▪ Parks, Recreation, and Open Space  Issues/Aspirations: Would love to see a multi-use recreation center. ▪ Environment  Issues/Aspirations: Ensuring old and new tree growth – minimize land clearing. ▪ Transportation  Issues/Aspirations: Being able to bike or at least get across the city without a car and being able to bike safely to Smokey Point either on 172nd or 530.  Needs: Commuting options ▪ Public Safety  Issues/Aspirations: More street lighting  Needs: Lighting at 530 round abouts Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement Page 20 and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 In addition to the comments collected during the scoping meeting the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) reviewed and commented on the scope of the EIS. Their comments can be seen in Appendix F. Community Survey A community survey was conducted online by Zencity October 1, 2023 to January 20, 2024. This survey measured how satisfied residents were with the community and with local government-provided services. The survey allows the City to compare scores over time and against a cohort of similar communities. This survey was a representative sample of 685 individuals, matching respondents with 2020 Census data. 72% of surveyed residents were overall satisfied with life in Arlington, based on general quality of life and satisfaction with different characteristics of life in Arlington. The report generated by Zen City is attached to this memo in Appendix G and outlines responses to the specific questions, comparisons to the City’s cohort, word clouds, and more. Focus Group Meetings The City of Arlington Community and Economic Development (CED) Department has ongoing focus group meetings every Tuesday from 4:30 pm to 6:30 pm at the CED office located at 18204 59 th Avenue NE, Arlington, WA 98223. These meetings are open to the public and a variety of land use topics are discussed to educate the community on the complex issues that revolve around land use and zoning. The meetings are noticed on the City’s website under public notices. The focus group was organized in 2017 and is led by the CED Director, Marc Hayes. Regular attendees include one or two City Council members, one or two Planning Commission members, developers in the community, and occasional members of the public. Over the years the focus group has learned different land use techniques and strategies through trainings, example projects, research, and discussions. In preparation for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan periodic update the focus group started discussing the future of Arlington in 2021 and is currently reviewing sections of the Comprehensive Plan as they are drafted. The main portions of the Comprehensive Plan that have been reviewed by and discussed within the focus group meetings are the goals and policies for each book (element) of the Plan. Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Appendix A: April 2023 Open House Presentation April 27, 2023 Presentation Topics ▪Planning Process and Timeline ▪Comprehensive Plan Table of Contents ▪Community Profile and Mapping ▪Engagement—Public Comments and Input Received to Date ▪Next Steps Planning Process & Timeline Plan Framework Plan Framework Community Profile City population has dramatically increased since the 1990s Community Profile Community Profile Community Profile Community Profile Only 13 % of residents work within the City Limits Subareas Neighborhoods Plan Table of Contents SECTION III: NEIGHBORHOODS •Existing characteristics of neighborhoods (needs), goals and opportunities for the next 20 years Public Comments and Input Received So Far Question 1: What do you LOVE about Arlington? Question 2: Favorite Places in Arlington COMMONLY MENTIONED: •Downtown / Old Town •Stillaguamish River •Farmer’s Market •Olympic Avenue •Home •Airport •Farms •Parks and Trails •Legion Park •Wetland Park •Centennial Trail •Haller Park •Terrace Park •Local Businesses •Arlington Hardware •Moe’s •Stilly Coffee House •Bistro San Martin •Bluebird Café •Nutty’s Junkyard Grill •Rocket Alley Bar and Grill •Hammond Bread Company •Garden Treasures •Andrew’s Hay •Co-op Supply •Arlington Velo Sport Question 3: One Word to Describe Arlington COMMONLY MENTIONED: •Small •Charming •Hometown •Changing •Community •Crowded •Festive •Authentic •Friendly •Peaceful Question 4: One Thing Enjoyed in Another City COMMONLY MENTIONED: •Variety of Businesses •Grocery Stores •Small •Safety •Parks and trails •Recreation Opportunities •Community Center •Live Entertainment •Parking Availability •Public Transportation •Diversity •Quiet •Murals •Historical Landmarks •Urban Design •Cleanliness •Affordability Question 5: What would you strengthen? Next Steps Open House And now….Please share YOUR IDEAS and TELL US what improvements you would like to see in your neighborhood! ▪Find the subarea you live and/or work in ▪Add your comments to the map or board ▪Scan the QR code to provide more detailed feedback The comprehensive planning team is available for questions! Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Appendix B: July 2023 Street Fair Presentation July 8, 2023 Presentation Topics ▪Overview of Project ▪Growth Allocation ▪Foundational Principles and Guiding Goals ▪Public Feedback Received to Date ▪Opportunities to Provide Feedback Overview ▪Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) enacted in 1990. ▪GMA provides a framework for state, regional, county, and local planning coordination. ▪Cities, counties, and ports develop and update comprehensive plans to plan for growth for the next 20 years (2044). HCT = High Capacity TransitSource: Puget Sound Regional Council VISION 2050 Planning Process & Timeline Community Profile Community Profile Community Profile Only 13 % of residents work within the City Limits Community Profile Community Profile City population has dramatically increased since the 1990s Growth Allocation Growth Allocation Allocation 2020 Baseline 2044 Allocation 2020-2044 Growth Population 20,418 35,506 15,088 Housing 9,120 15,483 6,363 Employment 12,449 24,751 12,302 Growth Allocation - Population Growth Allocation - Housing Growth Allocation - Employment Foundational Principles & Guiding Goals Plan Framework Plan Framework Economic Stability and Vibrancy Guiding Goals •Support the development of new approaches to economic growth and innovation. •Encourage local businesses through the continued application of mixed-use residential corridors and multiple locations for neighborhood serving businesses. •Ensure that the airport remains a viable, long-term employment and economic engine for the City of Arlington. •Promote a strong, diversified, and sustainable local and regional economy, while respecting the natural environment and preserving and enhancing the quality of life in the City. •Promote diverse and sustainable employment sectors to support and encourage residents to live and work in Arlington. •Encourage active cooperation between the City and local businesses concerning economic development issues, particularly of those businesses that have specialized infrastructure, building design, transportation or other needs. •Minimize the adverse impacts of industrial uses to adjacent and abutting residential properties. •Foster economic development throughout the City's many economic subareas. •Ensure adequate utility, capital facility, and transportation services to accommodate businesses providing jobs. Neighborhoods and Connectivity Guiding Goals •Use equitable and measurable planning tools to preserve neighborhood character in existing homes and provide regulatory context for new construction or re-development of existing housing stock. •Create new parks and public spaces to enhance the quality of life in all our neighborhoods. •Ensure new development and new services and facilities will arrive concurrently prior to the annexation of unincorporated Urban Growth Areas. •Encourage a mix of residential densities throughout the City. •Ensure stable residential neighborhoods through public investment in infrastructure and preserving existing housing stock and accommodate new development in a manner that enhances Arlington's quality of life, its natural environment, and its historical and cultural amenities. •Ensure the development of new multi-family housing and small single-family units occurs near high capacity transit and designated neighborhoods. •Consider the special needs of subarea transportation facilities including appearance and safety. Neighborhoods and Connectivity Guiding Goals •Maintain and enhance the safety of the transportation system, including non-motorized networks, and reduce the chance of accidents. •Plan, develop, and maintain a balanced transportation system for the efficient movement of people, goods, and services within the City and between the community and other activity centers in the region. •Ensure concurrency by providing an effective roadway network with adequate capacity to meet the demand for travel within the City at the adopted Level of Service (LOS) standard. Climate Adaptation and Resiliency Guiding Goals •Mitigate climate impact by reducing greenhouse gas emissions. •Cultivate safe, prepared, and resilient communities through emergency planning. •Identify, protect, and enhance natural areas to foster resiliency to climate impacts, as well as areas of vital habitat for s afe passage and species migration. •Identify, protect, and enhance community resiliency to climate change impacts, including social, economic, and built environment factors, that support adaptation to climate impacts consistent with environmental justice. •Address natural hazards created or aggravated by climate change, including sea level rise, landslides, flooding, drought, heat, smoke, wildfire, and other effects of changes to temperature and precipitation patterns. •Promote energy conservation by developing incentives and/or requirements for energy -saving transportation, land development patterns and practices, and building construction and operation methods and materials. •Develop transportation strategies that encourage the use of pedestrian, bicycle, and mass transit facilities that will lead to savings of nonrenewable energy sources and reduce vehicle miles traveled. •Minimize air quality impacts caused by the transportation system. •Remain a Tree City and encourage an increased tree canopy. Climate Adaptation and Resiliency Guiding Goals •Implement Travel Demand Management and Transit Oriented Design to create a more walkable city. •Provide opportunities/resources to educate the public on the importance of preserving natural resources and reducing individual carbon impacts. Equity Guiding Goals •Provide housing options affordable to all demographics. •Provide unique places and context for the growth of social capital. •Preserve and enhance open space, natural, and cultural resources and strive for equitable geographic and demographic distribution. •Encourage development of housing opportunities to accommodate the homeless, elderly, physically or mentally challenged, and other segments of the population who have special needs. •Encourage a quality and diverse housing stock within the City. •Promote environmental justice by not creating or worsening environmental health disparities. •Ensure capital facilities and utilities achieve efficient delivery of services, support equitable distribution of services, minimize environmental impacts, and maximize value for the community. •Ensure equitable access to City resources and programs through proactive and transparent communication, multiple platforms, and where appropriate, in multiple languages. •Where possible, incentivize affordable and workforce housing near transportation and employment centers. •Provide equal access to quality, life-long educational opportunities. Healthy Active Lifestyles Guiding Goals •Create and enhance environments that support physical activity and healthy living. •Improve collaboration between health organizations, schools, faith-based organizations, and other organizations to promote preventative care and improve access to health services. •Provide a trail system that creates links between commercial and residential areas in Arlington and connects to regional trails. •Work towards and maintain an aesthetically pleasing environment that enhances livability for residents. •Maintain the existing, diverse range of recreational, cultural, and educational activities and support new opportunities. •Encourage the identification, protection, maintenance, and preservation of landmarks, districts, or structures that have special significance because of historical, archaeological, architectural, recreational, social, cultural, and/or scenic importance. •Continue to work with other jurisdictions and/or agencies to establish joint use agreements, thus increasing available parkland and facilities at minimum cost. •Utilize “Vision Zero” and “Safe Routes to School” guidelines to provide safe walking and biking routes for our youth. Subareas Plan Framework Subareas Feedback Question 1 2% 3% 4% 4% 4% 4% 7% 8% 12% 13% 14% 25% Family Walkable Quiet Safety Parks and Trails Home Natural Beauty Local Business Community Old Town Culture & Lifestyle Small Town What I love most about Arlington is: Question 2 1% 3% 6% 8% 22% 26% 34% Church Airport Stillaguamish River Home Old Town Parks and Open Space Local Business My Favorite Place in Arlington is: Question 3 2% 3% 6% 15% 21% 24% 28% Fun Public Facilities Active Small Town Charming Changing Community One word to describe Arlington is: Question 4 2% 2% 3% 6% 7% 11% 12% 12% 13% 14% 20% Affordability Cleanliness Safety Community Public Facilities Small Town Traiks, Parks, and Open Space Multimodal Transportation Entertainment & Activities Variety Active Retail One thing I enjoy about another city is: Question 5 3% 3% 6% 8% 9% 10% 10% 12% 13% 13% 13% Affordability Open Mindedness Community Entertainment / Activities Trails, Parks, and Open Space Public Facilities Social Services Active Retail Public Safety Design Standards Transportation / Parking One thing I would strengthen in Arlington is: Provide Feedback! Please share YOUR THOUGHTS and TELL US: ▪What the foundational principles mean to you ▪What improvements you would like to see in your subarea Thank You! Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Appendix C: Subarea In-Person Engagement Results Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Airport / CIC Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Arlington Terrace / Kent Prairie / Crown Ridge Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Glendale / Edgecomb / Hill Top Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Island Crossing / Gateway Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Old Town / Haller City Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Smokey Point Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 West Bluff / Gateway Open House Results April 27, 2023 City of Arlington Arlington in Motion - 2024 and Beyond Comment Number Neighborhood Favorite Feature Improvements 1 Airport & CIC Airport Trail 2 Airport & CIC Ellie's 3 Airport & CIC Ellie's 4 Airport & CIC Airport Trail 5 Airport & CIC Food trucks 6 Airport & CIC More high paying jobs 7 Airport & CIC Bathrooms near Airport Trail 8 Airport & CIC No bathrooms by Aiport Trail, would only draw the homeless problems 9 Airport & CIC A bike friendly trail around the Airport (hard surface) 10 Airport & CIC Accessibility for all at all parks 11 Airport & CIC Off leash dog park 12 Airport & CIC People unfortunately do use Airport Trail as off leash park 13 Airport & CIC Can we get more fun? - roller skating - Children's museum - Bounce house 14 Airport & CIC All the parks, streets need wheelchair accessibility 15 Airport & CIC Stop local smoke shops from selling to minors 16 Airport & CIC Can you fix the big potholes at Haller Park - gravel? 17 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Zimmerman Stair Climb 18 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Jensen Park 19 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Love the community parks, trails, and playgrounds 20 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Monitor speed on 204th, from O'Reilly's Auto Parts to the Burn Hill Road (in front of Kent Prairie Elementary School, 8110 207th St NE) 21 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Need lighted speed signs on 204th 22 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Connect the road between AHS and Burn Rd 23 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Need lighted cross walks by the Kent Prairie Elementary School, Jensen Farm Lane & 204th St. Board Responses 1 Open House Results April 27, 2023 City of Arlington Arlington in Motion - 2024 and Beyond 24 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Improve marking needs calculations, especially for new mixed-use development - new development (combined res/com) along 204th- 207th corridor have less parking than needed 25 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Graffiti keeps appearing on Zimmerman stairs 26 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Art made by AHS students in median across from AHS 27 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Crown Ridge HOA parks haven't had much improvement, playgrounds only getting worse. Can the City help? 28 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Please - can the gated road at the bottom of Crown Ridge be cleared? It's covered by moss. 29 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Zimmerman stair climb needs a picnic area with a covered table. 30 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Off-leash fenced dog park 31 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge City pool + recreation center 32 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Need street sweeping. Need junk cars towed. 33 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge We need more daycares + child care. 34 Glendale & Edgecomb & Hill Top Centennial Trail 35 Glendale & Edgecomb & Hill Top Mostly friendly and quiet - Lopper Ct Highland View Estates 36 Glendale & Edgecomb & Hill Top Connect 172nd to Centennial Trail please 37 Glendale & Edgecomb & Hill Top Widen 172nd with pedestrian safety walking and no biking on the streets 38 Glendale & Edgecomb & Hill Top Yes please "Widen 172nd with pedestrian safety walking and no biking on the streets" 39 Glendale & Edgecomb & Hill Top Build a rec center with pool 40 Glendale & Edgecomb & Hill Top The people walking on 172nd right next to the road. Need sidewalks. (Scare me between 9 and 67th) 41 Glendale & Edgecomb & Hill Top A community public school swim facility similar to Snohomish High School. 42 Glendale & Edgecomb & Hill Top Traffic on 67th - Hard to leave our area at some times of day 2 Open House Results April 27, 2023 City of Arlington Arlington in Motion - 2024 and Beyond 43 Island Crossing & Gateway Leave the farms; offer conservation 44 Island Crossing & Gateway A freeway off and on ramp for the truck stops or another exit by the rest area 45 Old Town & Haller City Centennial Trail 46 Old Town & Haller City Parks, trail, schools, access to downtown 47 Old Town & Haller City walkability 48 Old Town & Haller City Good thing to have picnic area down thru town next to the curb 49 Old Town & Haller City Repainting of the crosswalks down was a good thing 50 Old Town & Haller City Good thing is that the trash cans thru downtown every morning 51 Old Town & Haller City The parks 52 Old Town & Haller City Seeing more vandalism, graffiti, and now arson around town, much in Parks. Need more police, patrols or something! 53 Old Town & Haller City Stop druge use! In all parks. In-force Laws! 54 Old Town & Haller City The sidewalks along side where Key Bank is all the way up. Awful. I fell other day on it. Also a sidewalk or something to cross to Olympic Place 55 Old Town & Haller City Community Center with a pool! :) 56 Old Town & Haller City Community pool 57 Old Town & Haller City Repair crosswalk lights at Hwy 9 and Olympic Drive 58 Old Town & Haller City More accessibility and activities at County Charm Park 59 Old Town & Haller City Need some type of repair for the curb at Olympic Drive and Highland Drive (SW corner) 60 Old Town & Haller City More police/police patrols/other security Concern over drunks and homeless wondering around the streets - day and night 61 Old Town & Haller City Ditto to: "More police/police patrols/other security Concern over drunks and homeless wondering around the streets - day and night " 3 Open House Results April 27, 2023 City of Arlington Arlington in Motion - 2024 and Beyond 62 Old Town & Haller City Please consider 2nd full-serve grocery store. Winco or Fred's preferred. If there's a disaster they will be needed. With the population growth they are already needed! Thank you! (in town) Please remember outlying areas are using those stores too. Thanks! 63 Old Town & Haller City Another grocery store also more stores like Target or Fred Meyer Winco 64 Smokey Point Walker's coffee stand 65 Smokey Point Stilly Valley Center 66 Smokey Point We lived in Smokey Point 40 yrs Used to be Airport Trail - have fear of homless in the woods on the trail 67 Smokey Point I understand there will be plants in the median - who will maintain them? And isn't it dangerous to weed in the middle of the street? 68 Smokey Point Park and ride is not safe to use as intended 69 Smokey Point Agree with "Park and ride is not safe to use as intended " Rite Aid Bus Area Walking sm. Pt. N <-> S 70 Smokey Point Citywide - we need to get ahead of the growth of disadvantaged/homeless/humhomed - adopt policies to build support proactively for the future number of people with these conditions 71 Smokey Point Sidewalks Lighting 72 Smokey Point Street lights in all communities (neighborhoods) to help stop crime, drugs, etc. 73 Smokey Point Need graffiti removed 74 Smokey Point Accessible sidewalks and parks 75 Smokey Point Parking lots at Safeways and Rite-Aid not safe 76 Smokey Point Small businesses 77 West Bluff / Gateway Save the farms 1 Arlington Terrace & Kent Prairie & Crown Ridge Steps up to Crown Ridge need some maintenance Map comments 4 Open House Results April 27, 2023 City of Arlington Arlington in Motion - 2024 and Beyond 2 City of Arlington Growth for all without handouts… real places for people to go that have mental health problems in the growth plan… include mental health care that really works… not enabling kind of lies that don't work 3 City of Arlington Artisan market or gathering place like Wenachee's market 5 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Appendix D: SEPA Scoping Notice Notice of SEPA Determination of Significance and Request for Comments on Scope of Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Arlington 2024-2044 Comprehensive Plan Update Arlington in Motion – 2024 and Beyond Date of Issuance: November 1, 2023 Deadline for Comments: November 30, 2023 (by no later than 11:59 pm) Lead Agency: City of Arlington Planning and Development Department Proposal: 2024-2044 Comprehensive Plan Update Location: City of Arlington (citywide) Contact: Marc Hayes Community and Economic Development Director 18204 59th Dr. NE, Arlington WA 98223 O: 360 403-3457 mhayes@arlingtonwa.gov Project Website: https://www.arlingtonwa.gov/784/Comprehensive-Plan-Update-2024 Project Notice Website: https://www.arlingtonwa.gov/310/Public-Notices-Hearings Project Description The City of Arlington is completing a periodic update to its Comprehensive Plan (“Plan”) to cover the 20-year period through 2044, which per RCW 36.70A.130(5)(a) must be completed by December 31, 2024. The Plan is the city’s primary policy document for guiding growth and development over the next 20 years and covers a wide range of topics such as land use, housing, transportation, parks and recreation, natural resources, economic development, utilities, and capital facilities. The Plan must be consistent with the Growth Management Act, Puget Sound Regional Council Vision 2050 Plan, and Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs). The most recent periodic update occurred in 2015 and the current version of the Comprehensive Plan is available here: https://www.arlingtonwa.gov/282/Comprehensive-Plan As part of the periodic update, the city must evaluate how it can achieve its 20-year (2044) growth targets for population, housing units and employment. These growth targets are based on guidance from the Washington State Department of Commerce and developed following a collaborative process with the county and other cities through Snohomish County Tomorrow and have been incorporated into Appendix B of the Snohomish County CPPs. For Arlington, the 2044 growth targets are as follows: Baseline 2044 Target Increase by 2044 County Total 19,868 (2020) 34,649 14,781 4.8% 7,689 (2020) 15,483 7,794 4.7% 10,267 (2019) 24,690 14,423 8.4% Determination of Significance (DS) and Request for Comments on EIS Scope and Alternatives The City of Arlington has determined that the proposal could potentially have a significant adverse impact on the environment and as such, requires programmatic environmental analysis within an environmental impact statement (EIS), as required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c) of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). The programmatic EIS will evaluate potential impacts and prescribe mitigation measures to address these. Topics and that will be addressed (at a minimum) include: • Environment (critical areas and other subtopics) • Land Use • Housing • Economic Development • Parks, Recreation, and Open Space • Transportation • Utilities • Public Safety • Capital Facilities The EIS will evaluate a No Action Alternative (which assumes no changes to current plans, policies, regulations, or zoning) and one Action Alternative—Implementation of the 2024-2044 Comprehensive Plan, evaluating the plan’s capability to meet the city’s 2044 growth targets. Previous city plans and documents as well as recent state legislation will be incorporated into the alternatives analysis. This scoping period provides an opportunity for the public to help shape the topics that are covered in the EIS. Agencies, affected tribes, and members of the public are invited to comment on the scope of the EIS, including alternatives, additional topics to address, potential environmental impacts, mitigation measures, approval and permitting requirements, and other considerations. The deadline for public scoping comments is November 30, 2023. Comments may be submitted via: • Email: ced@arlingtonwa.gov (Subject: Comp Plan EIS Scoping Comments) • Mail: City of Arlington, Attn: Marc Hayes; Community and Economic Development Director 18204 59th Avenue NE Arlington, WA 98223 • Project website: https://www.arlingtonwa.gov/784/Comprehensive-Plan-Update-2024 PUBLIC MEETING: The city will be holding a public meeting during the scoping period to gather comments to inform the scope of the EIS. This open house style meeting will be held on November 7, 2023 at City Council Chambers (110 E Third Street, Arlington, WA 98223), from 4:00 pm to 6:00 pm, with presentations at 4:30 pm and 5:30 pm. Responsible Official: Marc Hayes, Community and Economic Development Manager Signature: _______ Date: November 1, 2023 Appeal Process An agency or person may appeal the City’s procedural compliance with WAC 197-11. The appeal shall meet the requirements of AMC 20.98.210, AMC 20.20, and AMC 20.24. The appeal period commences on the date of publication of notice. Any appeal to the Hearing Examiner must be addressed to the City Hearing Examiner, accompanied by an application, written findings, a filing fee (plus the actual cost of the Hearing Examiner), and be filed in writing at the City of Arlington, Community and Economic Development Department, 18204 59th Avenue NE, Arlington, WA 98223. Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Appendix E: SEPA Scoping Presentation November 7, 2023 SEPA Scoping Presentation Topics What is the Comprehensive Plan? What is SEPA scoping? Alternatives Next steps What is the Comprehensive Plan? What is a Comprehensive Plan? 20-year vision and roadmap for Arlington’s future Meets requirements to ensure the City is eligible for important funding Growth Management Act Puget Sound Regional Council Snohomish County Guides decisions on infrastructure, housing, and more Framework that guides other important documents Parks & Recreation Master Plan Transportation Improvement Plan Stormwater Comprehensive Plan Planning Process & Timeline Plan Framework What is SEPA Scoping? State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) The SEPA process identifies and analyzes environmental impacts associated with governmental decisions (e.g. the Comprehensive Plan) The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) can be used to mitigate probable impacts The purpose of scoping for the EIS is to: Identify the elements that will be evaluated in the EIS Narrow the issues to those that are significant Provide a public comment period so that the public and other agencies can comment on key environmental issues and concerns Topics Environment (critical areas and other subtopics) Land use Housing Economic development Parks, recreation, and open space Transportation Utilities Public safety Capital facilities Growth Targets Target Baseline 2044 Target Increase by 2044 Percent of County Total Population (people)19,868 (2020)34,649 14,781 4.8% Housing (units)7,689 (2020)15,483 7,794 4.7% Employment (jobs)10,267 (2019)24,690 14,423 8.4% Alternatives Alternative 1: No Action This scenario analyzes the environmental impact if the 2024 Comprehensive Plan were not adopted and there were no changes to zoning, regulations, and other plans Alternative 1 represents a continuation of recent trends The 2024-2044 Comprehensive Plan would not be certified. The City of Arlington would not be eligible for important funding Existing plans and zoning provide capacity to meet the housing units and employment target. However, the growth may not be realized according to the community’s vision and recent subarea planning Alternative 2: Action This scenario analyzes the environmental impact if the 2024-2044 Comprehensive Plan were adopted Alternative 2 assumes varying growth trends through sub- alternative analyses The 2024-2044 Comprehensive Plan would be certified. The City of Arlington would be eligible for important funding Existing plans and zoning provide capacity to meet the housing units and employment target. The Plan calls for growth and redevelopment aligned with the community’s vision and recent subarea planning, specifically the Smokey Point Boulevard Corridor Project Next Steps Public Comments And now….Please share YOUR IDEAS and tell us your thoughts on each topic! What are your concerns? What would you like to see? What is needed? The public comment period is open until November 30, 2023. Please send additional comments to Marc Hayes at ced@arlingtonwa.gov. Look for publishing of the draft EIS in February 2024. Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Appendix F: SEPA Scoping Engagement Results Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Capital Facilities and Utilities Economic Development Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Environment Housing Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Land Use Patterns Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Public Safety Transportation January 24, 2024 Amy Rusko, Planning Manager City of Arlington Land Use & Planning Division 18204 59th Avenue NE Arlington, WA 982923 RE: City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan 2024 Update: Utility Element Dear Ms. Rusko: In response to the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update for the City of Arlington, Puget Sound Energy would like to submit the following comments: Company Overview: Puget Sound Energy (PSE) is a private utility provider of electric and natural gas service to homes and businesses in Puget Sound. With a 6,000 square mile service territory encompassing 10 counties, PSE provides power to more than 1.2 million electric customers and 900,000 natural gas customers. PSE creates 46% of electricity from its own hydro, thermal, solar and wind facilities; the company has 3,500 megawatts of power-generating capacity, and purchases the rest of its power supply from other utilities, independent power producers, and energy marketers across the United States and Canada. In 2022, PSE provided 3,794,770 MWh of renewable energy produced from wind and hydropower facilities. Electric and natural gas planning efforts are integrated and centered on providing safe, reliable, and efficient energy service. Regulatory Environment: PSE’s operations and rates are governed by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC). PSE electric utility options and standards are further governed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the National Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), and the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC). These respective agencies monitor, assess and enforce compliance and reliability standards for PSE. Additionally, the Clean Electricity Transformation Act (CETA) became law in Washington State in 2019. CETA requires PSE provide electricity free of greenhouse gas emissions by 2045. The UTC and Washington Department of Commerce (WDOC) adopted CETA implementation rules that require utilities develop four-year plans known as Clean Energy Implementation Plans (CEIP) to outline plans for clean energy investments, equitable distribution of customer benefits, and 100% clean energy by Amy Rusko, Planning Manager City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan 2024 Update 2045. The first CEIP covers the time period of 2022-2025 and was filed with the UTC on December 17, 2021. It includes programs and investments such as expanding energy efficiency efforts, deploying new technologies, installing localized sources of clean energy, and investing in renewable energy. The CEIP Library, including the 2023 Biennial Update, can be found: https://www.cleanenergyplan.pse.com/ceip-library Further government regulation includes the Washington Climate Commitment Act (CCA), which caps and reduces greenhouse gas emissions from large emitting sources to lower 95% of carbon emissions by 2050. This new program puts a price on greenhouse gas emissions emitted in the state and increases the cost to deliver electricity and natural gas to our customers. Arlington residents rely on PSE and the City to coordinate efforts on ordinances and codes that protect existing energy facilities and embrace new clean energy technology. One of the primary intentions of the Utility Element is to assure proper coordination of public land use planning and infrastructure planning by providers. Routine utility maintenance work—including vegetation management and avian protection— is required for regulatory compliance with FERC, NERC, WECC, and CETA. PSE Planning: Integrated Resource Plan (IRP): Puget Sound Energy plans years in advance to ensure we have the supply and infrastructure necessary to deliver clean, safe and reliable energy. An IRP is a plus year view of PSE’s energy resource needs, which is developed through a planning process that evaluates how a range of potential future outcomes could affect PSE’s ability to meet our customers’ electric and natural gas supply needs. The analysis considers policies, costs, economic conditions, physical energy systems, and future resource procurement. PSE’s latest IRP was filed with the UTC on April 1, 2021 and is the foundation for PSE’s first Clean Energy Implementation Plan (CEIP). The 2021 IRP can be accessed at: https://www.pse.com/en/IRP/Past-IRPs/2021-IRP; The 2023 GAS IRP: https://www.pse.com/en/IRP/Past-IRPs/2023-IRP PSE’s 2023 Electric Progress Report: https://www.pse.com/en/IRP/Past-IRPs/2023-IRP Equity: Many of PSE’s clean energy products include enhanced incentives for historically marginalized communities, and the community-based organizations, government agencies, and Tribal entities that serve them. For many products, PSE is moving away from qualifying customers for enhanced incentives or services based on solely on their geographic location within these communities, as mapped. Instead, PSE is focused on whether or not a project or its location will primarily serve and/or benefit these communities. Ensuring code language makes clean energy programs and products accessible to these communities will be key. Distributed Energy Resources: PSE offers the Distributed Energy Resources program to commercial customers in order to fulfill our commitment to a clean energy future. DER's aim is to support the development of customer-owned renewable energy projects that generate between 100 kilowatts and 5 megawatts to interconnect to the PSE electrical distribution grid. Current federal and state laws require Amy Rusko, Planning Manager City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan 2024 Update the interconnection customer to be responsible for all costs related to connecting their system to PSE's power grid. Therefore, PSE works with customers to ensure the interconnection process is efficient, while maintaining a grid that is safe and reliable. PSE Gas System Overview: PSE builds, operates, and maintains an extensive gas system in Snohomish County, which consists of transmission and distribution natural gas mains, odorizing stations, pressure regulation stations, heaters, corrosion protection systems, above ground appurtenances, and metering systems. In Snohomish County, PSE takes gas from Williams Northwest Pipeline at 15 gate/town border stations. PSE operates and maintains 75 miles of high pressure main, 78 District Regulators, nearly 2,175 miles of intermediate main, and serves 152,000 metered customers. Presently, PSE serves approximately 150 commercial/industrial and 350 residential natural gas customer meters within the City of Arlington. PSE’s culture of total safety is reflected in our approach to gas treatment, pressure reduction, and distribution. Gate Station infrastructure serves as a place of custody transfer, measurement, odorant treatment, and pressure regulation. Gas pressure is most commonly reduced to levels at or below 250 PSIG, then continues throughout PSE’s supply system in steel mains ranging in diameter of 2” to 20.” Over-pressure protection mechanisms release gas into the atmosphere, enact secondary regulation, or completely shut off the gas supply to ensure safety. PSE also applies corrosion control mitigation systems to prevent pipe damage. Yet another safety feature PSE uses involves odorants. Since natural gas is naturally odorless, the odorant mercaptan is injected so that leaks are detectable. In 2021, PSE launched a Renewable Natural Gas (RNG), program in which more than 4,700 customers lowered their carbon footprint by replacing a portion of their conventional natural gas usage with renewable natural gas. The renewable natural gas offered to customers is made from gas captured at a landfill —not from fossil fuels. Since launching RNG, PSE sold more than 92,000 therms of this cleaner alternative. In 2024, PSE strives for 3.5% RNG by volume. Hydrogen Hub: In 2023, the U.S. Department of Energy selected the Pacific Northwest Hydrogen Association’s PNWH2 hub as a regional Clean Hydrogen Hub to kick start a national network of clean hydrogen producers, consumers, and connective infrastructure while supporting the production, storage, delivery, and end-use of clean hydrogen. This Hub will receive $1 billion in federal funding spanning nine years of development phases. PSE’s portion of the project seeks to use clean hydrogen for peaking applications to support the utility’s push to meet Washington State’s mandated Clean Energy Transformation Act (CETA), which calls for no fossil fuel use by 2045. PSE 2030: PSE strives to decarbonize via PSE 2030, a strategic framework for guiding our company’s capital investments over the next 10 years. PSE 2030 is in alignment with our Beyond Net Zero Carbon goals and our commitments to safety, reliability, affordability and equity. PSE 2030 has four main focus areas of: Amy Rusko, Planning Manager City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan 2024 Update 1. CETA Implementation 2. Natural Gas Decarbonization 3. Regulatory and Legislative Enablement 4. Customer Solutions PSE Electrical System Overview: To provide Puget Sound with electricity, PSE maintains an extensive integrated electric system consisting of generating plants, transmission lines, substations, switching stations, sub-systems, overhead and underground distribution systems, attachments, appurtenances, and metering systems. Electricity provided by PSE to customers is often produced elsewhere, then interconnected to the Northwest’s regional grid. The PSE electric transmission facilities in Snohomish County are important components of the regional grid serving Puget Sound. For example, PSE serves Skagit, Island (Whidbey Island only), Whatcom, and King Counties with electricity by linking transmission facilities that pass through Snohomish County. In addition, PSE jointly owns the Anderson Canyon – Beverly Park line serving customers along Highway 2. Transmission Facilities in Snohomish County PSE owns and operates 114.5 miles of transmission line (230 kV and 115 kV) as well as the Horse Ranch substation in Snohomish County. The details of these facilities are provided in the table below. Transmission Lines PSE wholly owns the Sedro Woolley – Horse Ranch 230 kV transmission line which runs from Skagit County to Snohomish County. PSE jointly owns two other 230 kV transmission lines: Sedro Woolley – SCL Bothell – Horse Ranch and Horse Ranch – BPA Monroe – BPA Snohomish. In addition to the 230 kV lines, PSE wholly owns the Beverly Park – Cottage Brook 115 kV line. PSE jointly owns two other 115 kV transmission lines operating in Snohomish County: Anderson Canyon – Beverly Park and BPA Snohomish – Beverly Park #4. Amy Rusko, Planning Manager City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan 2024 Update Future PSE Projects & Programs: Electric: To meet increasing regional electric demand, new transmission lines and substations may need to be constructed. In addition, existing facilities will need to be maintained and possibly rebuilt. The system responds differently year to year and PSE is constantly modifying infrastructure to meet demands, including: • Wishbone Crossarm Replacement Program Transmission poles constructed with wishbone crossarms have exhibited failure modes requiring proactive replacement. There is an active system wide program to replace these crossarms. Sections of the Anderson Canyon – Beverly Park line are constructed using wishbone crossarms. Gas: To meet regional natural gas demand, PSE’s delivery system is modified every year to address customer growth, load changes that require system reinforcement, Rights-Of-Way (ROW) improvements, and pipeline integrity issues. PSE must maintain large-diameter transmission pipelines, system components and infrastructure, city gate stations, and smaller utility-owned gas mains. The system responds differently year to year so PSE is constantly adding or modifying infrastructure to meet gas volume and pressures demands. Ongoing gas system integrity work may include: • Pipe Replacement: PSE will continue pipe investigations to determine the exact location of any DuPont pipe and qualified steel wrapped pipe requiring replacement. Dupont manufactured polyethylene main and service piping, plus qualified steel wrapped intermediate pressure main and service piping may require attention. • Sewer Cross Bores: PSE will conduct investigations of cross bores to determine where gas lines have been cross bored through sewer lines, and then make subsequent repairs. • Buried Meters: There will be ongoing projects to remediate locations where above ground gas meter set piping was inadvertently buried. PSE encourages the City of Arlington to consider the following documents: • PSE Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) – 25 year Long-range Plan • PSE Clean Energy Action Plan (CEAP) – 10 year Strategy Plan • PSE Clean Energy Implementation Plan (CEIP) – 4 year Plan Further, PSE poses the following questions to the City for consideration: • How will the 2024 Comprehensive Plan meet requirements for the 2019 Washington Clean Energy Transformation Act (CETA)? Amy Rusko, Planning Manager City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan 2024 Update • How will the City of Arlington implement Transportation Electrification and Building Electrification, including electric vehicle deployment? These energy strategies have potential impacts to both electric and natural gas transmission and distribution facilities. Such impacts should be identified and evaluated as part of the 2024 Plan. • How will all potential impacts be integrated into the 2024 Comprehensive Plan, specifically within the Utilities Element, Subarea Plans, and other elements identified in RCW 36.70A? On behalf of Puget Sound Energy, thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the Update. If there is any additional information that PSE can provide, please contact me. Sincerely, Jacquelyn Styrna Jacquelyn Styrna, MPA Senior Municipal Liaison Manager Cc: Tom Buroker, WA Department of Ecology Dave Anderson, WA Department of Commerce Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 March 19, 2024 Arlington 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Public Engagement and Outreach Summary for 2021-2024 Appendix G: Zencity Community Survey Report Arlington, WA Community Sur vey October 2023 Januar y 2024 Powered by  The Zencity Community Sur vey A recurring survey that never stops running, the Zencity Community Survey measures how satisfied residents are with their community and with local government- provided services and allows officials to compare these scores over time and against a cohort of similar communities. Survey Methodology 685 respondents were digitally recruited (e.g. over social media, mobile apps, local websites, and survey panels ) between October 2023 January 2024. Zencity built a representative sample by matching respondent data to the U.S. Census Bureau’s race, ethnicity, age, and gender distributions in Arlington, WA. Finally, rake-weighting was applied as a statistical safeguard to balance out any remaining discrepancies in distribution, so no demographic group is overrepresented or underrepresented in the final score. Score Calculation The overall satisfaction score is calculated by averaging how each resident rated quality of life and community characteristics on a numeric scale 15, and classifying this average as satisfied, neutral, or not satisfied. The resulting score, then, is the weighted percentage of residents who gave an overall satisfied rating. Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Overall Satisfaction The overall satisfaction score is calculated from the questions in the two main sections of the survey: general quality of life and satisfaction with different characteristics of life in your community. We take the average of these questions, then classify the score as positive 3, neutral 1.5 to 3, or negative (≤1.5. The percentages represent the percent of respondents in each category.  If you have a previous cycle, the up (↑) and down (↓) arrows will show the change in percentage points.  Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by 72% of 685 surveyed residents are satisfied with life in Arlington 3%vs. previous cycle 72%3% Positive 27%4% Neutral 1%-- Negative Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by These are the main measures of satisfaction in your community The bars on the right show the propor tion of responses that are positive 4 or 5, neutral 3, or negative 1 or 2. The percentages show the percent in the positive category. We take the average of the Community Characteristics, then classify the score as positive 3, neutral 1.5 to 3, or negative (≤1.5. The percentages represent the percent of respondents in each category. If you have a previous cycle, the up (↑) and down (↓) arrows will show the change in percentage points.  QUESTION RESIDENT SATISFACTION How is the overall quality of life in Arlington?63%•1% How likely are you to recommend Arlington as a place to live? 56%•3% How likely are you to be living in Arlington 5 years from now?64%•6% Average rating from the Community Characteristics questions 59%•-- Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Demographic Breakdown Smaller sample sizes can lead to unreliable estimates. For this reason, we hide scores for groups under 30 respondents. For groups between 30 and 49 respondents, we highlight the small sample size using an asterisk (*). Use these scores with caution. Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Life in Arlington The bars show the percent of respondents who repor ted positively 4 or 5 in response to questions about community characteristics. We also display the percent of respondents who were neutral 3, shown with a gray dot) or negative 1 or 2, shown with a red dot). Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by COMMUNITY CHARACTERISTIC SATISFACTION SCORE CHANGE Quality of waste and recycling services 62%27%11%4%1% Overall cleanliness and maintenance 54%30%16%5%5% Quality of parks and recreational amenities 54%29%17%3%2% Access to quality education 53%29%18%2%3% Overall quality of services provided by Arlington 51%32%16%3%1% Access to quality health care services 51%32%16%-0%1% Sense of community among residents 48%30%22%3%3% Acceptance of residents of all backgrounds 47%22%31%3%10% KEY POSITIVE NEUTRAL NEGATIVE CHANGE IN POSITIVE SCORE CHANGE IN NEGATIVE SCORE The 'Change' column shows the percentage point changes in positive and negative scores from the previous cycle. In addition, questions with the largest changes above 5% are highlighted. Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by COMMUNITY CHARACTERISTIC SATISFACTION SCORE CHANGE Sense of overall safety 44%29%27%1%1% Availability of a variety of art and cultural events 40%35%25%1%2% Ability of residents to give input to the Arlington government 26%31%42%4%9% Availability of jobs that pay a living wage 19%40%41%2%4% Ease of getting around by public transportation 18%26%55%8%17% Availability of affordable housing 12%28%60%6%13% KEY POSITIVE NEUTRAL NEGATIVE CHANGE IN POSITIVE SCORE CHANGE IN NEGATIVE SCORE The 'Change' column shows the percentage point changes in positive and negative scores from the previous cycle. In addition, questions with the largest changes above 5% are highlighted. Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by The ratings residents gave these par ts of life showed a connection to their overall satisfaction In order to appear here, a characteristic must a) demonstrate a strong correlation with how residents rated their overall satisfaction and b) receive a notably high or low satisfaction score Maintain High-scoring characteristics with strong correlation to overall satisfaction Focus on Low-scoring characteristics with strong correlation to overall satisfaction 48%3% Sense of Community Among Residents 22%3% 30%-- 19%2% Availability of Jobs that Pay a Living Wage 41%4% 40%2% Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Strengt hs This community characteristic was selected because it had a high correlation with satisfaction AND received a notably high score. The percentages shown indicate the percent of respondents who responded positively 4 or 5. The bars indicate the proportion of respondents who were positive, neutral 3, or negative 1 or 2. For groups between 30 and 49 respondents, we highlight the small sample size using an asterisk (*). Use these scores with caution. Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by In Focus This community characteristic was selected because it had a high correlation with satisfaction AND received a notably low score. The percentages shown indicate the percent of respondents who responded positively 4 or 5. The bars indicate the proportion of respondents who were positive, neutral 3, or negative 1 or 2. For groups between 30 and 49 respondents, we highlight the small sample size using an asterisk (*). Use these scores with caution. Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Community Benchmark Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Community Benchmark Community Benchmark Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by How we compare Arlington, WA to other similar communities Residents from more than 1,000 communities across the United States have participated in Zencity ’s Community Surveys. We use the combined results from these surveys to produce our benchmark estimates. By averaging across respondents from dozens or hundreds of different communities, it’s possible to arrive at a picture of what the results for a “typical” community in that cohort look like. This offers a way to compare your results- par ticularly strengths and areas for improvement- within a greater context. Each community running a Community Survey with Zencity receives a customized community benchmark cohor t that reflects its unique characteristics. First, the cities, towns, and counties in the United States are allocated into cohorts using variables such as population size, geography, density, and demographics to group similar communities together. Then, each cohort’s benchmarks are calculated using the same scoring methodology outlined in the Survey Methodology section. Finally, since recruitment methods can differ slightly according to the needs of each community, cohort benchmarks are adjusted accordingly to match the exact distribution of recruitment methods. Community Benchmark Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by These are some of the communities represented in your cohor t Density is calculated by people per square mile of land area. Diversity is measured by percentage of people who are not in the largest race or ethnicity group. Median income is the median annual dollars of income per household. The data displayed on this page was sourced from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2020 Census of Population and Housing. + more communities with similar characteristics Community Benchmark Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by The overall resident satisfaction in Arlington is lower than its cohor t. 72% Arlington 75% Cohor t 76% National Arlington Cohor t National QUESTION NATIONAL COHORT YOUR SCORE SATISFACTION COMPARISON How is the overall quality of life in Arlington?63%61%63% How likely are you to recommend Arlington as a place to live? 61%57%56% How likely are you to be living in Arlington 5 years from now? 64%67%64%     0%25%50%75%100% Community Benchmark Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Satisfaction with Life in Arlington, WA Breakdown by characteristic Arlington Cohor t National Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Free-Text Responses Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by What residents love Question: What is your favorite thing about living in Arlington? What residents want changed Question: What is the one thing you would change in Arlington? Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Rotating Sur vey Section The rotating survey section focuses on one issue per survey cycle and can be updated as new areas of interest emerge. Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by 77% of respondents like to receive their local Arlington news and information from social media. The question: How do you like to receive local Arlington news and information? Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by 74% of respondents would like to see communications about community happenings and events. The question: What types of communications would you most like to see from City of Arlington? Community happenings and events 74% Infrastructure updates 63% About City projects 53% City government news 42% Other 3% Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by 80% of respondents currently follow the City of Arlington on Facebook. The question: Which of the following City of Arlington social media accounts do you currently follow? Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by The Questionnaire Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Section 1 General Satisfaction QUESTIONS CHOICES How is the overall quality of life in Arlington?*1 5 Scale Poor Excellent) How likely are you to recommend Arlington as a place to live?*1 5 Scale Very unlikely Very likely) How likely are you to be living in Arlington 5 years from now?*1 5 Scale Very unlikely Very likely) What is your favorite thing about living in Arlington?Open Ended What is the thing you would most want to change about life in Arlington?Open Ended Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Section 2 Community Characteristics QUESTIONS Availability of affordable housing Availability of jobs that pay a living wage Access to quality health care services Access to quality education Availability of a variety of art and cultural events Ease of getting around by public transportation Sense of overall safety Sense of community among residents QUESTIONS Acceptance of residents of all backgrounds Ability of residents to give input to the Arlington government Overall cleanliness and maintenance Quality of parks and recreational amenities Quality of waste and recycling services Overall quality of services provided by Arlington Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Section 3 Rotating Survey Section QUESTIONS CHOICES How do you like to receive local Arlington news and information? Social media / Podcasts / Mailed/printed newsletters / Email newsletters / Newspapers / City website / Text message / Email / Local radio / Arlington TV channel 21 / Other What types of communications would you most like to see from City of Arlington? Community happenings and events / Infrastructure updates / City government news / About City projects / Other Which of the following City of Arlington social media accounts do you currently follow?Facebook / Twitter / Instagram / None of the above Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Section 4 Demographics Zencity Community Sur vey Arlington, WA October 2023 January 2024 Powered by Section 4 Demographics QUESTIONS CHOICES What is the highest level of school you have completed or the highest degree you have received?* Less than a high school diploma / High school graduate or GED / Some college but no degree / Associate degree in college / Bachelor’s degree For example: BA, AB, BS / Master’s degree (for example: MA, MS, MBA / Professional School Degree (for example: MD, DDS, DVM, LLB, JD / Doctorate degree (for example: PhD, EdD / Prefer not to say Do any children under the age of 18 live in your household at least half of the time?*Yes / No / Prefer not to say Were you born in the United States?*Yes, born in the United States / No, born outside the United States / Prefer not to say Which category best represents your household's total income over the past year?* $14,999 or less / $15,000 to $24,999 / $25,000 to $34,999 / $35,000 to $49,999 / $50,000 to $74,999 / $75,000 to $99,999 / $100,000 to $149,999 / $150,000 to $199,999 / $200,000 to $299,999 / $300,000 or more / Prefer not to say Published on January 26, 2024 by Zencity suppor t@zencity.io LOCAL GOVERNMENT DIVISION Periodic Update Checklist for Fully-Planning Cities Overview: This checklist is intended to help cities that are fully planning under the Growth Management Act (GMA) conduct the “periodic review and update” of comprehensive plans and development regulations required under RCW 36.70A.130 (5). This checklist identifies components of comprehensive plans and development regulations that may need updating to reflect the latest local conditions or to comply with GMA changes since the last periodic update cycle (2015-2018). Local governments should review local comprehensive plan policies, countywide planning policies and multicounty planning policies (where applicable) to be consistent with the new requirements. Checklist Instructions With the most recent versions of your comprehensive plan and development regulations in hand, fill out each item in the checklist, answering the following questions: Is this item addressed in your current plan or development regulations? If YES, fill in the form with citation(s) to where in the plan or regulation the item is addressed. Where possible, we recommend citing policy or goal numbers by element rather than page numbers, since these can change. If you have questions about the requirement, follow the hyperlinks to the relevant statutory provision or rules. If you still have questions, visit the Commerce Periodic Update webpage or contact the Commerce planner assigned to your region. City of Arlington City Marc Hayes Community and Economic Development Director mhayes@arlingtonwa.gov Staff contact, phone + email Notice: This checklist has been updated with the new 2022-2023 GMA legislation. Rows that include new 2022-2023 legislative changes or updated Commerce guidance are marked with an orange dot . Statutory changes adopted since 2015 are emphasized in highlighted text to help identify new GMA requirements that may not have been addressed during the last periodic update or through other amendments outside of the required periodic update process. Additionally, amendments to the GMA, including those from the 2023 legislative session, are summarized in this document on Commerce’s GMA Laws and Rules webpage. PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 2 Is amendment needed to meet current statute? Check YES to indicate a change to your plan will be needed. Check NO to indicate that the GMA requirement has already been met. Local updates may not be needed if the statute hasn’t changed since your previous update, if your jurisdiction has kept current with required inventories, or if there haven’t been many changes in local circumstances. Use the “Notes” column to add additional information to note where your city may elect to work on or amend sections of your plan or development regulations, to call out sections that are not strictly required by the GMA, or to indicate if the item is not applicable to your jurisdiction. Submit your checklist! This will be the first deliverable under your periodic update grant. PlanView system and instructions: Completed checklists can be submitted through Commerce’s PlanView portal. The PlanView system allows cities and counties to submit and track amendments to comprehensive plans or development regulations online, with or without a user account. You can also submit via email: reviewteam@commerce.wa.gov Fill out and attach a cover sheet, a copy of your submittal and this checklist. Please be advised that Commerce is no longer accepting paper submittals. For further information about the submittal process, please visit Commerce’s Growth Management Act Laws and Rules webpage. Need help? Please visit Commerce’s periodic update webpage for additional resources. Or contact: Suzanne Austin, AICP Senior Planner Growth Management Services WA Department of Commerce 509.407.7955 Suzanne.Austin@commerce.wa.gov Or, your assigned regional planner PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 3 Appendices LAND USE CRITICAL AREAS APPENDIX A: HOUSING UNIT MINIMUMS PER POPULATION HOUSING ZONING CODE APPENDIX B: ELEMENT UPDATES UNDER HB 1181 CAPITAL FACILITIES SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UTILITIES RESOURCE LANDS TRANSPORTATION ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES SHORELINE SUBDIVISION CODE ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES STORMWATER TRIBAL PLANNING ORGANIC MATERIALS MANAGEMENT CLIMATE CHANGE & RESILIENCY IMPACT FEES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CONCURRENCY & TDM PARKS & RECREATION TRIBAL PARTICIPATION OPTIONAL ELEMENTS REGULATIONS FOR OPTIONAL ELEMENTS CONSISTENCY PROJECT REVIEW PROCEDURES PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN & REGULATION AMENDMENTS PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 4 Section I: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes Notice: 2021-2022 legislation ESSB 5593: includes changes to RCW 36.70A.130 regarding UGA size, patterns of development, suitability and infrastructure. Coordinate these efforts with your county. N/A No Not applicable Completed: ☐ Date: a. The element integrates relevant county-wide planning policies into the local planning process, and ensures local goals and policies are consistent. For jurisdictions in the central Puget Sound region, the plan is consistent with applicable multicounty planning policies. RCW 36.70A.210 WAC 365-196-305 Coordinate these efforts with your county. Appendix C was adopted to be consistent with VISION 2040 Multi- County Planning Policies (MPPs) and Snohomish County Planning Policies (CPPs) as Yes A policy gap analysis will be prepared to compare existing comprehensive plan policies with the updated VISION 2050 Multi-County Planning Policies (MPPs) and the updated 2022 Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs). This process will identify where current comprehensive plan policies fully implement the updated MPPs/CPPs and where there are partial or full policy gaps, which will be addressed as part of the update process to ensure consistency. Completed: ☒ Date: October 2023 b. A future land use map showing city limits and UGA boundaries. RCW 36.70A.070(1) amended in 2023 and RCW 36.70A.110(6), WAC 365-196- 400(2)(d), WAC 365-196-405(2)(i)(ii) Yes Figure 2.3a is a future land use map that includes Yes Expect to update future land use map to be future land use changes. Completed: ☐ Date: c. Consideration of urban planning approaches that increase physical activity and reduce per capita vehicle miles 25 traveled within the jurisdiction, but without increasing greenhouse gas emissions elsewhere in the state. RCW 36.70A.070(1) (amended in 2023) and WAC 365-196-405(2)(j). Goals: GL-9, T-5, T- 8, GP-6 Policies: PO-6.1, PO-6.2, PH-3.2, PL- No pedestrian trail development, there could be an opportunity to review and add polices to further implement WAC 365-196-405(2)(j).The City implemented a Complete Street Policy in 2018 and increased the amount of open space required from 5-10% for developments in 2022. Completed: ☒ Date: March 2024 PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 5 Section I: Comprehensive Plan guidance, and the WA Department of Health Washington State Plan for Healthy Communities and Active Community Environment Toolkit 2.0, PT-4.3, PT-4.9, PT-4.12, PT-5.1- 5.13, PT-6.6, PT- 8.1, PT-8.2, PT- 14.4, PP-6.1-6.3, PP-3.3, PP-5.5 As noted in PT-1.2 the Comprehensive Transportation Plan is the official movement via trails and walkways. (Figure 2.7) and Parks and Recreation Facilities map proposing Healthy, Active Lifestyles as a Foundational Principle in the comprehensive plan. In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes d. A consistent population projection throughout the plan which should be consistent with the jurisdiction’s allocation of countywide population and housing needs. RCW 36.70A.115, RCW 43.62.035 and WAC 365-196-405(f) Yes Sections 5.7-5.14 of the Land Use Element Yes update population, housing, and employment targets consistent with the adopted Countywide Planning Policies. This will ensure that, taken collectively, adoption of and amendments to the comprehensive plans and/or development regulations provide sufficient capacity of land suitable for development within the City to Completed: ☒ Date: March 2024 PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 6 Section I: Comprehensive Plan Please note that while this is the Land Use Element section, these requirements will be synced with Housing Element requirements required in RCW 36.70A.070(2) e. Estimates of population densities and building intensities based on future land uses and housing needs. RCW 36.70A.070(1) (amended in 2023), WAC 365-196-405(2)(i) • For cities required to plan under the Buildable Lands Program, RCW 36.70A.215 amended in 2017, some jurisdictions may need to identify reasonable measures to reconcile inconsistencies. See Commerce’s Buildable Lands Program page. Yes Sections 5.9-5.10 of the Land Use Element Yes include new estimates of population densities and building intensities based on future land uses and housing needs out to 2044. This may use designation, the acreage in each implementing zone, the approximate densities that are assumed, and how this meets the twenty-year population projection. Please note that while this is the Land Use Element section, these requirements will be synced with Housing Element requirements required in RCW 36.70A.070(2). There is a strong correlation between building intensities and land use and housing that is needed within the City, including housing at various income levels. If needed, the City of Arlington will consider reasonable measures to reconcile Completed: ☒ Date: July 2023 f. Provisions for protection of the quality and quantity of groundwater used for public water supplies. RCW 36.70A.070(1) (amended in 2023), WAC 365-196-405(1)(c); WAC 365-196-485(1)(d) Yes Discussed in Appendix E and several policies of water quality and quantity No requirements, this will be crosschecked with new and revised regional and countywide planning policies. A policy gap analysis is being prepared to compare existing comprehensive plan policies with the updated VISION 2050 Multi-County Planning Policies (MPPs) and the updated 2022 Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs). This process will identify where current comprehensive plan Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 7 Section I: Comprehensive Plan policy gaps, which will be addressed as part of the update process to ensure consistency. g. Identification of lands useful for public purposes such as utility corridors, transportation corridors, landfills, sewage treatment facilities, storm water management facilities, recreation, schools and other public uses. RCW 36.70A.150 and WAC 365- 196-340 An inventory, forecast, assessment, and proposed expansion or new capital facilities is 9. The Public/Semi- designation contains publicly owned open spaces and civic buildings is discussed in Chapter 5. City owned properties are mapped in Yes The City will identify lands useful for public purposes when updating the urban growth area designations and the land use, capital facilities, utilities, and transportation elements of comprehensive plan. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 8 In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes h. Identification of open space corridors and green spaces within and between urban growth areas, including lands useful for recreation, wildlife habitat, trails and connection of critical areas, and urban and community forests within the UGA. RCW 36.70A.070(1) amended in 2023, RCW 36.70A.160 and WAC 365-196-335 Yes Identified and discussed in Chapter 7. There is a Trail and (Figure 2.7) and Parks and Recreation Facilities map Yes The Parks and Open Space Element will also be updated to reflect any new parks, critical areas, or open space per the requirements in RCW.36.70A.160 and WAC 365-196-335. Completed: ☐ Date: i. If there is an airport within or adjacent to the city: policies, land use designations (and zoning) to discourage the siting of incompatible uses adjacent to general aviation airports. RCW 36.70A.510, RCW 36.70.547 Note: The plan (and associated regulations) must be filed with the Aviation Division of WSDOT. WAC 365-196-455 GL-16 and There are numerous the Arlington Airport and how it is to be protected from incompatible uses, addressed through institution of the Airport Safety Overlay and Airport Protection District, on the zoning and plan No The City will work closely with the Arlington Airport as the Airport Master Plan is updated alongside the comprehensive plan. Any the airport will be coordinated closely with the aviation division of the Washington State Department of Transportation per WAC 365-196- 455 and will be consistent of RCW 36.70A.510 and RCW 36.70.547. Completed: ☐ Date: j. Where applicable, a review of drainage, flooding and stormwater run-off in the area and nearby jurisdictions and provide guidance for corrective actions to mitigate or cleanse those discharges that pollute waters of the state. RCW 36.70A.070(1) (amended in 2023) and WAC 365-196-405(2)(e) Yes Goal GL-20; Policies PL-14.4, PL-15.46, PL-18.3, PL-19.4, PL-20.1- 20.4, PS-5.9 Water resources are discussed in No compare existing comprehensive plan policies with the updated VISION 2050 Multi-County Planning Policies (MPPs) and the updated 2022 Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs). This process will identify where current comprehensive plan policies fully implement the updated MPPs/CPPs and where Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 9 Additional resources: Commerce’s climate guidance, Protect Puget Sound Watersheds, Building Cities in the Rain, Ecology Stormwater Manuals, Puget Sound Partnership Action Agenda including a Geo- Spatial tool that allows a user to identify a parcel and the tool will prescribe a LID best fit the site 2.16-2.18 display relevant ensure consistency. PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 10 In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes k. Policies to designate and protect critical areas including wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat protection areas, frequently flooded areas, critical aquifer recharge areas and geologically hazardous areas. In developing these policies, the city must have included the best available science (BAS) to protect the functions and values of critical areas, and give “special consideration” to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries. RCW 36.70A.030(6), RCW 36.70A.172, WAC 365- 190-080. Best Available Science: see WAC 365- 195-900 through -925 Yes PL-4.6, pl-18.1- 18.10, PL-19.1- 19.5, PL-25.4, PT- 9.1-9.7, PP-5.9, PS- 3.2 Yes best available science. the environment element will be updated to address the most recent best available science during the 2024 update. An Environmentally Critical Areas Regulation (AMC 20.93) is in effect meeting these criteria. Completed: ☒ Date: October 2023 l. If forest or agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance are designated inside a city: a program authorizing Transfer (or Purchase) of Development Rights. RCW 36.70A.060(4), RCW 36.70A.170 N/A No There are no forest or agricultural lands of long- term commercial significance designated inside the City. Completed: ☐ Date: m. If there is a Military Base within or adjacent to the jurisdiction employing 100 or more personnel: policies, land use designations, (and consistent zoning) to discourage the siting of incompatible uses adjacent to military bases. RCW 36.70A.530(3), WAC 365-196-475 N/A No No military base within or adjacent to the City. Completed: ☐ Date: n. New section RCW 36.70A.142 (2022), HB 1799: Development regulations newly developed, updated, or amended after January 1, 2025 allow for the siting of organic materials (OM) management facilities as identified in local solid waste management plans (SWMP) to meet OM reduction and diversion goals. Siting must meet criteria described in RCW 70A.205.040(3). See also RCW 36.70.330. For applicability, see RCW 70A.205.540. No Yes The requirements of HB1799 (RCW 36.70A.142) will be addressed and incorporated into the update process if found applicable. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 11 In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes o. Give special consideration to achieving environmental justice in goals and policies, including efforts to avoid creating or worsening environmental health disparities. RCW 36.70A.070(1) amended in 2023. Completed: ☐ Date: p. The land use element must reduce and mitigate the risk to lives and property posed by wildfires by using land use planning tools and through wildfire preparedness and fire adaptation measures. RCW 36.70A.070(1) amended in 2023. See also: International Wildland-Urban Interface Code Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 12 Housing Element New 2021 and 2022 legislation substantially amended the housing-related provisions of the Growth Management Act (GMA), RCW 36.70A.070 (2). Local governments should review local comprehensive plan policies and countywide planning policies to be consistent with the updated requirements Please refer to Commerce’s housing webpage for further information. See also Appendix A of this checklist for the new 2023 minimum housing unit requirements per city population. In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes housing element requirements involve and what Commerce staff will be reviewing for, please see the Expanded Housing Checklist located on the Updating GMA Housing a. Goals, policies and objectives for: • the preservation, improvement and development of housing RCW 36.70A.070(2)(b); • moderate density housing options including, but not limited to, duplexes, triplexes, and townhomes, within an urban growth area boundary, RCW 36.70A.070(2)(b) and WAC 365-196-410(2)(a); and • Consideration of housing locations in relation to employment locations and the role of ADUs. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(d) new in 2021 Notice: These items were separately listed in the previous version of the checklist. No content was changed. Yes Goals GH-1-GH-8 and associated policies Policies PH-5.5, PL-1.2, PL-1.3, PL- 15.2 address duplexes and PH- 1.1 and PH-8.1 support a variety of housing types Policies PH-2.1 and PH-8.1 Yes compare existing comprehensive plan policies with the updated VISION 2050 Multi-County Planning Policies (MPPs) and the updated 2022 Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs). This process will identify where current comprehensive plan policies fully implement the updated MPPs/CPPs and where there are partial or full policy gaps, which will be addressed as part of the update process to ensure consistency. Further analysis of middle housing will be prepared during the update process. Updates need to be made to address RCW Completed: ☒ Date: December 2023 b. An inventory and analysis of existing and projected housing needs over the planning period, by income band, consistent with the jurisdiction’s share of countywide housing need, as provided by Commerce. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(a) amended in 2021, WAC 365-196-410(2)(b) and (c) Chapter 6 includes inventory information, past trends, future Yes presented in the County’s 2013 Housing Report, which implements Countywide Planning Policy HO-5. The projections divide future housing needs among the three levels of affordability (50%, 80% and 80+% AMI) Completed: ☒ Date: July 2023 PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 13 Housing Element New 2021 and 2022 legislation substantially amended the housing-related provisions of the Growth Management Act (GMA), RCW 36.70A.070 (2). Local governments should review local comprehensive plan policies and countywide planning policies to be consistent with the updated requirements Please refer to Commerce’s housing webpage for further information. See also Appendix A of this checklist for the new 2023 minimum housing unit requirements per city population. numbers with the population forecasts for 2035. 36.70A.070(2)(a). 2021. The City is adopting a Tax Increment Finance (TIF) program with associated mandatory PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 14 In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section meet current statute? Yes/No Notes including, but not limited to, government-assisted housing, housing for moderate, low, very low, and extremely low-income households, manufactured housing, multifamily housing, group homes, foster care facilities, emergency housing, emergency shelters and permanent supportive housing. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c) amended in 2021, WAC Yes Table 5.4 Yes Updates will made to address RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c). 2021. The City is adopting a Tax Increment Finance (TIF) program with associated mandatory affordable housing. Completed: ☒ Date: July 2023 housing needs for all economic segments of the community, including documenting barriers and actions needed to achieve housing availability. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(d) amended in 2021, WAC 365-196-010(g)(ii), WAC 365-196-300(f), WAC 365-196-410 and see Commerce’s Housing Action Plan (HAP) guidance: Guidance for Developing a Although policies, Table 5.4, and indicate a commitment to providing a variety Yes Updates need to be made to address RCW 36.70A.070(2)(d). An inventory and analysis of projected housing needs by income band will be addressed during the periodic update process. Completed: ☐ Date: in racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing, including: • Zoning that may have a discriminatory effect; • Disinvestment; and • Infrastructure availability No Yes Updates need to be made to address RCW 36.70A.070(e). Policies and regulation that result in racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing will be addressed during the periodic update process. Completed: ☐ Date: f. Establish policies and regulations to address and begin to undo racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing caused by local policies, plans, and actions. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(f) new in 2021 No Yes Updates need to be made to address RCW 36.70A.070(2)(f). Policies and regulation that result in racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing will be addressed during the periodic update process. Completed: ☒ Date: December 2023 PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 15 In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section meet current statute? Yes/No Notes In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes of displacement from market forces that occur with changes to zoning development regulations and capital investments. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(g) new in 2021 Establish anti-displacement policies, with consideration given to the preservation of historical and cultural communities as well as investments in low, very low, extremely low, and moderate-income housing; equitable development initiatives; inclusionary zoning; community planning requirements; tenant protections; land may be used for affordable housing. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(h) new in 2021 See also: Support Materials for Racially Disparate Impacts, Exclusion and Displacement Work No Yes Anti-displacement policies will be addressed during the periodic update process. The City recognizes risk of displacement at the mobile home park in the Cascade Industrial Center and along Smokey Point Boulevard. Affordable housing measures being developed now are intended to address these and other areas of high risk of displacement. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 16 Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Element To serve as a check on the practicality of achieving other elements of the plan, covering all capital facilities planned, provided and paid for by public entities including local government and special districts, etc. including water systems, sanitary sewer systems, storm water facilities, schools, parks and recreational facilities, police and fire protection facilities. Capital expenditures from park and recreation elements, if separate, should be included in the CFP Element. The CFP Element must be consistent with CWPPs, and RCW 36.70A.070(3) amended in 2023. Changes made to this element through HB 1181 (climate change and resiliency) are not required, although jurisdictions should make a good faith effort to incorporate these items to In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. Policies or procedures to ensure capital budget decisions are in conformity with the comprehensive plan. RCW 36.70A.120 GL-1, GS-1 The Sewer, Water, Transportation, and Stormwater Plans are adopted by reference as part of the Comprehensive No A policy may be added to explicitly state requirement outlined in RCW 36.70A.120. Completed: ☐ Date: b. An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, including green infrastructure. RCW 36.70A.070(3)(a) amended in 2023 and WAC 365- 196-415(1)(a) Yes Chapters 7-9; Tables 7-2 and 9-3 Yes update the capital facilities element to be targets, updated VISION 2050 Multi-County Planning Policies (MPPs), Snohomish County Countywide Planning Completed: ☐ Date: c. A forecast of needed capital facilities. RCW 36.70A.070(3)(b) and WAC 365-196-415(1)(b) Note: The forecast of future need should be based on projected population and adopted levels of service (LOS) over the planning period. Chapters 7-9 The Sewer, Water, Transportation, and Stormwater Plans are adopted by reference as part of the Comprehensive Yes The City will update the forecast of needed capital facilities as part of the periodic update process. In addition, the City should work with non-City service providers to outline forecasted needs based on expected growth. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 17 d. Proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities. RCW 36.70A.070(3)(c) and WAC 365-196-415 (1)(c) and (3)(c) Infrastructure investments should consider equity and plan for any potential displacement impacts. Chapters 7-9 Figures 2.22, 2.5 The Sewer, Water, Transportation, and Stormwater Plans are adopted by reference as part of the Comprehensive Yes The City will update the proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities as part of the periodic update process. The City should work with non-City service providers to outline forecasted locations, if needed, for new facilities based expected growth. Completed: ☐ Date: e. A six-year plan (at minimum) that will finance such capital facilities within projected funding capacities and identify sources of public money to finance planned capital facilities. RCW 36.70A.070(3)(d), RCW 36.70A.120, WAC 365-196-415(1)(d) Section 9.3: Capital Facilities Plan The Sewer, Water, Transportation, and Stormwater Plans are adopted by reference as part of the Comprehensive Yes The City has an existing six-year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). The City is considering years. The stormwater utility is funded through connection and service fees. Impact fees are collected under existing City code for parks and transportation. The City collects school impact fees, when assessed, on behalf of the Arlington and Lakewood Districts, when requested. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 18 In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes f. A policy or procedure to reassess the Land Use Element if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs. RCW 36.70A.070(3)(e) WAC 365- 196-415(2)(d) Note: park and recreation facilities shall be included in the capital facilities plan element. Page 1-5 The Plan as prepared was “concurrent” The Implementation and Appendix “I” discusses the City’s reassessment approach, if and when an element is found to be No A policy may be added to explicitly state requirement outlined in RCW 36.70A.070(3)(e) WAC 365-196-415(2)(d). Completed: ☐ Date: g. If impact fees are collected: identification of facilities on which money is to be spent. RCW 82.02.050(5) and WAC 365-196-850(3) Impact fees are collected under existing City code for parks and City collects school impact fees, when assessed, on behalf of the Arlington and Lakewood Districts, when No The City could consider additional impact fees for public facilities listed in WAC 365-196- 850(3). Completed: ☐ Date: h. Identify and include information about all public entities, including special purpose districts that Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 19 Utilities Element Consistent with relevant CWPPs and RCW 36.70A.070 (4) amended in 2023. Utilities include, but are not limited to: sanitary sewer systems, water lines, fire suppression, electrical lines, telecommunication lines, and natural gas lines. Changes made to this element through HB 1181 (climate change and resiliency) are not required, although jurisdictions should make a good faith effort to incorporate these items to be consistent with the a. The general location, proposed location and capacity of all existing and proposed utilities, to include telecommunications. RCW 36.70A.070(4)(a) amended in 2023 and WAC 365-196-420 Yes Figure 2.21 Chapter 9 No The City could consider developing maps with the general location and proposed locations of utilities to be consistent with RCW 36.70A.070(4) and WAC 365-196-420. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Identify and include information and contact information about all public entities, including special purpose districts that own utility systems. RCW 36.70A.070 (4)(b) new in 2023 Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 20 Transportation Element Consistent with relevant CWPPs and RCW 36.70A.070 (6) amended in 2023 by HB 1181. See also the new climate element below for jurisdictional requirements. In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. An inventory of air, water and ground transportation facilities and services, including transit alignments, active transportation facilities, state-owned transportation facilities and general aviation airports. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iii)(A) amended in 2023 and WAC 365-196-430(2)(c) Yes Chapter 8 Yes The transportation element will be updated to reflect changes since the previous update, as appropriate. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Adopted multimodal levels of service standards for all locally owned arterials, locally and regionally operated transit routes that serve UGAs, state- owned or operated transit routes that serve urban areas if the department of transportation has prepared such standards, and active transportation facilities to serve as a gauge to judge performance of the system and success in helping to achieve environmental justice. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iii)(B) and (C) amended in 2023, WAC 365-196-430 Yes Policy PT-3.1 Section 8.3: Level of Service No The City is changing the model for Traffic Impact Fees from a LOS standard for intersections and PM Peak Hour Trips to a LOS standard based on the individual to allow for funding to be used for Multi-Modal Transportation. Completed: ☐ Date: c. Identification of specific actions to bring transportation facilities and services to established multimodal LOS. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iii)(D) amended in 2023, WAC 365-196-430 2035 Plan was adopted by reference Goal T-3 In Section 8.3: Level of Service the City has level of service Yes The City is changing the model for Traffic Impact Fees from a LOS standard for intersections and PM Peak Hour Trips to a LOS standard based on the individual to allow for funding to be used for Multi-Modal Transportation. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 21 projects needed to meet standards that were d. A forecast of multimodal transportation for at least 10 years including land use assumptions used in estimating travel. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(i), RCW 36.70A.070 (6)(a)(iii)(E) amended in 2023, WAC 365-196-430(2)(f) Chapter 8 2035 Plan was adopted by Yes The City will update the traffic forecast as part of the periodic update process. Completed: ☐ Date: In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes e. A projection of state and local system needs to equitably meet current and future demand and equitably implement the multimodal network. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iii)(F) amended in 2023, WAC 365-196-430(1)(c)(vi) and RCW 47.06 Yes Chapter 8 2035 Plan was adopted by Yes Projected needs will be updated to reflect changes since the 2015 update, as appropriate. Completed: ☐ Date: f. A transition plan for transportation as required in Title II of ADA. Perform self-evaluations of current facilities and develop a program access plan to address deficiencies and achieve the identification of physical obstacles, establish methods, perform modifications and identify leadership roles. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iii)(G) new in 2023. Completed: ☐ Date: g. An active transportation component to include collaborative efforts to identify and designate planned improvements for active transportation Yes Policy PT-1.2, PT- 2.0, PT-5.1, PT-5.4, PT-5.8 Yes The City adopted a Complete Streets Policy in 2018. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 22 2023, WAC 365-196-430(2)(j) Non-Motorized Facilities of Chapter 8 2035 Plan was adopted by h. A description of any existing and planned transportation demand management (TDM) strategies, such as HOV lanes or subsidy programs, parking policies, etc. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(vi) and WAC 365-196- 430(2)(i)(i) Yes 2035 Plan was adopted by reference Yes multi-modal approaches including pedestrian paths, bicycle lanes and encouraging TDM measures. The City maintains a CTR and TDM program Community Transit has opened a Park and Ride facility in the City to add to its other services to the Arlington/ Marysville area. since the 2015 update, as appropriate. The complete streets program will become a Completed: ☐ Date: i. An analysis of future funding capability to judge needs against probable funding resources. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iv)(A), WAC 365.196- 430(2)(k)(iv) PT-7.3, PT-12.6 Chapters 8 and 9 2035 Plan (adopted by Yes Changes based on projected project needs Completed: ☐ Date: In Current Plan? Yes/No Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 23 j. A multi-year financing plan based on needs identified in the comprehensive plan, the appropriate parts of which serve as the basis for the 6-year street, road or transit program. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iv)(B) and RCW 35.77.010, WAC 365-196-430(2)(k)(ii) Yes Transportation Improvement Plan Yes The City will address the financing in the Transportation Element Book, Capital Facilities Element Book, and through the 6 year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). Completed: ☐ Date: k. If probable funding falls short of meeting identified needs of the transportation system, including state transportation facilities, a discussion of how additional funds will be raised, or how land use assumptions will be reassessed to ensure that LOS standards will be met. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iv)(C) amended in 2023, WAC 365-196-430(2)(l)(iii) Yes PT-12.4, PT-12.5 Chapters 8 and 9 Yes The City will address the financing in the Transportation Element Book, Capital Facilities Element Book, and through the 6 year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). Completed: ☐ Date: l. A description of intergovernmental coordination the transportation plan and land use assumptions on the transportation systems of adjacent jurisdictions and how it is consistent with the regional transportation plan. RCW 36.70A.070(6) (a)(v); WAC 365-196-430(1)(e) and 430(2)(a)(iii) Yes PT-11.2 Yes transportation planning efforts, including membership on the Snohomish County Committee for Improved Transportation (SCCIT), the Economic Alliance of Snohomish County and the Growth Management Steering these groups, the major multi-modal transportation priorities have been identified, including those serving Arlington. In 2022 there was a traffic analysis for the Cascade Industrial Center (CIC) between Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 24 Shoreline For shorelines of the state, the goals and policies of the shoreline management act as set forth in RCW 90.58.020 are added as one of the goals of the Growth Management Act (GMA) as set forth in RCW 36.70A.480. The goals and policies of a shoreline master program for a county or city approved under RCW 90.58 shall be considered an element of the county or city's comprehensive plan. In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. The policies, goals, and provisions of RCW 90.58 and applicable guidelines shall be the sole basis for determining compliance of a shoreline master program with this chapter except as the shoreline master program is required to comply with the internal consistency provisions of RCW 36.70A.070, 36.70A.040(4), 35.63.125, 35A.63.105 36.70A.480 PL-18.10 The City updated its Shoreline Master Plan in 2012 (Ordinance No The City updated the Shoreline Master Program in 2019. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Shoreline master programs shall provide a level of protection to critical areas located within shorelines of the state that assures no net loss of shoreline ecological functions necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources as defined by department of ecology guidelines adopted pursuant to RCW 90.58.060. PL-18.10 The City updated its Shoreline Master Plan in 2012 (Ordinance 2012-015) No The City updated their critical areas with the best available science in 2022. The City updated the Shoreline Master Program in 2019. Completed: ☒ Date: 2019 c. Shorelines of the state shall not be considered critical areas under this chapter except to the extent that specific areas located within shorelines of the state qualify for critical area designation based on the definition of critical areas provided by RCW 36.70A.030(5) and have been designated as such by a local government pursuant to RCW 36.70A.060(2) Yes The City updated its Shoreline Master Plan in 2012 (Ordinance 2012-015) No The City updated their critical areas with the best available science in 2022. The City updated the Shoreline Master Program in 2019. Completed: ☒ Date: 2019 PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 25 In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes d. If a local jurisdiction's master program does not include land necessary for buffers for critical areas that occur within shorelines of the state, as authorized by RCW 90.58.030(2)(f), then the local jurisdiction shall continue to regulate those critical areas and their required buffers pursuant to RCW 36.70A.060(2). Yes The City updated its Shoreline Master Plan in 2012 (Ordinance 2012-015) No The City updated the Shoreline Master Program in 2019. Completed: ☒ Date: 2019 Provisions for siting essential public facilities (EPFs) Consistent with CWPPs and RCW 36.70A.200, amended 2021. This section can be included in the Capital Facilities Element, Land Use Element own element. Sometimes the identification and siting process for EPFs is part of the CWPPs. a. A process or criteria for identifying and siting essential public facilities (EPFs). RCW 36.70A.200 and WAC 365-196-550(1) Notes: RCW 36.70A.200, amended 2021 reentry and rehabilitation facilities. EPFs are defined in RCW 36.70A.200. Regional transit authority facilities are included in the list of essential public facilities. No Yes tax to Snohomish County’s program to provide the following services: • Constructing and acquiring affordable housing for low- additional needs • Constructing and acquiring emergency housing • Constructing and acquiring behavioral health facilities • Operating and maintaining these facilities • Providing services to individuals utilizing these facilities Administering and evaluating the services Completed: ☐ Date: b. Policies or procedures that ensure the comprehensive plan does not preclude the siting of EPFs. RCW 36.70A.200(5) Note: If the EPF siting process is in the CWPPs, this policy may be contained in the PS-1.2 Appendix B: No Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 26 PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 27 Tribal Participation in Planning new in 2022 (see HB 1717) A federally recognized Indian tribe may voluntarily choose (opt-in) to participate in the local and regional planning processes. In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. Mutually agreeable memorandum of agreement collaboration and participation in the planning process unless otherwise agreed at the end of a mediation period. RCW 36.70A.040(8)(a) new in 2022, RCW 36.70A.190 new in 2022 Yes PL-22.2, PP-5.7 Yes the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians review developments. The City has quarterly meetings have been discussions to develop a memorandum of understanding, however the Completed: ☐ Date: b. Port elements, if adopted, are developed collaboratively between the city, the applicable port and the applicable tribe(s), which shall comply with RCW 36.70A.040(8). RCW 36.70A.085 amended in 2022 N/A No There is no Port Element. Completed: ☐ Date: c. Urban Growth Areas: counties and cities coordinate planning efforts for any areas planned for urban growth with applicable tribe(s). RCW 36.70A.110(1) amended 2022, RCW 36.70A.040(8) N/A No This effort is led by Snohomish County. Coordination on this process takes place through Snohomish County Tomorrow (SCT). Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 28 Climate Change and Resiliency New in 2023, see HB 1181. RCW and WAC updates are forthcoming. A new required element for comprehensive plans and new goal of the GMA. Designed to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, plan for resiliency and support environmental justice. Climate elements must maximize economic, environmental and social co-benefits and prioritize environmental justice in order to avoid worsening environmental health disparities. A climate element can take the form of a single comprehensive plan chapter or be integrated into several chapters/elements such as housing, transportation and land use. Visit Commerce’s Climate Program webpage for further These requirements for GHG emission reductions and resiliency apply to the following counties and their cities with a population greater than 6,000 as of April 1, 2021. Please also review Appendix B for requirements due in the upcoming periodic update. • June 30, 2025 Deadline: Clark, Skagit, Thurston, Whatcom • June 30, 2026 Deadline: Benton, Franklin, Spokane • June 30, 2029 Deadline: These jurisdictions are only required to update two elements this cycle – the transportation and climate elements In Current Plan? Yes/No Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. Greenhouse gas emissions reduction sub- element: must include goals and policies to reduce emissions and vehicle miles traveled. This sub-element is mandatory for the state’s largest and fastest-growing counties and the cities within those counties. RCW 36.70A.070(9) new in 2023 No No resilience element of City’s comprehensive plan “climate adaptation and community resiliency” will be one of the foundational principles of the 2024 comprehensive plan. Climate change mitigation and resilience will be an important component of the City’s 20-year plan, will be weaved throughout the other elements. The City is planning to address the adverse impacts of climate change by addressing reductions in overall greenhouse gas emissions during the Completed: ☐ Date: b. Resiliency sub-element: must include goals and polices to improve climate preparedness, GMA and encouraged for others. RCW 36.70A.070(9) new in 2023 No No resilience element of City’s comprehensive plan “climate adaptation and community resiliency” will be one of the foundational principles of the 2024 comprehensive plan. Climate change mitigation and resilience will be an important component of the City’s 20-year plan, will be weaved throughout the other elements. The City Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 29 overall greenhouse gas emissions during the PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 30 Future required elements: pending state funding As of 2022, these elements have not received state funding to aid local jurisdictions in implementation. Therefore, these elements are not required to be added to comprehensive plans at this time. Commerce encourages jurisdictions to begin planning for these elements, pending the future mandate. In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Notes Economic Development Although included in RCW 36.70A.070 “mandatory currently required because funding was not provided to assist in developing local elements provisions for economic growth, vitality, and a high quality of life are important, and supporting strategies should be integrated with the land use, housing, utilities, and transportation elements. RCW 36.70A.070(7) amended in 2017 No While there is not an economic development element of City’s comprehensive plan “economic sustainability and vibrancy” will be one of the foundational principles of the 2024 comprehensive plan. Economic development will be an important component of the City’s 20- year plan, will be addressed throughout the document, and will be weaved throughout the other elements. Completed: ☒ Date: February 2024 Parks and Recreation Implements and is consistent with the capital facilities plan. Include a ten-year demand estimate, evaluation of service and facilities needs and evaluation of tree canopy coverage within UGAs. RCW 36.70A.070(8) amended in 2023 Although included in RCW 36.70A.070 “mandatory elements” a parks and recreation element is not currently required because the state did not provide funding to assist in developing local elements when this provision was added to the GMA. However, parks, recreation and open space planning are GMA goals, and it is important to plan for and fund these facilities. Yes The 2023 Parks & Recreation Master Plan will be adopted be reference in the 2024 comprehensive plan. Completed: ☒ Date: April 2024 PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 31 Optional Elements Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.080, a comprehensive plan may include additional elements, items, or studies dealing with other subjects relating to the physical development within its jurisdiction, including, but not limited to: In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Notes Sub-Area Plans No Subarea Plan is Crossing Subarea Plans are in the early stages of development. The City will be which will define the City’s subareas. The City is planning to use the identified subareas as an avenue to discuss needs and opportunities throughout the City and develop a sense of predictability in the Completed: ☐ Date: Conservation Completed: ☐ Date: Recreation Completed: ☐ Date: Solar Energy Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 32 Consistency is required by the GMA In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. All plan elements must be consistent with relevant county-wide planning policies (CWPPs) and, where applicable, multi-county planning policies (MPPs), and the GMA. RCW 36.70A.100 and 210, WAC 365-196-305; 400(2)(c); 510 and 520 The comprehensive plan was VISION 2040 MPPs and the Yes As part of this periodic update the City will update the capital facilities element to be targets, updated VISION 2050 Multi-County Planning Policies (MPPs), Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs). Completed: ☐ Date: b. All plan elements must be consistent with each other. RCW 36.70A.070 (preamble) and WAC 365- 197-040 The plan is internally Yes The City will ensure that the plan remains internally consistent through the update process. Completed: ☐ Date: c. The plan must be coordinated with the plans of adjacent jurisdictions. RCW 36.70A.100 and WAC 365-196-520 Yes The current comprehensive plan was adopted as part of a process to be consistent with RCW 36.70A.100 and WAC 365-196- 520 Yes with adjacent jurisdictions will be met in many ways as part of the comprehensive plan update process. • The City will update comprehensive plan policies to be consistent with updated VISION 2050 Multi-County Planning Policies (MPPs) and the updated 2022 Policies (CPPs). This will ensure consistent planning practices with Snohomish County and the Cities within the county. • Consistent with RCW 36.70A.100, the city will coordinate other counties or cities with which the county or city has, in part, common borders or related regional issues. This includes close coordination with the City of Marysville. Coordination will include providing the Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 33 Consistency is required by the GMA being considered so comments can be considered and direct dialogue on important regional issues, such as regional transportation planning, where appropriate. the requirements of RCW 36.70A.040(8)(a-c) - Tribal coordination with the Stillaguamish Tribe Public Participation a. Plan ensures public participation in the comprehensive planning process. RCW 36.70A.020(11), .035, and .140, WAC 365- 196-600(3) provide possible public participation choices. Yes Participation Program Yes public engagement plan as part of the update process. In addition to public notices and Planning Commission, the City will also identify other tactics and strategies to engage the public. The City will be engaging with Completed: ☐ Date: b. If the process for making amendments is included in the comprehensive plan: • The plan provides that amendments are to be considered no more often than once a year, not including the exceptions described in RCW 36.70A.130(2), WAC365-196-640 • The plan sets out a procedure for adopting emergency amendments and defines emergency. RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b) and RCW 36.70A.390, WAC 365-196-650(4) Citizens have the opportunity to suggest changes each year as part of the annual amendment (docket) process. Appendix I: Concurrency Review and Reassessment No Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 34 Consistency is required by the GMA In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes c. Plan or program for monitoring how well comprehensive plan policies, development regulations, and other implementation techniques are achieving the comp plan’s goals and the goals of the GMA. WAC 365-196-660 discusses a potential review of growth management implementation on a systematic basis. New 2021-2022 legislation HB 1241 provides that those jurisdictions with a periodic update due in 2024 have until December 31, 2024 to submit. The legislation also changed the update cycle to every ten years after the 2024-2027 cycle. Jurisdictions that meet the new criteria described in RCW 36.70A.130(9) will be required to submit an years after the review and revision of their comprehensive plan. No Yes The City will include an implementation and monitoring section during the periodic update. Completed: ☐ Date: d. Considerations for preserving property rights. Local governments must evaluate proposed regulatory or administrative actions to assure that such actions do not result in an unconstitutional taking of private property. RCW 36.70A.370. For further guidance see the 2018 Advisory Memo on the Unconstitutional Taking of Private Property Yes Yes This language may be strengthened during the Periodic Update. Completed: ☐ Date: e. Encourage the involvement of citizens in the planning process, including the participation of vulnerable populations and overburdened communities, and ensure coordination between communities and jurisdictions to reconcile conflicts. HB 1181 (2023) revised RCW Planning Goals Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 35 Consistency is required by the GMA vulnerable populations and overburdened communities. RCW 36.70A.035 Public was not amended under HB 1181. PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 36 Section II: Development Regulations Must be consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan. RCW 36.70A.040, WAC 365-196-800 and 810 Critical Areas Regulations protecting critical areas are required by RCW 36.70A.060(2), RCW 36.70A.172(1), WAC 365-190-080 and WAC 365-195-900 through 925. Please visit Commerce’s Critical Areas webpage for resources and to complete the Critical Areas Checklist. Critical areas regulations must be reviewed and updated, as necessary, to incorporate legislative changes and best available science. Jurisdictions using periodic update grant funds to update critical areas regulations must submit the critical areas checklist as a first deliverable, in addition to this periodic update checklist. Zoning Code Note: Please review the new 2023 housing laws in the Washington State Housing Laws of 2019 through 2023 guidance, on Commerce’s Planning for Housing webpage and Appendix A of this checklist. In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes Notice: For more information about housing regulatory changes regarding supportive housing types, see Supportive Housing Types Review Checklist on the Updating GMA Housing Elements webpage. And for additional information on middle housing and ADU regulations, see the Middle Housing webpage. a. Zoning designations are consistent and implement land use designations that accommodate future housing needs by income bracket as allocated through the countywide planning process. (RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c) - amended in 2021 (HB 1220) No Yes Zoning designations to implement policies on housing needs will be integrated into the development regulations. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Permanent supportive housing or transitional housing must be allowed where residences and hotels are allowed. RCW 36.70A.390 new in 2021, (HB 1220 sections 3-5) “permanent supportive housing” is defined in RCW 36.70A.030; “transitional in RCW 84.36.043(2)(c) No Yes Will be amended to better state that transitional housing must be allowed where residences and hotels are allowed. May need to be updated to include language that specifies “permanent supportive housing” and/or “transitional housing” Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 37 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes c. housing must be allowed in any zones in which hotels are allowed, except in cities that have adopted an ordinance authorizing indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing in a majority of zones within one-mile of transit. RCW 35A.21.430 amended in 2021, RCW 35.21.683, amended in 2021, (HB 1220 sections 3-5) “emergency housing” is defined in RCW 84.36.043(2)(b) No Yes AMC 20.40.040 Permissible uses and Specific Exclusions: 15. “there shall be no more than one the city.” No language or mention of the use of hotels. Will need to be updated to include language of indoor emergency shelters and housing in zones in which hotels are allowed. Completed: ☐ Date: d. The number of unrelated persons that occupy a household or dwelling unit except as provided in state law, for short-term rentals, or occupant load per square foot shall not be regulated or limited by cities. (HB 5235), RCW 35.21.682 new in 2021, RCW 35A.21.314 new in 2022, RCW 36.01.227 new in 2021 No Yes There is currently no mention of occupant size regulations imposed by the city. May need to be updated to include HB 5235, RCW 35.21.682, RCW 35A.21.314, and RCW 36.01.227 Completed: ☐ Date: e. Limitations on the amount of parking local governments can require for low-income, senior, disabled and market-rate housing units located near high-quality transit service. RCW 36.70A.620 amended in 2020 and RCW 36.70A.600 amended in 2019 Yes AMC 20.72-1: Table of Parking Requirements Yes Parking requirements need to be amended to be consistent with RCW 36.70A.620. Completed: ☐ Date: f. Family day care providers are allowed in all residential dwellings located in areas zoned for residential or commercial RCW 36.70A.450. Review RCW 43.216.010 for definition of family day care provider and WAC 365-196-865 for more information. Yes AMC 20.40.120- Residential Zones Permissible Use Table No Requires a Special Use Permit. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 38 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes g. Manufactured housing is regulated the same as site built housing. RCW 35.21.684 amended in 2019, RCW 35.63.160, RCW 35A.21.312 amended in 2019 and RCW 36.01.225 amended in 2019. A local government may require that manufactured homes: (1) are new, (2) are set on a permanent foundation, and (3) comply with local design standards applicable to other homes in the neighborhood, but may not discriminate against consumer choice in housing. See: National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 No Yes Manufactured housing is regulated in 20.44.060- 062 but there is no language about regulation being the same as site built housing. Needs to be amended to be consistent with RCW 35.21.684, RCW 35.63.160, RCW 35A.21.312, RCW 36.01.225 Completed: ☐ Date: must adopt or amend by ordinance, and incorporate into their development regulations, zoning regulations and other official controls. RCW 36.70A.680 amended in 2023, RCW 36.70A.681 amended in 2023, RCW 36.70A.696 amended in 2023, RCW 36.70A.697 amended in 2020, RCW 36.70A.698 amended in 2020, RCW 36.70A.699 amended in 2020 See new Commerce guidance on the Middle Housing webpage Yes AMC 20.44.42(j) No The city updated the ADU regulations in 2022 and are reviewing current legislature and updating again in 2023 Completed: ☐ Date: i. Residential structures occupied by persons with handicaps, and the definition of “familial status” same as a similar residential structure occupied by a family or other unrelated individuals. No city or county planning under the GMA may enact or maintain ordinances, development regulations, or administrative practices which treat a residential structure occupied by persons with handicaps differently than a similar residential structure occupied by a family or other unrelated individuals. RCW 36.70A.410, RCW 70.128.140 and 150, RCW 49.60.222-225 and WAC 365-196- 860 Yes AMC 20.04.014(a)(3)(C) No AMC Glossary: “Family” 2.C “residential uses pursuant to the Fair Housing Act amendments as the same exists or is hereafter amended.” Being updated to be included in their Affordable Housing Section Title 20 of the AMC. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 39 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes j. Affordable housing programs enacted or expanded under RCW 36.70A.540 amended in 2022 comply with the requirements of this section. Examples of such programs may include: density bonuses within urban growth areas, height and bulk bonuses, fee waivers or exemptions, parking reductions, expedited permitting conditioned on provision of low- income housing units, or mixed-use projects. WAC 365-196-300 See also RCW 36.70A.545 and WAC 365-196- 410(2)(e)(i) “affordable housing” is defined in RCW 84.14.010 Review RCW 36.70A.620 amended in 2020, for minimum residential parking requirements. Yes AMC 20.44 Yes Will need to be amended to include RCW 36.70A.540. The City is currently developing an Affordable Housing Program, which will be in Title 20 of the AMC. Completed: ☐ Date: k. Limitations on regulating: outdoor safe parking efforts, indoor overnight shelters temporary small houses on property owned or controlled by a religious organization. RCW 36.01.290 amended in 2020 Yes AMC 20.44.035(3) Yes Will need to be amended to include amended RCW 36.01.290. Completed: ☐ Date: l. general aviation airports. RCW 36.70.547 and WAC 365-196-455. Incompatible uses include: high population intensity uses such as schools, wildlife attractants such as solid waste disposal sites, wastewater or stormwater treatment facilities, or stockyards. For more guidance, see WSDOT’s Aviation Land Use Compatibility Program. Yes AMC 20.38 No AMC 20.38.020 “discourages the siting of incompatible land uses adjacent to general aviation airports for the purposes of promoting the public health, safety, and general welfare of city residents and aviation users.” Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 40 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes m. If a U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) military base employing 100 or more personnel is within or adjacent to the jurisdiction, zoning should discourage the siting of incompatible uses adjacent to military base. RCW 36.70A.530(3) and WAC 365-196-475. Visit Military One Source to locate any bases in your area and help make determination of applicability. If applicable, inform the commander of the base regarding amendments to the comprehensive plan and development regulations on lands adjacent to the base. N/A No No military base within or adjacent to the City. Completed: ☐ Date: n. Electric vehicle infrastructure (jurisdiction specified: adjacent to Interstates 5, 90, 405 or state route 520 and other criteria) must be allowed as a use in all areas except those zoned for residential, resource use or critical areas. 36.70A.695 Yes AMC 20.44.098 No The City has an electric vehicle infrastructure code that needs to be updated in the future. The City will use the State’s model code and will be adopted through a code amendment. Completed: ☐ Date: Shoreline Master Program a. Zoning designations are consistent with Shoreline Master Program (SMP) environmental designations. RCW 36.70A.480 Ordinance No. 2012-No Completed: ☐ Date: b. If updated to meet RCW 36.70A.480 (2010), SMP regulations provide protection to critical areas in shorelines that is at least equal to the protection provided to critical areas by the critical areas ordinance. RCW 36.70A.480(4) and RCW 90.58.090(4) See Ecology’s shoreline planners’ toolbox for the SMP Checklist and other resources and Shoreline Master Programs Handbook webpage Yes Ordinance No. 2015- 015 No Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 41 Resource Lands Defined in RCW 36.70A.030(3), (12) and (17) and consistent with RCW 36.70A.060 and RCW 36.70A.170 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. Zoning is consistent with natural resource lands designations in the comprehensive plan and conserves natural resource lands. RCW 36.70A.060(3), WAC 365-196-815 and WAC 365- 190-020(6). Consider innovative zoning techniques to conserve agricultural lands of long- term significance RCW 36.70A.177(2). See also WAC 365-196-815(3) for examples of innovative zoning techniques. N/A No There are no designated natural resource lands inside the City. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Regulations to assure that use of lands adjacent to natural resource lands does not interfere with natural resource production. RCW 36.70A.060(1)(a) and WAC 365-190-040 Regulations require notice on all development permits and plats within 500 feet of designated natural resource lands that the property is within or near a designated natural resource land on which a variety of commercial activities may occur that are regulations to implement comprehensive plan N/A No There are no designated natural resource lands inside or adjacent to the City. Completed: ☐ Date: c. For designated agricultural land, regulations encourage nonagricultural uses to be limited to lands with poor soils or otherwise not suitable for agricultural purposes. Accessory uses should be located, designed and operated to support the continuation of agricultural uses. RCW 36.70A.177(3)(b) N/A No There are no designated agricultural lands inside the City. Completed: ☐ Date: d. Designate mineral lands and associated regulations as required by RCW 36.70A.131and WAC 365-190-040(5). For more information review the WA State Dept. of Natural Resources (DNR)’s Geology Division site N/A N/A There are no designated mineral lands inside the City. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 42 Siting Essential Public Facilities Regulations for siting essential public facilities should be consistent with RCW 36.70A.200 and consider WAC 365-196-550. Essential public facilities include those facilities that are typically difficult to site, such as airports, state education facilities, state or regional transportation facilities, state and local correctional facilities, solid waste handling facilities, and in-patient facilities including substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities, group homes, and secure community transition facilities. Regulations may be specific to a local jurisdiction, but may be part of county-wide planning policies In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes Regulations for CWPPs include a process for siting EPFs and ensure EPFs are not precluded. RCW 36.70A.200 amended in 2023, WAC 365-196-550(6) lists process for siting EPFs. WAC 365-196-550(3) details preclusions. EPFs should be located of known hazardous areas. Visit Commerce’s Behavioral Health Facilities Program page for information on establishing or expanding new capacity for behavioral health EPFs. Note: RCW 36.70A.200 amended by SB 5536 to include EPFs for opioid treatment programs Yes AMC 20.16.270(b)(2) Yes The requirement for the siting of EFPs is mentioned. In the future code modified to be more robust. Completed: ☐ Date: Subdivision Code a. Subdivision regulations are consistent with and implement comprehensive plan policies. RCW 36.70A.030(8), RCW 36.70A.040(4) Yes AMC 20.16 No Completed: ☐ Date: establish adequacy of public facilities. RCW 58.17.110 amended in 2018 • Streets or roads, sidewalks, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, and other features that assure safe walking conditions for students. • Potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, and drainage ways. RCW 36.70A.590 amended 2018 • Open spaces, parks and recreation, and playgrounds • Schools and school grounds Other items related to the public health, safety and general welfare, WAC 365-196-820(1). Yes AMC 20.16.425.(a)(7) No Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 43 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes c. Preliminary subdivision approvals under RCW 58.17.140 and RCW 58.17.170 are valid for a period of five or seven years (previously five years). Note: preliminary plat approval is valid for: seven years if the date of preliminary plat approval is on or before December 31, 2014; five years if the preliminary plat approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015; and ten years if the project is located within city limits, not subject to the shoreline management act, and the preliminary plat is approved on or before December 31, 2007. Yes AMC 20.16.280(b) Yes Completed: ☐ Date: d. Include in short plat regulations procedures for unit lot subdivisions allowing division of a parent lot into separately owned unit lots. RCW 58.17.060 (3) new in 2023 by SB 5258 - section 11 Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 44 Stormwater In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. Regulations protect water quality and implement actions to mitigate or cleanse drainage, flooding, and storm water run-off that pollute waters of the state, including Puget Sound or waters entering Puget Sound. RCW 36.70A.070(1) Regulations may include: adoption of a stormwater manual consistent with Ecology’s latest manual for Eastern or Western Washington, adoption of a clearing and grading ordinance –See 2005 Technical Guidance Document for Clearing and Grading in Western Washington. Adoption of a low See Puget Sound Partnership’s 2012 Low Impact Development guidance and Ecology’s 2013 Eastern Washington Low Impact Development guidance. Additional Resources: Federal Grants to Protect Puget Sound Watersheds, Building Cities in the Rain, Ecology Stormwater Manuals, Puget Sound Partnership Action Agenda Yes AMC 13.28.150 No The City has adopted the of the Washington Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. AMC 13.28.150(A)(3): The city's LID code and procedures shall be specified in Title 20 — Land Use Code and in the city engineering standards. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Provisions for corrective action for failing septic systems that pollute waters of the state. RCW 36.70A.070(1). See also: DOH Wastewater Management, Ecology On-Site Sewage System Projects & Funding No Yes Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 45 Organic Materials Management Facilities New in 2022, HB 1799 added a section to the GMA aimed at reducing the volumes of organic materials collected in conjunction with other solid waste and delivered to landfills, supporting productive uses of organic material waste and reduction of methane gas (a greenhouse gas). In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes New section RCW 36.70A.142; new in 2022 legislation HB 1799: Development regulations newly developed, updated, or amended after January 1, 2025 allow for the siting of organic materials (OM) management facilities as identified in local solid waste management plans (SWMP) to meet OM reduction and diversion goals. Siting to meet criteria described in RCW 70A.205.040(3) See also RCW 36.70.330. For applicability, see RCW 70A.205.540 Yes AMC 20.04, AMC 20.40.140, AMC 20.44. Yes The city has a current contract with Waste Management that provides solid waste collection, recycling, and compostable organics for all residents in the city. An organics material facility could be sited the General Industrial zone of the city and would be considered a permissible use under “Solid Waste Recycling Center”. Completed: ☐ Date: Impact Fees May impose impact fees on development activity as part of the financing for public facilities, provided that the financing for system improvements to serve new development must provide for a balance between impact fees and other sources of public funds; cannot rely solely on impact fees. a. If adopted, impact fees are applied consistent with RCW 82.02.050 amended in 2015, RCW 82.02.060 amended in 2023 by SB 5258, .070, .080, .090 amended in 2018 and .100. WAC 365-196-850 provides guidance on how impact fees should be implemented and spent. Yes AMC 20.90 Yes May need to be updated to include most recent amendments. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Jurisdictions collecting impact fees must adopt and maintain a system for the deferred collection of impact fees for single-family detached and attached residential construction, consistent with RCW 82.02.050(3) amended in 2016 Yes AMC 20.90.420 No Current code includes updated amendment. Completed: ☐ Date: c. If adopted, limitations on impact fees for early learning facilities RCW 82.02.060 amended in 2021 No Yes City will evaluate exemptions during the periodic update. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 46 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes d. If adopted, exemption of impact fees for low- income and emergency housing development RCW 82.02.060 amended in 2023. See also definition change in RCW 82.02.090(1)(b) amended in 2018 Yes AMC 20.90.250(b) No Current code includes updated amendment. Completed: ☐ Date: e. Ensure impact fees are not assessed on the construction of accessory dwelling units that are greater than 50 percent (50%) of the impact fees that would be imposed on the principal unit. RCW 36.70A.681 new in 2023 by HB 1337 Completed: ☐ Date: f. The schedule of impact fees reflects the proportionate impact of new housing units, including multifamily and condominium units, or trips generated, in the housing unit in order to produce a proportionally lower impact fee for smaller housing units. RCW 82.02.060 amended in 2023 by SB 5258 Completed: ☐ Date: Concurrency and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ensures consistency in land use approval and the development of adequate public facilities as plans are implemented, maximizes the efficiency of existing transportation systems, limits the impacts of traffic and reduces pollution. a. The transportation concurrency requirement includes specific language that prohibits development when level of service standards for transportation facilities cannot be met. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(b) amended in 2023, WAC 365- 196-840. Note: Concurrency is required for transportation, but may also be applied to park facilities, etc. Yes AMC 20.90.045(a)(2) No Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 47 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes b. Measures exist to bring into compliance locally owned, or locally or regionally operated, transportation facilities or services that are below the levels of service established in the comprehensive plan. and (D), RCW 36.70A.070(6)(b) amended in 2023 Levels of service can be established for automobiles, pedestrians and bicycles. See WAC 365-196-840(3) on establishing an appropriate level of service. No Yes see if LOS is met. While development is not meet concurrency through a Traffic Impact Analysis. The City is changing the model for Traffic Impact Fees from a LOS standard for intersections and PM Peak Hour Trips to a LOS standard based on the individual to allow for funding to be used for Multi-Modal Transportation. This new system will be updated within the AMC. Completed: ☐ Date: c. Highways of statewide significance (HSS) are exempt from the concurrency ordinance. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iii)(C) No Yes In the comprehensive plan, transportation element Completed: ☐ Date: d. Traffic demand management (TDM) requirements are consistent with the comprehensive plan. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(vi) Examples may include requiring new development to be oriented towards transit streets, pedestrian-oriented site and building design, and requiring bicycle and pedestrian connections to street and trail networks. WAC 365-196-840(4) recommends adopting methodologies that analyze the transportation system from a comprehensive, multimodal perspective. No No The City maintains a TDM program. The City is changing the model for Traffic Impact Fees from a LOS standard for intersections and PM Peak Hour Trips to a LOS standard based on the individual to allow for funding to be used for Multi-Modal Transportation. Completed: ☐ Date: e. If required by RCW 82.70, a commute trip reduction (CTR) ordinance to achieve reductions in the proportion of single-occupant vehicle commute trips has been adopted. The ordinance should be consistent with comprehensive plan policies for CTR and Department of Transportation rules. Yes AMC 10.80 No Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 48 PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 49 Tribal Participation in Planning new in 2022 (see HB 1717) A federally recognized Indian tribe may voluntarily choose to participate in the county or regional planning process. See Commerce’s new Tribal Planning Coordination for GMA webpage for guidance and staff contacts. In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. Mutually agreeable memorandum of agreement between local governments and tribes in regard to collaboration and participation in the planning process unless otherwise agreed at the end of a mediation period RCW 36.70A.040(8)(a) new in 2022. No Yes RCW 36.70A.040(8)(a). The City has quarterly meetings with the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians and there have been discussions to develop a memorandum of understanding, however the document has Completed: ☐ Date: b. Policies consistent with countywide planning policies that address the protection of tribal cultural resources in collaboration with federally recognized Indian tribes that are invited, provided that a tribe, or more than one tribe, chooses to participate in the process. RCW 36.70A.210(3)(i) new in 2022. No Yes RCW 36.70A.210(3)(i) Currently, the Tulalip Tribes of Washington and the Stillaguamish developments. The City has quarterly meetings with the Stillaguamish Tribe of Indians and there have been discussions to develop a memorandum of understanding, Completed: ☐ Date: Regulations to Implement Optional Elements a. New fully contained communities are consistent with comprehensive plan policies, RCW 36.70A.350 and WAC 365-196-345 N/A No master planned but will not be a fully contained community. The City is amending the code to add that master planned neighborhoods are to be developed with a Completed: ☐ Date: b. If applicable, master planned resorts are consistent with comprehensive plan policies, RCW 36.70A.360, RCW 36.70A.362 and WAC 365- 196-460 N/A No Completed: ☐ Date: c. If applicable, major industrial developments and master planned locations outside of UGAs are consistent with comprehensive plan policies, RCW 36.70A.365, RCW 36.70A.367 and WAC 365- 196-465 N/A No Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 50 d. Regulations include procedures to identify, preserve, and/or monitor historical or archaeological resources. RCW 36.70A.020(13), WAC 365-196-450 Yes AMC 20.98.200(d)(1)(D) No Completed: ☐ Date: In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes e. Other development regulations needed to implement comprehensive plan policies such as energy, sustainability or design are adopted. WAC 365-196-445 N/A No consistent with the comprehensive plan. Completed: ☐ Date: f. Design guidelines for new development are clear and easy to understand; administration procedures are clear and defensible Yes AMC 20.46 No town residential design standards, and design guidelines for Olympic Avenue. The old town residential design standards have been updated to reflect middle housing requirements. In the future the city will be changing the Olympic Avenue design guidelines to standards and developing Completed: ☐ Date: ascertainable guideline, standard or criterion by building design is permissible under that development regulation. May not result in a reduction in density, height, bulk or scale below the generally applicable development regulations for a development proposal in the applicable zone. RCW 36.70A.630 new in 2023 by HB 1293 Completed: ☐ Date: Project Review Procedures In 2023, SB 5290 substantially amended local permit review processes. Codification and additional resources from Commerce are forthcoming. Project review processes integrate permit and environmental review. RCW 36.70A.470, RCW Yes AMC 20.16 No Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 51 Also: WAC 365-196-845, WAC 197-11(SEPA Rules), WAC 365-197 (Project Consistency Rule, Commerce, 2001) and Ecology SEPA Handbook. Integrated permit and environmental review procedures for: • Notice of application • Notice of complete application • One open-record public hearing • Combining public hearings & decisions for multiple permits • Notice of decision • One closed-record appeal Plan & Regulation Amendments If procedures governing comprehensive plan amendments are part of the code, then assure the following are true: In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. Regulations limit amendments to the comprehensive plan to once a year exceptions). RCW 36.70A.130(2) and WAC 365- 196-640(3) Yes AMC 20.96.010(c) No Completed: ☐ Date: b. Regulations define emergency for an emergency plan amendment. RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b) and WAC 365-196-640(4) AMC No Completed: ☐ Date: c. Regulations include a docketing process for requesting and considering plan amendments. RCW 36.70A.130(2), RCW 36.70A.470, and WAC 365-196-640(6) Yes AMC 20.96.022 No Completed: ☐ Date: d. A process has been established for early and continuous public notification and participation in the planning process. RCW 36.70A.020(11), RCW 36.70A.035 and RCW 36.70A.140. See WAC 365- Yes AMC 20.96.120 No Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 52 Appendix A: Housing unit minimums per population See Commerce’s Middle Housing webpage for more information and the Middle Housing Fact Sheet for the list of cities that must comply with the following requirements. Cities with a population less than 25,000 but within the Contiguous UGA with the largest city in a county with a population greater than 275,000 In Current zoning? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes Zoning and development regulations allow at least two residential units per lot on all lots zoned predominantly for residential use, unless the lot is smaller than 1,000 square feet. RCW 36.70A.635 (1) and (6) HB 1110 Completed: ☐ Date: Cities with a population between 25,000 and 75,000 In Current zoning? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes meeting requirements. e. A process exists to assure that proposed regulatory or administrative actions do not result in an unconstitutional taking of private property RCW 36.70A.370. See the on the Unconstitutional Taking of Private Property No Yes The city attorney holds this document. May need to be reviewed and updated in code if deemed necessary. Completed: ☐ Date: f. Provisions ensure adequate enforcement of regulations, such as zoning and critical area ordinances (civil or criminal penalties). See implementation strategy in WAC 365-196-650(1). Yes AMC 20.28 No Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 53 Cities with a population between 25,000 and 75,000 a. Zoning and development regulations allow at least: • two residential units on each lot, • four residential units on each lot if at least one unit is affordable, unless the lot is smaller than 1,000 square feet. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Zoning and development regulations allow at least four residential units on each lot, within ¼ mile walking distance of a major transit stop. Completed: ☐ Date: Cities with a population greater than 75,000 In Current zoning? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. Zoning and development regulations allow at least: • four residential units on each lot, • six residential units on each lot if at least two units are affordable, unless the lot is smaller than 1,000 square feet. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Zoning and development regulations allow at least six residential units on each lot, within ¼ mile walking distance of a major transit stop. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED NOVEMBER 2023 54 Appendix B: Element updates per HB 1181 Appendix <INSERT> DRAFT Capital Projects Prioritization Matrix for Neighborhoods and City Owned Facilities # Criteria Description Value Scoring Description Value Weight Score 1 Project Category Five categories of projects that support different classifications of projects which vary depending on importance and impact to the public; assign the category that most aligns the project with the description. 100 Essential Projects ‐ this category includes capital projects that have a legal, safety, these requirements would lead to legal action, fines, penalties or high risk of liability against the City. 25% 80 Priority Projects ‐ this category includes projects required to maintain critical components in a state of good repair. These projects are not mandatory but will maintain critical infrastructure at current service levels. 60 Efficiency or Cost Savings Projects ‐ These projects will result in operational cost savings over the life of the capital investment and will provide financial benefits in the future. 40 State of Good Repair/Lifecycle ‐ This category includes projects that maintain existing capital infrastructure. These projects are not mandatory but if the project is not undertaken the current level of service/condition of the capital asset will decline. 20 Improvement (non‐essential) ‐ This category includes: projects that will increase current service level; new facilities; expansion of existing facilities or new initiatives. 2 Alignment with Adopted Goals, Policies, and Plans The project’s alignment with strategic goals as set 100 Directly aligned with goals and policies of adopted Comprehensive Plan and subarea plan (if relevant) or other adopted plan (e.g., Transportation Master Plan) 20% 50 Indirectly linked to the goals and policies of adopted Comprehensive Plan and subarea plan or other adopted plan 0 No alignment with any adopted goals and policies Appendix <INSERT> DRAFT Capital Projects Prioritization Matrix for Neighborhoods and City Owned Facilities # Criteria Description Max Value Scoring Description Assigned Value Weight Score 3 Risk Mitigation Related to Public Health and Safety The extent to which the project will positively impact/mitigate risk related to public health and safety 100 Significant impact 15% 50 Moderate impact 10 Low impact 0 No impact 4 Financing and Funding 100 Financed entirely from external sources and must proceed immediately to leverage funds (which could include awarded grants to the City) 15% 90 Financed entirely from external sources 75 75% ‐ 99% of project financing is from external sources 50 50% ‐ 74% of project financing is from external sources 25 25% ‐ 49% of project financing is from external sources 10 Less than 25% of project financing is from external sources 0 Financed entirely from debt, tax levy or tax levy funded reserves Appendix <INSERT> DRAFT Capital Projects Prioritization Matrix for Neighborhoods and City Owned Facilities # Criteria Description Max Value Scoring Description Assigned Value Weight Score 5 Addresses Neighborhood and Community Needs (and Addresses in Service Levels) Project will fill a need and address deficiency in service levels to the public 100 There is a demonstrated need within the neighborhood or community for the project and it addresses service level deficiency helps to achieve a level of service standard, as applicable (or generally improve service levels) 15% 50 project is likely to address a neighborhood or community need and to improve level of service/service levels 0 There is not yet a defined or identified need and the project would not improve level of service/service levels 6 Community Economic Impact Impact on and economy in terms of revenue 100 Generates a significant economic benefit to the local economy 5% 50 Generates a moderate economic benefit for the local economy 10 Limited, minimal or no economic benefit for the local economy 7 Environmental Sustainability and Resiliency The extent to which the project will improve environmental sustainability and resiliency 5% Total: 100% Proposed Parks Capital Improvement Plan 2025-2029 SR 531 Trail east of 67th Avenue to SR 9 trail 2025/2026/2027 TBD 211th Street Trail trail 2025/2026 500,000$ construct new paved trail Bill Quake Park field lights 2028/2029 250,000$ Haller Park parking lot 2027 350,000$ Parks capital pave gravel parking lot Jensen Park restrooms/parking 2025 400,000$ Stormwater Wetland Park access 2029 900,000$ Waldo E Evans Park field lights 2027 100,000$ Staff Report & Recommendation 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update – PLN #1172 Page 1 of 11 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT & RECOMMENDATION To: City Council From: Amy Rusko, Planning Manager Meeting Date: November 25, 2024 Date Prepared: November 20, 2024 Regarding: 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update – PLN #1172 A. INTRODUCTION The city is proposing the adoption of the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update. The last Comprehensive Plan for the City of Arlington was adopted in 2018 (2015 Periodic Update). The State of Washington extended the eight-year deadline for completion (2023) to December 2024. The purpose of the Comprehensive Plan is for the City to supply an overview of comprehensive planning for the city including required and optional elements under the Growth Management Act for the next 20 years. The mandatory elements include Land Use, Housing, Capital Facilities Plan, Utilities, Transportation, and Climate Change and Resiliency. The optional elements include Economic Development, Parks and Recreation, Public Safety, and Subareas. The Comprehensive Plan articulates a series of goals, objectives, policies, actions, and standards that are intended to guide the day-to-day decisions of elected officials and staff. The Comprehensive Plan must meet Washington Administrative Code, Revised Code of Washington, Puget Sound Regional Council Vision 2050, and Snohomish County Countywide Planning Policies. The State of Washington changed the periodic update from 8 to 10 years, the next update will occur in 2034. B. GENERAL INFORMATION Applicant: City of Arlington Project Description: 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update Requested Action: City Council Approval C. DETAILED PROJECT INFORMATION The City of Arlington is updating its Comprehensive Plan, Arlington in Motion – 2044 and Beyond, and has completed a programmatic Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) analyzing a range of potential alternatives for long range growth in Arlington. As the City amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate growth targets allocated by Washington State and Snohomish County for increase population, housing units, and jobs, it is imperative to understand what environmental impacts may occur with various levels of growth. The DEIS analyzes three different alternatives for future growth through the year 2044. Alternative 1: No Action Alternative 2: Slow to Moderate Pace of Growth, Alternative 3: Faster Pace of Growth Community and Economic Development Planning Division 18204 59th Avenue NE, Arlington, WA 98223 Staff Report & Recommendation 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update – PLN #1172 Page 2 of 11 The City is proposing updates and amendments to the Arlington Comprehensive Plan, that bring the plan into alignment with state, regional, and county goals, policies, and planning provisions, along with updated content of plan elements to support ongoing growth through 2044. The way the city grows and at what pace would influence the provision of infrastructure development and improvements – including transportation and utilities, as well as parks and recreation, schools, City operations, and other public services. The DEIS analyzes potential impacts related to the following topics: Consistency with Plans and Policies; Natural Environment; Land Use Patterns, Urban Form, and Housing; Multimodal Transportation; Public Services; Utilities; and Community Design and Aesthetics. The EIS studies alternatives for growth so that the city can proactively plan for this growth now and in the coming years. All documents related to the 2024 Comprehensive Plan can be viewed on the following city website: http://www.arlingtonwa.gov/784/2024-Comprehensive-Plan-Update. Please visit the website to review the documents. D. REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS, FINDINGS, AND CONCLUSIONS 1. SEPA COMPLIANCE: Type of Determination Issued Date Distribution and Public Notice SEPA Determination of Significance and Request for Comments on Scope of Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for Arlington 2024-2044 Comprehensive Plan Update 11/1/2023 – 11/30/2023 City 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Website City Public Notice Website Arlington Library, City Hall, Smokey Point Post Office Posting Boards Review Agencies Email Distribution List Party of Record Email Distribution The Herald Published Date – 11/1/2023 Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update 10/4/2024 – 11/4/2024 City 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Website City Public Notice Website Arlington Library and City Hall Posting Boards Review Agencies Email Distribution List Party of Record Email Distribution The Herald Published Date – 10/4/2024 2. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Public comments received during the official SEPA public comment periods and throughout the entire process of the Comprehensive Plan Period Update. Comment Summary Date Received City Response Snohomish County Public Utility District No. 1 Comments for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan (Attachment 1) 10/21/2022 Comments were reviewed and incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Comprehensive Plan Open House Public Comments at the Meeting (Notes from Meeting – Not Attached) 4/27/2023 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the Staff Report & Recommendation 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update – PLN #1172 Page 3 of 11 Comment Summary Date Received City Response Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (Attachment 3) 11/21/2023 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Washington State Department of Transportation Comments for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan (Attachment 4) 11/30/2023 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Master Builders Association Comments for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan – Policy Analysis Request (Attachment 5) 1/23/2024 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Puget Sound Energy Comments for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update: Utility Element (Attachment 6) 1/24/2024 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Puget Sound Energy Comments for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan (Attachment 7) 4/11/2024 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Washington State Department of Natural Resources and Washington Geological Survey Comments for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan (Attachment 8) 6/7/2024 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Ecosystem Coordination Board Puget Sound Partnership Comments for the Critical Areas Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update (Attachment 9) 8/14/2024 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Master Builders Association Comments for the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan (Attachment 10) 9/10/2024 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Washington State Department of Natural Resources and Washington Geological Survey Comments for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan (Attachment 11) 10/25/2024 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Puget Sound Regional Council Comments for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan (Attachment 12) 10/25/2024 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Planning Commissioner – Gayle Roeber Comments for the DEIS (Attachment 13) 10/26/2024 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Comments for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan (Attachment 14) 10/28/2024 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Department of Commerce Comments for the Expanded Housing Comments (Attachment 15) 10/24/2024 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Staff Report & Recommendation 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update – PLN #1172 Page 4 of 11 Comment Summary Date Received City ResponseDepartment of Commerce Comments for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan (Attachment 16) 10/29/2024 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Planning Commissioner Gayle Roeber Comments on the 2024 Comprehensive Plan (Attachment 17) 10/30/2024 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Master Builders Association Comments regarding Housing and Permitting. (Attachment 18) 11/1/2024 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife Comments for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan (Attachment 19) 11/4/2024 incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan Update where needed to reflect the suggested information provided. 3. PUBLIC NOTIFICATION/INVOLVEMENT: a. Public Engagement and Outreach to the Community Public Engagement and Meeting Date(s) Distribution and Public Notice Community and Economic Development Focus Group Meetings Every Tuesday 4:30 – 6:30 pm Focus Group Meeting had been held weekly from January 2016 to present. The Focus Group developed the Mission and Visions Statements for the Comprehensive Plan, as well as reviewed and commented on all goals Arlington Kick-Off and Visioning Survey 10/2022 – 5/2023 City of Arlington E-News on City Website and through Email City 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Website City Public Notice Website City of Arlington Social Media Posts Project Flyers Distributed throughout Arlington Hometown Halloween 10/29/2022 In Person at the City Hall Plaza Handing Out Postcards that had the Comprehensive Plan Survey Information. Holiday Santa 12/3/2022 In Person at the City Hall parking lot during the Santa Parade Handing Out Postcards that had the Comprehensive Plan Survey Information. Commission and City Council Presentation 1/23/2023 City 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Website City Council Agenda Online City Council Email Distribution List Comprehensive Plan Open House 4/27/2023 Postcard Mailed to All Property Owners in the City Limits of Arlington City Public Notice Website City 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Website Arlington Street Fair 7/7/2023 – 7/9/2023 In Person at City Booth and Presentations in City Council Chambers Community Survey Conducted by ZenCity 10/1/2023 – 1/20/2024 Online Survey completed by City of Arlington through the Community Engagement Director City of Arlington Social Media Posts Staff Report & Recommendation 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update – PLN #1172 Page 5 of 11 Public Engagement and Meeting Date(s) Distribution and Public Notice SEPA Scoping Meeting for the Environmental Impact Statement 11/7/2023 City Public Notice Website City 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Website Arlington Library, City Hall, Smokey Point Post Office Posting Boards Party of Record Email Distribution The Herald Published Date – 11/1/2023 Arlington Street Fair 7/11/2024 – 7/13/2024 In Person at City Booth. Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) Open House 10/22/2024 City Public Notice Website Arlington Library and City Hall Posting Boards Party of Record Email Distribution The Herald Published Date – 10/4/2024 b. Public Meetings, Presentations, and Required Agency Review Public Notice and Meeting Type Meeting Date(s) Discussion, Distribution and Public Notice Planning Commission Meeting 2/15/2022 Discussion about the Comprehensive Plan RFP and Scope of Work. Planning Commission Workshop 12/6/2022 Update on public engagement regarding the Comprehensive Plan survey at the Holiday events. Planning Commission Meeting 1/19/2023 Discussion regarding the Comprehensive Plan Joint Meeting with City Council, process of the Comprehensive Plan and more items will be coming forward for review and comments. Planning Commission Workshop 2/7/2023 Recap of the Joint Planning Commission and City Council Workshop and Presentation, along with discussion around subareas, neighborhoods, and public engagement. Planning Commission Workshop 5/2/2023 Staff updated the Commission on the Comprehensive Plan Open House and discussion occurred regarding the open house topics. Planning Commission Meeting 9/19/2023 Staff updated the Commission on the progress of the Comprehensive Plan, showed some maps of the Subareas and highlighted changes. Preliminary Books (Elements) were shown in word format, and talked about pictures and graphics that would be added. Additional discussion about the process of the goals and policies, timelines for review, public engagement, and updates on all the Books and when the Commissioners would start seeing drafts. Planning Commission Workshop 11/7/2023 Staff presented the Draft Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies and provided an overview of the Commissioners role with reviewing the Plan (two new members to the board). There was discussion regarding the goals and the city’s accountability process to ensure we are reaching these goals. Staff provided information about a monitoring and implementation section of the Plan to track the progress. Additional conversation about the implementation of the Plan occurred. Staff Report & Recommendation 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update – PLN #1172 Page 6 of 11 Public Notice and Meeting Date(s) Discussion, Distribution and Public Notice Planning Commission Meeting 11/21/2023 Discussion about the comments the Commissioners had submitted on the goals and policies, along with a reminder to submit comments to staff. Planning Commission Workshop 12/5/2023 Staff provided a workplan for the Comprehensive Plan, incorporated in the same document with other projects for 2024, and description of the expected timing. Planning Commission Meeting 1/18/2024 Staff provided the Commissioners drafts of a new chapter for review and comments and reminded the Board that all documents will be uploaded into the Teams folders. Commission Public Meeting 2024 Docket Presentation 2/06/2024 and 2/22/2024 City Public Notice Website Planning Commission Agenda Online Planning Commission Email Distribution List The Herald Published Date – 2/1/2024 Planning Commission Workshop 3/5/2024 Staff provided the Commissions drafts of the goals and policies for review through Teams. Discussion revolved around the process for reviewing and providing comments. Meeting 2024 Docket Presentation 3/11/2024 and 3/18/2024 City Public Notice Website City Council Agenda Online City Council Email Distribution List Planning Commission Meeting 3/19/2024 Staff provided the Commissioners drafts of a new chapter for review and comments and reminded the Board that all documents will be uploaded into the Teams folders. Planning Commission Workshop 7/2/2024 Staff updated the Commissioners on the Comprehensive Plan work, discussed the city street fair booth for public engagement, and provided a proposed upcoming schedule for meetings. Planning Commission Workshop 9/3/2024 Staff presented the Draft Introduction and Community Profile portion of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff also presented the Draft Comprehensive Plan Books, there was a lengthy discussion about multiple items, including background information, citizen engagement, neighborhood charts and graphs, functionality of the Plan, appreciative for images, links, and graphs, along with how staff wanted to see comments from the commissioners on language and technical edits. Planning Commission Meeting 9/17/2024 Staff presented the updated timeline for the Comprehensive would be posted online for review and comments. Washington State Department of Commerce Review (RCW 36.70A.106) N/A Date Sent for 60-Day Review – 9/18/2024 Deadline for 60-Day Review – 11/17/2024 Finalized Comment Letters Sent to City – 10/29/2024 Staff Report & Recommendation 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update – PLN #1172 Page 7 of 11 Public Notice and Meeting Type Meeting Date(s) Discussion, Distribution and Public Notice Puget Sound Regional Council Review N/A Date Sent for 30-Day Review – 9/20/2024 Deadline for 30-Day Review – 10/20/2024 Meeting with City Staff – 10/23/2024 Finalized Comment Letter Sent to City – 10/25/2024 Planning Commission Meeting 10/15/2024 Staff discussed with the Commissioners that the full draft of the Comprehensive Plan was online for review and to make sure to view and provide any additional comments. Staff reminded Commissioners that the November meetings would be the final Comprehensive Plan review at the workshop and a public hearing would be on the meeting date. Planning Commission Workshop 11/5/2024 City 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Website Planning Commission Agenda Online Planning Commission Email Distribution List Arlington Update October 2024 Edition - Mailed Planning Commission Public Hearing 11/19/2024 City 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Website City Public Notice Website Arlington Library and City Hall Posting Boards Party of Record Email Distribution Arlington Update October 2024 Edition - Mailed Planning Commission Agenda Online Planning Commission Email Distribution List The Herald Published Date – 11/1/2024 City Council Workshop 11/25/2024 City 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Website City Council Agenda Online City Council Email Distributions List Arlington Update October 2024 Edition - Mailed City Council Public Hearing 12/2/2024 City 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Website City Public Notice Website Arlington Library and City Hall Posting Boards Party of Record Email Distribution Arlington Update October 2024 Edition - Mailed City Council Agenda Online City Council Email Distribution List The Herald Published Date – 11/19/2024 and 11/26/2024 4. PUBLIC COMMENTS AT PLANNING COMMISSION AND CITY COUNCIL All written public comments received are attached to this staff report as Exhibit A and labeled with the corresponding Attachment numbers. Staff Report & Recommendation 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update – PLN #1172 Page 8 of 11 5. COMPLIANCE WITH RCW 36.70A Regulation Meets uncoordinated and unplanned growth, together with interest in the conservation and the wise use of our lands, pose a threat to the environment, sustainable high quality of life enjoyed by residents of this state. It is in the public interest that citizens, communities, local governments, and the private sector cooperate and coordinate with one another in comprehensive land use planning. Further, the legislature finds that it is in the public interest that economic development programs be shared with communities experiencing insufficient economic growth. the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update. The along with public interest that provides protection to development, and the health, safety, and high quality of live to city residents. comprehensive plans and development regulations of those counties and cities that are required or choose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040. (1) Urban growth. Encourage development in urban services exist or can be provided in an efficient manner. (2) Reduce sprawl. Reduce the inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling, low-density development. (3) Transportation. Encourage efficient multimodal transportation systems that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and per capita vehicle priorities and coordinated with county and city comprehensive plans. (4) Housing. Plan for and accommodate housing affordable to all economic segments of the population of this state, promote a variety of residential densities and housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock. (5) Economic development. promote economic opportunity for all citizens of growth in areas experience insufficient economic naturafacilities. following required goals: (1) The city provides land uses that can support future population growth and employment growth, along with the needed infrastructure to generations to come. (2) The city has reduced sprawl by allowing vertical density to occur in the mixed-use areas of the create smaller footprint homes and lots within the same square footage as a low-density home. (3) The city has developed a multimodal transportation plan serving Arlington residents, transit, rail transportation, non-motorized facilities (bike lands, multiuse trails, sidewalks, Airport. (4) The city provides a mix of housing types throughout all the residential zones. Proposed mixed-income and mixed-that are stable and sustainable while allowing people to lead healthy and active lifestyles. (5) The city’s primary objective is to create conditions for economic growth and to improve living- natural environment and unique economic hubs. This includes the commercial and mixed-use occupations. Staff Report & Recommendation 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update – PLN #1172 Page 9 of 11 Regulation Meets (6) Property rights. Private property shall not be taken for public use without just compensation landowners shall be protected from arbitrary and discriminatory actions. (7) Permits. Applications for both state and local governments should be processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure predictability. (8) Natural resources industries. Maintain and enhance natural resource-fisheries industries. Encourage the conservation uses. (9) Open space and recreation. Retain open space and green space, enhance recreational opportunities, enhance fish and wildlife habitat, increase access to natural resource lands and water, and develop parks and recreation facilities. Environment. Protect and enhance the environment and enhance the state’s high quality of life, including air and water quality and the availability of water. Citizen participation and coordination. Encourage process, including the participation of vulnerable populations and overburdened communities, and ensure coordination between communities and jurisdictions to reconcile conflicts. Public facilities and services. Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support established minimum standards. Historic preservation. Identify and encourage the preservation of lands, sites, and structures, that have historical or archaeological significance. Climate change and resiliency. Ensure that comprehensive plans, development regulations, and regional policies, plans, and strategies under RCW 36.70A.210 and chapter 47.80 RCW adapt to support reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and per capita vehicle miles traveled; prepare for climate impacts and natural hazards; protect and justice. Shorelines of the state. For shorelines of the state, management act as set forth in RCW 90.58.020 shall be considered an element of the county’s or city’s comprehensive plan. allow private property to be taken for public use without just compensation. (7) The city has adopted requirements from Senate Bill 5290 that implements reduces timelines for streamlines the entire permitting process. (8) The city does not have zoning designations related to timber production, agriculture, and discourage incompatible uses with neighboring agricultural lands are present. (9) The city has a Parks and Recreation Master Plan that strives to ensure sufficient, diverse, high- quality, equitably distributed open space, trail, services throughout Arlington. (10) The city’s primary objective is to integrate the sustainable manner and includes preservation, resources, eco-emissions reduction, climate change resilience, increased tree canopy, and livability. (11) The city has provided twelve specific public events for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update, as shown in (3)(a) above, along with multiple public workshops and meetings with the Planning Commission and City Council, as shown in (3)(b) above. (12) The city has both publicly owned and privately telecommunication services. facilities and utilities serving Arlington support economy. (13) The city follows the guidance and requirements Archaeology and Historic Preservation for sites within Arlington. (14) The city’s primary objective is to integrate the sustainable manner and includes preservation, resources, eco-emissions reduction, climate change resilience, increased tree canopy, and livability. (15) The city has a Shoreline Master Plan that provides regulations in accordance with RCW 90.58.020. Staff Report & Recommendation 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update – PLN #1172 Page 10 of 11 Regulation Meets (1) Each county that has both a population of fifty thousand or more and, until May 16, 1995, has had its population increase by more than ten percent in the previous ten years or, on or after May 16, 1995, has had its population increase by more than seventeen percent in the previous ten years, and the cities located within such county, and any regardless of its population that has had it percent in the previous ten years, and the cities located within such county, shall conform with all County since 1995. The city has adopted plans in city’s fourth Comprehensive Plan. or city that is required or chooses to plan under RCW descriptive text covering objectives, principles, and standards used to develop the comprehensive plan. The plans shall be an internally consistent document and all elements shall be consistent with the future land use map. A comprehensive plan shall be adopted and amended with public participation as provided in following: (1) Land Use Element (2) Housing Element (3) Capital Facilities Element (4) Utilities Element (5) Rural Element (6) Transportation Element (7) Economic Development Element (8) Park and Recreation Element (9) Climate Change and Resiliency Element Update includes the following elements: • Book 1: Environment (includes Climate Change and Resiliency) • Book 2: Land Use • Book 3: Housing • Book 4: Economic Development • Book 5: Parks, Recreation, and Open Space • Book 6: Transportation • Book 8: Capital Facilities and Utilities Note: The city is considered urban and does not need to plan or provide for a rural element. elements. (1) A comprehensive plan may include additional elements, items, or studies dealing with other subjects relating to the physical including, but not limited to: (a) Conservation; (b) Solar energy; and (c) Recreation. (2) A comprehensive plan may include, where appropriate, subarea plans, each of which is consistent with the comprehensive plan. Update includes the following optional elements: • Book 7: Public Safety • Section III: Subareas • Appendix A: Subarea Neighborhoods bonuses, cluster housing, planned unit developments, and the transfer of development rights. provide an increase to density, along with provisions for cluster housing, and unit lot subdivisions. Staff Report & Recommendation 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update – PLN #1172 Page 11 of 11 Regulation Meets development. (1) Counties and cities that are required or choose to taken collectively, adoption of and amendments to suitable for development within their jurisdictions employment growth, including the accommodation policies and consistent with the twenty-year pomanagement. Transit (HCT) city by Puget Sound Regional population to the city to provide by the year 2044: • 2044 Total Jobs = 24,751 • 2044 Total Housing Units = 15,781 • 2044 Total Population = 35,506 which are the following: • 2020 Total Jobs = 12,449 • 2020 Total Housing Units = 9,120 • 2020 Total Population = 20,418 Since the year 2020 the city has approximately 1,602 jobs and 4,368 housing units pending. 6. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Arlington City Council approve the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update, PLN #1172. Attachment 1 This message is from an External Sender This message came from outside the City of Arlington From:Krueger, Morgan (DFW) To:Marc Hayes; Amy Rusko Cc:Weilert, Kathryn L (DFW) Subject:RE: WDFW GMA Assistance Date:Tuesday, November 21, 2023 7:14:04 PM Attachments:image001.png Hi Marc, I saw in the planning commission meeting tonight (11/21) that there were policies relating to the comprehensive plan that were in draft form being discussed. Are these policies for the annual amendment cycle or for the Periodic Comprehensive Plan Update, due 2024? WDFW would very much like to be a part of the group that receives these drafts to offer our comments. We would also like to offer our comments on any planning/developmental document drafts as they come out. Thanks so much in advance. All the best, Morgan Krueger (she/her) Regional Land Use Planner, Habitat Division Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 Morgan.Krueger@dfw.wa.gov 206-707-5434 From: DFW R4Cplanning Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2023 2:04 PM To: mhayes@arlingtonwa.gov Subject: WDFW GMA Assistance Hi Marc, I wanted to reach out to you and provide a couple great resources WDFW has recently updated, which you can find attached to this email. We are committed in meeting your planning needs as deadlines quickly approach for code amendments, Comprehensive Plan updates, and more. Our duty is to provide Best Available Science resources, but we feel if we just stopped there, we would not be doing our job. Please reach out to me with any questions, concerns, or just to chat. I would be more than happy to set up a time to meet your planning team, give a presentation, go through our science, or all the above to better meet you specific planning needs. Attachment 3 I look forward to hearing from you soon, Morgan Krueger (she/her) Land Use Environmental Planner, Habitat Division Washington Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Region 4 Morgan.Krueger@dfw.wa.gov 206-707-5434 November 30, 2023 Community Planning & Development 18204 59th Dr. NE Arlington WA 98223 Dear Mr. Hayes, The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) appreciates the opportunity to review and comment on the scope of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the Arlington 2024-2044 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update. Alignment between local, regional, and state planning efforts is vital to advance shared interests in the comprehensive planning process. WSDOT offers the following input in support of the city’s efforts. Alternatives WSDOT recognizes the importance of coordinated land use and transportation strategies to effectively manage demand and provide travel options in the Puget Sound region. WSDOT supports the city exploring alternatives that concentrate employment and population growth around local and regional transit. Such growth patterns support our state and regional goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled by reducing the number of single occupancy vehicle trips. They also create opportunities by connecting destinations across the region through transit and active modes and reflect the city’s role as a High Capacity Transit Community, as identified in the Puget Sound Regional Council’s Regional Growth Strategy adopted in VISION 2050. EIS Analysis Scope WSDOT requests that the City of Arlington’s transportation element and EIS provide thorough analysis and documentation of the “estimated multimodal level of service impacts to state -owned transportation facilities resulting from land use assumptions” (RCW 36.70a.070(6)(a)(ii)). We also suggest that the transportation element include forecasts of multimodal transportation demand and needs for at least ten years based on the adopted land use plan, to inform the development of a transportation element that balances transportation system safety and convenience to accommodate all users of the transportation system. Other Relevant Considerations WSDOT offers the following statewide legislative priorities for consideration during the development of the comprehensive plan update and EIS: •Complete Streets: In 2022, the Washington State Legislature passed Senate Bill 5974, the Move Ahead Washington package. The bill directs WSDOT to incorporate the principles of Complete Streets in most state transportation projects. More information, including staff contacts, can be found on WSDOT’s Complete Streets webpage. •Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT): RCW 47.01.440 establishes statewide targets for reducing VMT per capita, and WSDOT is currently responding to a legislative proviso to help advance these goals. Local decisions and partnerships between local jurisdictions and state agencies are critical to achieving state VMT reduction goals. We look forward to further working with the City of Arlington on VMT reduction. •SSSB 5412: Legislation passed in the 2023 session provides a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) categorical exemption for most residential development, provided that proposed projects are consistent with the comprehensive plan and development regulations, and that the comprehensive plan “analyzes multimodal transportation impacts, including impacts to neighboring jurisdictions, transit facilities, and Attachment 4 the state transportation system.” The legislation requires that WSDOT be consulted “on impacts to state- owned transportation facilities including consideration of whether mitigation is necessary for impacts to transportation facilities.” WSDOT suggests that the EIS scoping include an expansive multimodal transportation analysis to allow for potential project-level categorical exemptions. WSDOT Resources WSDOT’s comprehensive planning resources for local agencies can be found on our Land Use and Transportation Guidance page. This includes a wealth of information on how WSDOT reviews local agency plans, our land use and transportation goals, best practices in building transportation efficient communities, and pertinent concurrency and SEPA guidance. WSDOT’s Community Planning Portal may be particularly helpful for local jurisdictions. The portal includes data on the state transportation system often needed to complete the transportation element inventory required by the Growth Management Act. In addition to the data included in the portal, local planners can add their own data to ArcGIS Online and create custom reports. Further Engagement & Coordination Please reach out if you would like to discuss opportunities for ongoing engagement and coordination, as well as technical assistance available during your plan updates. We also ask that you add the address nwrcompplansupport@wsdot.wa.gov to your distribution list of planning related documents (i.e., scoping documents, draft plans, annual amendments, EIS documents, etc.). Thank you again for the opportunity to comment on the scope of the Arlington 2024-2044 EIS. We look forward to our continuing productive partnership. Sincerely, Jeff Storrar WSDOT Policy Manager CC: Matt Kenna, WSDOT Elizabeth Sjostrom, WSDOT David Strich, WSDOT Attachment 5 This message is from an External Sender This message came from outside the City of Arlington From:Styrna, Jacquelyn To:Amy Rusko; Shared-VM-CED Subject:PSE Memo: City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan 2024 Update: Utility Element Date:Wednesday, January 24, 2024 6:01:22 PM Attachments:image001.png image002.png PSE_Memo_CityofArlington_2024ComprehensivePlanUpdate.pdf January 24, 2024 Amy Rusko, Planning Manager City of Arlington Land Use & Planning Division 18204 59th Avenue NE Arlington, WA 982923 RE: City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan 2024 Update: Utility Element Dear Ms. Rusko: In response to the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update for the City of Arlington, Puget Sound Energy would like to submit the following comments: Company Overview: Puget Sound Energy (PSE) is a private utility provider of electric and natural gas service to homes and businesses in Puget Sound. With a 6,000 square mile service territory encompassing 10 counties, PSE provides power to more than 1.2 million electric customers and 900,000 natural gas customers. PSE creates 46% of electricity from its own hydro, thermal, solar and wind facilities; the company has 3,500 megawatts of power-generating capacity, and purchases the rest of its power supply from other utilities, independent power producers, and energy marketers across the United States and Canada. In 2022, PSE provided 3,794,770 MWh of renewable energy produced from wind and hydropower facilities. Electric and natural gas planning efforts are integrated and centered on providing safe, reliable, and efficient energy service. Regulatory Environment: PSE’s operations and rates are governed by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC). PSE electric utility options and standards are further governed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the National Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), and the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC). These respective agencies monitor, assess and enforce compliance and reliability standards for PSE. Additionally, the Clean Electricity Transformation Act (CETA) became law in Washington State in 2019. CETA requires PSE provide electricity free of greenhouse gas emissions by 2045. The UTC and Washington Department of Commerce (WDOC) adopted CETA implementation rules that require utilities develop four-year plans known as Clean Energy Implementation Plans (CEIP) to outline plans for clean energy Attachment 6 investments, equitable distribution of customer benefits, and 100% clean energy by 2045. The first CEIP covers the time period of 2022-2025 and was filed with the UTC on December 17, 2021. It includes programs and investments such as expanding energy efficiency efforts, deploying new technologies, installing localized sources of clean energy, and investing in renewable energy. The CEIP Library, including the 2023 Biennial Update, can be found: https://www.cleanenergyplan.pse.com/ceip-library Further government regulation includes the Washington Climate Commitment Act (CCA), which caps and reduces greenhouse gas emissions from large emitting sources to lower 95% of carbon emissions by 2050. This new program puts a price on greenhouse gas emissions emitted in the state and increases the cost to deliver electricity and natural gas to our customers. Arlington residents rely on PSE and the City to coordinate efforts on ordinances and codes that protect existing energy facilities and embrace new clean energy technology. One of the primary intentions of the Utility Element is to assure proper coordination of public land use planning and infrastructure planning by providers. Routine utility maintenance work— including vegetation management and avian protection— is required for regulatory compliance with FERC, NERC, WECC, and CETA. PSE Planning: Integrated Resource Plan (IRP): Puget Sound Energy plans years in advance to ensure we have the supply and infrastructure necessary to deliver clean, safe and reliable energy. An IRP is a plus year view of PSE’s energy resource needs, which is developed through a planning process that evaluates how a range of potential future outcomes could affect PSE’s ability to meet our customers’ electric and natural gas supply needs. The analysis considers policies, costs, economic conditions, physical energy systems, and future resource procurement. PSE’s latest IRP was filed with the UTC on April 1, 2021 and is the foundation for PSE’s first Clean Energy Implementation Plan (CEIP). The 2021 IRP can be accessed at: https://www.pse.com/en/IRP/Past-IRPs/2021-IRP; The 2023 GAS IRP: https://www.pse.com/en/IRP/Past-IRPs/2023-IRP PSE’s 2023 Electric Progress Report: https://www.pse.com/en/IRP/Past-IRPs/2023-IRP Equity: Many of PSE’s clean energy products include enhanced incentives for historically marginalized communities, and the community-based organizations, government agencies, and Tribal entities that serve them. For many products, PSE is moving away from qualifying customers for enhanced incentives or services based on solely on their geographic location within these communities, as mapped. Instead, PSE is focused on whether or not a project or its location will primarily serve and/or benefit these communities. Ensuring code language makes clean energy programs and products accessible to these communities will be key. Distributed Energy Resources: PSE offers the Distributed Energy Resources program to commercial customers in order to fulfill our commitment to a clean energy future. DER's aim is to support the development of customer-owned renewable energy projects that generate between 100 kilowatts and 5 megawatts to interconnect to the PSE electrical distribution grid. Current federal and state laws require the interconnection customer to be responsible for all costs related to connecting their system to PSE's power grid. Therefore, PSE works with customers to ensure the interconnection process is efficient, while maintaining a grid that is safe and reliable. PSE Gas System Overview: PSE builds, operates, and maintains an extensive gas system in Snohomish County, which consists of transmission and distribution natural gas mains, odorizing stations, pressure regulation stations, heaters, corrosion protection systems, above ground appurtenances, and metering systems. In Snohomish County, PSE takes gas from Williams Northwest Pipeline at 15 gate/town border stations. PSE operates and maintains 75 miles of high pressure main, 78 District Regulators, nearly 2,175 miles of intermediate main, and serves 152,000 metered customers. Presently, PSE serves approximately 150 commercial/industrial and 350 residential natural gas customer meters within the City of Arlington. PSE’s culture of total safety is reflected in our approach to gas treatment, pressure reduction, and distribution. Gate Station infrastructure serves as a place of custody transfer, measurement, odorant treatment, and pressure regulation. Gas pressure is most commonly reduced to levels at or below 250 PSIG, then continues throughout PSE’s supply system in steel mains ranging in diameter of 2” to 20.” Over-pressure protection mechanisms release gas into the atmosphere, enact secondary regulation, or completely shut off the gas supply to ensure safety. PSE also applies corrosion control mitigation systems to prevent pipe damage. Yet another safety feature PSE uses involves odorants. Since natural gas is naturally odorless, the odorant mercaptan is injected so that leaks are detectable. In 2021, PSE launched a Renewable Natural Gas (RNG), program in which more than 4,700 customers lowered their carbon footprint by replacing a portion of their conventional natural gas usage with renewable natural gas. The renewable natural gas offered to customers is made from gas captured at a landfill —not from fossil fuels. Since launching RNG, PSE sold more than 92,000 therms of this cleaner alternative. In 2024, PSE strives for 3.5% RNG by volume. Hydrogen Hub: In 2023, the U.S. Department of Energy selected the Pacific Northwest Hydrogen Association’s PNWH2 hub as a regional Clean Hydrogen Hub to kick start a national network of clean hydrogen producers, consumers, and connective infrastructure while supporting the production, storage, delivery, and end-use of clean hydrogen. This Hub will receive $1 billion in federal funding spanning nine years of development phases. PSE’s portion of the project seeks to use clean hydrogen for peaking applications to support the utility’s push to meet Washington State’s mandated Clean Energy Transformation Act (CETA), which calls for no fossil fuel use by 2045. PSE 2030: PSE strives to decarbonize via PSE 2030, a strategic framework for guiding our company’s capital investments over the next 10 years. PSE 2030 is in alignment with our Beyond Net Zero Carbon goals and our commitments to safety, reliability, affordability and equity. PSE 2030 has four main focus areas of: 1. CETA Implementation 2. Natural Gas Decarbonization 3. Regulatory and Legislative Enablement 4. Customer Solutions PSE Electrical System Overview: To provide Puget Sound with electricity, PSE maintains an extensive integrated electric system consisting of generating plants, transmission lines, substations, switching stations, sub-systems, overhead and underground distribution systems, attachments, appurtenances, and metering systems. Electricity provided by PSE to customers is often produced elsewhere, then interconnected to the Northwest’s regional grid. The PSE electric transmission facilities in Snohomish County are important components of the regional grid serving Puget Sound. For example, PSE serves Skagit, Island (Whidbey Island only), Whatcom, and King Counties with electricity by linking transmission facilities that pass through Snohomish County. In addition, PSE jointly owns the Anderson Canyon – Beverly Park line serving customers along Highway 2. Transmission Facilities in Snohomish County PSE owns and operates 114.5 miles of transmission line (230 kV and 115 kV) as well as the Horse Ranch substation in Snohomish County. The details of these facilities are provided in the table below. Transmission Lines PSE wholly owns the Sedro Woolley – Horse Ranch 230 kV transmission line which runs from Skagit County to Snohomish County. PSE jointly owns two other 230 kV transmission lines: Sedro Woolley – SCL Bothell – Horse Ranch and Horse Ranch – BPA Monroe – BPA Snohomish. In addition to the 230 kV lines, PSE wholly owns the Beverly Park – Cottage Brook 115 kV line. PSE jointly owns two other 115 kV transmission lines operating in Snohomish County: Anderson Canyon – Beverly Park and BPA Snohomish – Beverly Park #4. Future PSE Projects & Programs: Electric: To meet increasing regional electric demand, new transmission lines and substations may need to be constructed. In addition, existing facilities will need to be maintained and possibly rebuilt. The system responds differently year to year and PSE is constantly modifying infrastructure to meet demands, including: · Wishbone Crossarm Replacement Program Transmission poles constructed with wishbone crossarms have exhibited failure modes requiring proactive replacement. There is an active system wide program to replace these crossarms. Sections of the Anderson Canyon – Beverly Park line are constructed using wishbone crossarms. Gas: To meet regional natural gas demand, PSE’s delivery system is modified every year to address customer growth, load changes that require system reinforcement, Rights-Of-Way (ROW) improvements, and pipeline integrity issues. PSE must maintain large-diameter transmission pipelines, system components and infrastructure, city gate stations, and smaller utility-owned gas mains. The system responds differently year to year so PSE is constantly Ongoing gas system integrity work may include: · Pipe Replacement: PSE will continue pipe investigations to determine the exact location of any DuPont pipe and qualified steel wrapped pipe requiring replacement. Dupont manufactured polyethylene main and service piping, plus qualified steel wrapped intermediate pressure main and service piping may require attention. · Sewer Cross Bores: PSE will conduct investigations of cross bores to determine where gas lines have been cross bored through sewer lines, and then make subsequent repairs. · Buried Meters: There will be ongoing projects to remediate locations where above ground gas meter set piping was inadvertently buried. PSE encourages the City of Arlington to consider the following documents: · PSE Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) – 25 year Long-range Plan · PSE Clean Energy Action Plan (CEAP) – 10 year Strategy Plan · PSE Clean Energy Implementation Plan (CEIP) – 4 year Plan Further, PSE poses the following questions to the City for consideration: · How will the 2024 Comprehensive Plan meet requirements for the 2019Washington Clean Energy Transformation Act (CETA)? · How will the City of Arlington implement Transportation Electrification and Building Electrification, including electric vehicle deployment? These energy strategies have potential impacts to both electric and natural gas transmission and distribution facilities. Such impacts should be identified and evaluated as part of the 2024 Plan. · How will all potential impacts be integrated into the 2024 Comprehensive Plan,specifically within the Utilities Element, Subarea Plans, and other elementsidentified in RCW 36.70A? On behalf of Puget Sound Energy, thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the Update. If there is any additional information that PSE can provide Arlington, please contact me. Sincerely, Jacquelyn Styrna Jacquelyn Styrna, MPA Senior Municipal Liaison Manager Jacquelyn Styrna Senior Municipal Liaison Manager – Island & Snohomish Counties Municipal Relations South PUGET SOUND ENERGY P.O. Box 97034 Bellevue, WA 98009-9734 Cell: (360) 201-3238 January 24, 2024 Amy Rusko, Planning Manager City of Arlington Land Use & Planning Division 18204 59th Avenue NE Arlington, WA 982923 RE: City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan 2024 Update: Utility Element Dear Ms. Rusko: In response to the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update for the City of Arlington, Puget Sound Energy would like to submit the following comments: Company Overview: Puget Sound Energy (PSE) is a private utility provider of electric and natural gas service to homes and businesses in Puget Sound. With a 6,000 square mile service territory encompassing 10 counties, PSE provides power to more than 1.2 million electric customers and 900,000 natural gas customers. PSE creates 46% of electricity from its own hydro, thermal, solar and wind facilities; the company has 3,500 megawatts of power-generating capacity, and purchases the rest of its power supply from other utilities, independent power producers, and energy marketers across the United States and Canada. In 2022, PSE provided 3,794,770 MWh of renewable energy produced from wind and hydropower facilities. Electric and natural gas planning efforts are integrated and centered on providing safe, reliable, and efficient energy service. Regulatory Environment: PSE’s operations and rates are governed by the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC). PSE electric utility options and standards are further governed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), the National Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), and the Western Electricity Coordinating Council (WECC). These respective agencies monitor, assess and enforce compliance and reliability standards for PSE. Additionally, the Clean Electricity Transformation Act (CETA) became law in Washington State in 2019. CETA requires PSE provide electricity free of greenhouse gas emissions by 2045. The UTC and Washington Department of Commerce (WDOC) adopted CETA implementation rules that require utilities develop four-year plans known as Clean Energy Implementation Plans (CEIP) to outline plans for clean energy investments, equitable distribution of customer benefits, and 100% clean energy by Amy Rusko, Planning Manager City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan 2024 Update 2045. The first CEIP covers the time period of 2022-2025 and was filed with the UTC on December 17, 2021. It includes programs and investments such as expanding energy efficiency efforts, deploying new technologies, installing localized sources of clean energy, and investing in renewable energy. The CEIP Library, including the 2023 Biennial Update, can be found: https://www.cleanenergyplan.pse.com/ceip-library Further government regulation includes the Washington Climate Commitment Act (CCA), which caps and reduces greenhouse gas emissions from large emitting sources to lower 95% of carbon emissions by 2050. This new program puts a price on greenhouse gas emissions emitted in the state and increases the cost to deliver electricity and natural gas to our customers. Arlington residents rely on PSE and the City to coordinate efforts on ordinances and codes that protect existing energy facilities and embrace new clean energy technology. One of the primary intentions of the Utility Element is to assure proper coordination of public land use planning and infrastructure planning by providers. Routine utility maintenance work—including vegetation management and avian protection— is required for regulatory compliance with FERC, NERC, WECC, and CETA. PSE Planning: Integrated Resource Plan (IRP): Puget Sound Energy plans years in advance to ensure we have the supply and infrastructure necessary to deliver clean, safe and reliable energy. An IRP is a plus year view of PSE’s energy resource needs, which is developed through a planning process that evaluates how a range of potential future outcomes could affect PSE’s ability to meet our customers’ electric and natural gas supply needs. The analysis considers policies, costs, economic conditions, physical energy systems, and future resource procurement. PSE’s latest IRP was filed with the UTC on April 1, 2021 and is the foundation for PSE’s first Clean Energy Implementation Plan (CEIP). The 2021 IRP can be accessed at: https://www.pse.com/en/IRP/Past-IRPs/2021-IRP; The 2023 GAS IRP: https://www.pse.com/en/IRP/Past-IRPs/2023-IRP PSE’s 2023 Electric Progress Report: https://www.pse.com/en/IRP/Past-IRPs/2023-IRP Equity: Many of PSE’s clean energy products include enhanced incentives for historically marginalized communities, and the community-based organizations, government agencies, and Tribal entities that serve them. For many products, PSE is moving away from qualifying customers for enhanced incentives or services based on solely on their geographic location within these communities, as mapped. Instead, PSE is focused on whether or not a project or its location will primarily serve and/or benefit these communities. Ensuring code language makes clean energy programs and products accessible to these communities will be key. Distributed Energy Resources: PSE offers the Distributed Energy Resources program to commercial customers in order to fulfill our commitment to a clean energy future. DER's aim is to support the development of customer-owned renewable energy projects that generate between 100 kilowatts and 5 megawatts to interconnect to the PSE electrical distribution grid. Current federal and state laws require Amy Rusko, Planning Manager City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan 2024 Update the interconnection customer to be responsible for all costs related to connecting their system to PSE's power grid. Therefore, PSE works with customers to ensure the interconnection process is efficient, while maintaining a grid that is safe and reliable. PSE Gas System Overview: PSE builds, operates, and maintains an extensive gas system in Snohomish County, which consists of transmission and distribution natural gas mains, odorizing stations, pressure regulation stations, heaters, corrosion protection systems, above ground appurtenances, and metering systems. In Snohomish County, PSE takes gas from Williams Northwest Pipeline at 15 gate/town border stations. PSE operates and maintains 75 miles of high pressure main, 78 District Regulators, nearly 2,175 miles of intermediate main, and serves 152,000 metered customers. Presently, PSE serves approximately 150 commercial/industrial and 350 residential natural gas customer meters within the City of Arlington. PSE’s culture of total safety is reflected in our approach to gas treatment, pressure reduction, and distribution. Gate Station infrastructure serves as a place of custody transfer, measurement, odorant treatment, and pressure regulation. Gas pressure is most commonly reduced to levels at or below 250 PSIG, then continues throughout PSE’s supply system in steel mains ranging in diameter of 2” to 20.” Over-pressure protection mechanisms release gas into the atmosphere, enact secondary regulation, or completely shut off the gas supply to ensure safety. PSE also applies corrosion control mitigation systems to prevent pipe damage. Yet another safety feature PSE uses involves odorants. Since natural gas is naturally odorless, the odorant mercaptan is injected so that leaks are detectable. In 2021, PSE launched a Renewable Natural Gas (RNG), program in which more than 4,700 customers lowered their carbon footprint by replacing a portion of their conventional natural gas usage with renewable natural gas. The renewable natural gas offered to customers is made from gas captured at a landfill —not from fossil fuels. Since launching RNG, PSE sold more than 92,000 therms of this cleaner alternative. In 2024, PSE strives for 3.5% RNG by volume. Hydrogen Hub: In 2023, the U.S. Department of Energy selected the Pacific Northwest Hydrogen Association’s PNWH2 hub as a regional Clean Hydrogen Hub to kick start a national network of clean hydrogen producers, consumers, and connective infrastructure while supporting the production, storage, delivery, and end-use of clean hydrogen. This Hub will receive $1 billion in federal funding spanning nine years of development phases. PSE’s portion of the project seeks to use clean hydrogen for peaking applications to support the utility’s push to meet Washington State’s mandated Clean Energy Transformation Act (CETA), which calls for no fossil fuel use by 2045. PSE 2030: PSE strives to decarbonize via PSE 2030, a strategic framework for guiding our company’s capital investments over the next 10 years. PSE 2030 is in alignment with our Beyond Net Zero Carbon goals and our commitments to safety, reliability, affordability and equity. PSE 2030 has four main focus areas of: Amy Rusko, Planning Manager City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan 2024 Update 1. CETA Implementation 2. Natural Gas Decarbonization 3. Regulatory and Legislative Enablement 4. Customer Solutions PSE Electrical System Overview: To provide Puget Sound with electricity, PSE maintains an extensive integrated electric system consisting of generating plants, transmission lines, substations, switching stations, sub-systems, overhead and underground distribution systems, attachments, appurtenances, and metering systems. Electricity provided by PSE to customers is often produced elsewhere, then interconnected to the Northwest’s regional grid. The PSE electric transmission facilities in Snohomish County are important components of the regional grid serving Puget Sound. For example, PSE serves Skagit, Island (Whidbey Island only), Whatcom, and King Counties with electricity by linking transmission facilities that pass through Snohomish County. In addition, PSE jointly owns the Anderson Canyon – Beverly Park line serving customers along Highway 2. Transmission Facilities in Snohomish County PSE owns and operates 114.5 miles of transmission line (230 kV and 115 kV) as well as the Horse Ranch substation in Snohomish County. The details of these facilities are provided in the table below. Transmission Lines PSE wholly owns the Sedro Woolley – Horse Ranch 230 kV transmission line which runs from Skagit County to Snohomish County. PSE jointly owns two other 230 kV transmission lines: Sedro Woolley – SCL Bothell – Horse Ranch and Horse Ranch – BPA Monroe – BPA Snohomish. In addition to the 230 kV lines, PSE wholly owns the Beverly Park – Cottage Brook 115 kV line. PSE jointly owns two other 115 kV transmission lines operating in Snohomish County: Anderson Canyon – Beverly Park and BPA Snohomish – Beverly Park #4. Amy Rusko, Planning Manager City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan 2024 Update Future PSE Projects & Programs: Electric: To meet increasing regional electric demand, new transmission lines and substations may need to be constructed. In addition, existing facilities will need to be maintained and possibly rebuilt. The system responds differently year to year and PSE is constantly modifying infrastructure to meet demands, including: • Wishbone Crossarm Replacement Program Transmission poles constructed with wishbone crossarms have exhibited failure modes requiring proactive replacement. There is an active system wide program to replace these crossarms. Sections of the Anderson Canyon – Beverly Park line are constructed using wishbone crossarms. Gas: To meet regional natural gas demand, PSE’s delivery system is modified every year to address customer growth, load changes that require system reinforcement, Rights-Of-Way (ROW) improvements, and pipeline integrity issues. PSE must maintain large-diameter transmission pipelines, system components and infrastructure, city gate stations, and smaller utility-owned gas mains. The system responds differently year to year so PSE is constantly adding or modifying infrastructure to meet gas volume and pressures demands. Ongoing gas system integrity work may include: • Pipe Replacement: PSE will continue pipe investigations to determine the exact location of any DuPont pipe and qualified steel wrapped pipe requiring replacement. Dupont manufactured polyethylene main and service piping, plus qualified steel wrapped intermediate pressure main and service piping may require attention. • Sewer Cross Bores: PSE will conduct investigations of cross bores to determine where gas lines have been cross bored through sewer lines, and then make subsequent repairs. • Buried Meters: There will be ongoing projects to remediate locations where above ground gas meter set piping was inadvertently buried. PSE encourages the City of Arlington to consider the following documents: • PSE Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) – 25 year Long-range Plan • PSE Clean Energy Action Plan (CEAP) – 10 year Strategy Plan • PSE Clean Energy Implementation Plan (CEIP) – 4 year Plan Further, PSE poses the following questions to the City for consideration: • How will the 2024 Comprehensive Plan meet requirements for the 2019 Washington Clean Energy Transformation Act (CETA)? Amy Rusko, Planning Manager City of Arlington Comprehensive Plan 2024 Update • How will the City of Arlington implement Transportation Electrification and Building Electrification, including electric vehicle deployment? These energy strategies have potential impacts to both electric and natural gas transmission and distribution facilities. Such impacts should be identified and evaluated as part of the 2024 Plan. • How will all potential impacts be integrated into the 2024 Comprehensive Plan, specifically within the Utilities Element, Subarea Plans, and other elements identified in RCW 36.70A? On behalf of Puget Sound Energy, thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the Update. If there is any additional information that PSE can provide, please contact me. Sincerely, Jacquelyn Styrna Jacquelyn Styrna, MPA Senior Municipal Liaison Manager Cc: Tom Buroker, WA Department of Ecology Dave Anderson, WA Department of Commerce This message is from an External Sender This message came from outside the City of Arlington From:Styrna, Jacquelyn To:Shared-VM-CED; Amy Rusko Subject:Comprehensive Plan -- PSE Comments -- April 2024 Date:Thursday, April 11, 2024 11:10:14 AM Attachments:image001.png 8162_HB_1589_Facts_0334_r4.pdf Copy of PSE Comp Plan Language Comments April 2024.xlsx On behalf of Puget Sound Energy (PSE), I am reaching out to convey our thoughts for your consideration as part of the periodic update to the comprehensive plan and development regulations under the Revised Code of Washington (RCW), specifically Chapters 36.70A and 43.21C. The attached spreadsheet contains suggested language as it relates to customer programs and our shared climate goals. In the spreadsheet, you will find 7 tabs grouped by category. I’ve also attached information on PSE’s continued obligation to serve natural gas customers, FAQs on HB 1589, which was signed into law by Governor Inslee. At PSE, we recognize that climate change is one of the biggest existential threats facing our planet today. As one of the largest producers of renewable energy in the Pacific Northwest, PSE has been an early leader in addressing climate change and investing billions in renewable resources and energy efficiency for homes and businesses. Now, PSE is on the path to meet the current and future needs of its customers and to deliver on the requirements to decarbonize operations and serve its customers and communities equitably. This transition is unprecedented in terms of the magnitude of the change and the accelerated time frame in which it must be achieved. By working together, we can successfully drive towards our shared clean energy goals. PSE looks forward to providing input as the comprehensive plan items are discussed in more detail. Together, we can reduce emissions and keep energy safe, reliable, and affordable. Thank you, Jacquelyn Jacquelyn Styrna Senior Municipal Liaison Manager – Island & Snohomish Counties Municipal Relations South Attachment 7 PUGET SOUND ENERGY P.O. Box 97034 Bellevue, WA 98009-9734 Cell: (360) 201-3238 Supporting Washington’s clean energy economy and planning for a clean, affordable and reliable energy future HB 1589 facts • The Washington State Legislature passed HB 1589 in March 2024, and the bill is currently under evaluation by the governor’s office. HB 1589 is a planning bill. It will help PSE, under the supervision of the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (UTC), thoughtfully plan for the electric and natural gas choices of our customers consistent with our state’s aggressive climate goals. • There has been a lot of misinformation about HB 1589 as it changed over the course of two legislative sessions, from when it was first introduced in January 2023 to passage by the legislature in March 2024. • HB 1589 does not include a ban on natural gas, and it does not change PSE’s obligation to serve natural gas to our customers. Why is this necessary? • PSE is currently required to file a multitude of different plans for the gas and electric business on different timelines with the UTC. These plans are duplicative and time consuming. This process brings more alignment to our planning for customers and stakeholders while maintaining important standards and benchmarks. • Natural gas energy use is declining—down 7% for residential and 3% for commercial customers in 2023 and forecasted to continue to decline over the next five years. Electricity use is increasing and forecasted to continue to rise. • Washington state has some of the most aggressive climate policies in the nation. Under state law, PSE must have 80% non-emitting resources by 2030 and 100% by 2045. • PSE has dramatically expanded our low-income bill assistance programs and established a new bill discount rate for qualifying customers to protect them through this long transition. Key provisions • Planning — The bill consolidates multiple existing system plans into an integrated plan, streamlining processes and providing more transparency for customers. There will be three years of rulemaking and planning prior to the submission in 2027 of PSE’s first integrated system plan to the UTC. • Regulatory mechanisms — The bill clarifies the application of three important regulatory mechanisms for PSE. ○Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN): To reach our state’s 2030 targets as established by the Clean Energy Transformation Act (CETA), PSE must build or buy more electric generation than we have in our past 150-plus years. A CPCN would help us do that more efficiently. For example, when PSE has a major project — like a transmission line or generation facility — the UTC would review the project at the outset, and then again once the project is completed.This gives the UTC two reviews to make sure the project is prudent and allows regulatory review before PSE invests a significant amount of money. 2 ○Construction Work in Progress (CWIP): With this tool, costs associated with capital intensive projects with longer lead times could be recovered before the project is completed with UTC approval. This helps protect customers from rate shock as costs are captured over time in smaller amounts, as opposed to being added to customer bills all at once. ○Accelerated Depreciation: The bill requires PSE to file new depreciation schedules for the natural gas business each time the company files a multi-year rate plan (which PSE did in the filing we made in February). It requires the UTC to set depreciation rates for all the gas plants in service as of July 2024 so that those assets are fully depreciated by 2050. Accelerated depreciation ensures that current customers who are benefiting from the gas infrastructure pay their fair share of the costs before leaving the system, helping to protect against an undue cost burden falling on an increasingly smaller group of customers, particularly those who can least afford it. FAQ How will existing customers get natural gas service? Same as you do now. The bill, as passed by the legislature, does not include a ban on natural gas or any changes to our obligation to serve natural gas. Will I have to switch my home to all electric? How am I going to pay for that? PSE’s own study says this will cost thousands. No. The bill, as passed by the legislature, does not include a ban on natural gas or any changes to our obligation to serve natural gas. As part of the integrated system plan that we will submit in 2027, we will be required to show what electrification is cost effective. We do this today—an example is the extensive planning we do to establish which energy efficiency measures are most cost effective. Some pencil out. Others do not, including the heat pumps that we have studied. If these don’t change by a good bit, the plan won’t show them as cost effective. And we won’t pursue them under our obligation to provide service at the least cost to our customers. We know many consumers are choosing to electrify their homes and businesses and are taking advantage of state and federal incentives. That choice is not changed by HB 1589. How much will my monthly bill increase? There is no rate increase associated with HB 1589. It’s a planning bill, and there will be three years of rulemaking and work before we submit an integrated system plan to our regulators. That will only be a plan—it will not include a rate increase. We currently have a two-year rate plan pending with the UTC. It is not related to HB 1589. The rate plan maintains essential utility services and invests in our infrastructure to ensure the safe and reliable delivery of energy to customers, while implementing some of the most aggressive energy, environmental and climate policies in the nation. Natural gas rates for residential customers are proposed to increase by 20% over the two-year period to help protect against an undue share of the cost burden falling on an increasingly smaller group of customers, particularly those who can least afford it. 3 PSE wants to combine rates for natural gas and electric customers. I hear this will push rates higher and that I might have to pay for costs associated with a system that I’m not even served by. How can that be right? To make a change of this magnitude, our regulators would have to agree that it provides a net benefit to customers and includes reasonable rate protections for low income customers. There would be an extensive examination and public process with multiple opportunities for customers and others to have a say in the decision making before anything happens. We do not currently have a proposal to do this nor do we expect to make one soon. Will I be able to add gas to my home for cooking, heating or water heating? HB 1589 does not affect adding natural gas to your home. However, new State Building Codes went into effect on March 14, 2024. The new codes include increased requirements that would add substantial costs to the construction of homes for owners who choose to use natural gas for space and/or water heat. Will I be able to add gas to my business for cooking, heating or water heating? HB 1589 does not affect adding natural gas at your business. However, new State Building Codes went into effect on March 14, 2024. The new codes include increased requirements that would add substantial costs to the construction of buildings to use natural gas for space and/or water heat. Why can’t I receive a rebate or incentive for natural gas appliances and equipment? • Residential customers will no longer be able to receive rebates for natural gas appliances starting Jan. 1, 2025. This was added to the legislation to reduce the financial incentive to continue using natural gas. • Commercial and industrial gas customers will no longer be able to utilize rebates for natural gas appliances and equipment effective Jan. 1, 2031. This was added to the legislation to reduce the financial incentive to continue using natural gas. What happens if I am a PSE gas customer but served by a different electricity provider (Seattle City Light, SnoPUD, Tacoma PUD)? Nothing. You will continue to receive natural gas from PSE if you do not choose to electrify your appliances. We’re currently partnering with Seattle City Light on a joint utility pilot that began before HB 1589 was even introduced that seeks to accelerate heat pump adoption within an underserved Seattle neighborhood for approximately 15-20 homes. If there are no changes to natural gas service for existing customers, why am I getting emails from PSE offering a free home electrification assessment? While HB 1589 does not change how we serve our customers today, we realize there is growing interest among our customers in electrification for a variety of reasons. PSE’s free electrification assessments provide customers with information so they can decide what is best for their home or business. The assessments are informational- only, there is no obligation to do anything after receiving the assessment. 8162 03/24 PSE Program Model Comp Plan Language PSE's Bill Discount Rate (BDR): Our BDR program provides income qualified customers with ongoing help on their monthly energy bill. Depending on household income and size, customers can save 5% to 45% a month on your bill. PSE Home Energy Lifeline Program (HELP): PSE provides qualified customers with bill-payment assistance beyond the Washington state LIHEAP program. Customers do not need to owe a balance on their PSE bill to apply. LIHEAP Program: This government program provides financial assistance so eligible households can maintain affordable, dependable utility services and avoid disconnection. PSE can assist with eligibility requirements and applications. The Salvation Army Warm Home Fund: Administered by the SA and funded by voluntary contributions from PSE customers, term, emergency bill payment assistance to PSE customers facing financial difficulties. Payment Arrangements: PSE will work with customers to produce a manageable payment schedule with a realistic timeline for up to 18 months. Budget Payment Plan: PSE provides customers with a predictable average monthly payment to reduce bill fluctuation and avoid unplanned high bills during winter heating months. Energy Equity Assistance Programs Partner with PSE to promote financial assistance and discounted billing programs for income qualified residents in order to ensure that the most vulnerable are not disproportionately impacted by the State's clean energy transition. Home Weatherization Assistance: This program provides free upgrades for single-family homes, manufactured homes or eligible apartment buildings. Upgrades can include insulation, duct sealing and much more. Energy Efficiency Boost Rebates: PSE offers higher rebates on energy-efficient upgrades to income-qualified customers. Low-Income Eligible Community Solar: This no cost program enables bill savings of up to $40 per month for income eligible customers. PSE Program Model Comp Plan Language PSE Up & Go Electric for Public: PSE helps organizations easily and affordably install public charging for all EV drivers. PSE Up & Go Electric for Fleet: PSE empowers businesses, municipalities and more with electrifying their fleets. PSE Up & Go Electric for Multifamily: PSE brings pole charging to multifamily properties to attract new residents and keep existing ones. PSE Up & Go Electric for Workplace: PSE brings charging to workplaces so employees can electrify their commutes. PSE Home Charging: PSE provides rebates and incentives for the installation of home EV charging stations. Electric Vehicles PSE Up & Go EV Charging Programs decarbonization of our transportation sector. PSE Program Model Comp Plan Language Home Energy Assessment: PSE offers a quick and convenient 3- step process to help customers understand and control their home’s energy usage. Energy Efficiency Rebates: • Appliance program • Electric hybrid heat pump water heaters • Smart thermostats program • Weatherization program • Windows, water heat and space heat programs • Home weatherization assistance • Insulation Other PSE Energy Rebates: • EV chargers • New construction Clean Buildings Accelerator: PSE assists customers with complying with Washington’s Clean Buildings Law (HB 1257, 2019). Green Power: PSE customers can voluntarily contribute to PSE investments in renewable energy projects in the Pacific Northwest. Solar Choice: PSE customers can voluntarily purchase solar energy from independent sources through PSE. Carbon Balance: PSE customers can voluntarily purchase carbon offsets from local forestry projects through PSE. Community Solar: PSE customers can voluntarily contribute to solar projects of their choice installed on such facilities as local school and community centers. Renewable Natural Gas: PSE customers can voluntarily purchase blocks of RNG to lower than carbon usage and support the development of locally produced RNG. Green Direct: This program is offered to local municipalities and corporations seeking to reduce their carbon footprint by is currently full. Energy Efficiency & Green Options Energy Efficiency Green Options Partner with PSE to promote energy efficiency programs and initiatives. Expedite permitting processes related to energy efficiency upgrades. Partner with PSE to promote local investments and customer enrollment in clean energy projects and programs in order to achieve clean energy goals. PSE Program Model Comp Plan Language Time of Use (TOU) Program: PSE's current pilot program uses variable 24 hour pricing to incentivize customers to use less power during times of peak demand. Flex Rewards: This program encourages and financially incentivizes voluntary reduction in energy use during peak demand. Flex Smart: This program financially rewards customers for allowing PSE to make remote minor adjustments to thermostats during periods of high peak load and demand. Flex EV: This program incentivizes EV charging during off-peak hours. Demand Response - Energy Management Peak Load Shifting Partner with PSE to promote and support programs designed to decrease load on the grid during times of peak use. PSE Investments/Initiatives Model Comp Plan Language Wind and Hybrid Wind (co-located wind and battery): A variable source of power representing approximately 30% of PSE's future electric resource need by 2030. Solar and Hybrid Solar (co-located solar and battery): A variable source of power representing approximately 16% of PSE's future electric resource need by 2030. Utility-Scale Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS): A technology that will allow energy to be stored for future use representing about 22% of PSE's future electric resource need by 2030. Types of energy storage technology include: • Chemical (e.g., Lithium-Ion Iron-Air) • Thermal (e.g., carbon, molten salt) • Gravity (e.g., water pumping, mechanical) Variable generation sources (wind & solar) require large scale Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) to be fully utilized since the sun goes down when demand increases and wind often fades when most needed; such as during extremely cold weather. sources, help meet periods of peak demand, and provide greater reliability for the grid. transmission lines are needed to serve new utility scale clean energy resources, such as wind and solar. transmission lines are needed to meet increasing local demand due to growth, EV's, and electrification of the heating sector (e.g., Sammamish to Juanita line in Kirkland). Transmission upgrades are needed to meet increasing local demand (e.g., Energize Eastside line in Redmond, Bellevue, Newcastle, and Renton upgraded from 115kv to 230kv) due to growth, EVs, and electrification of the heating sector. larger substations will be needed to meet growing energy needs due to growth, EVs and electrification of the heating sector. distribution lines will be needed to meet growing energy needs due to growth, EVs and electrification of the heating sector. Customer Connected Solar: PSE assists customers with information and resources for installing residential solar projects and how to apply for interconnection and net metering with PSE. Battery Walls: PSE offers installation guidelines and a process whereby customers can report battery installations. Host An Energy Project: Community partners can get paid to lease space to PSE to develop distributed solar and/or battery storage projects. Distributed Renewables: PSE supports the development of commercial customer-owned renewable energy projects that generate between 100 kilowatts and 5 megawatts to interconnect to the PSE electrical distribution grid. order to beautify their community, reduce heat islands, and to need to protect electrical system reliability around overhead lines. Support ongoing vegetation management in order to maintain system reliability. have unlocked public funding for climate and environmental benefit. PSE is aggressively pursuing all applicable funding opportunities to support lower customer bills, reduced power costs, and investments in the grid and clean energy. PSE is also supporting municipalities, tribes, and non-profits in their applications for public funding. Pursue public-private partnership to seek funding sources to accelerate clean energy projects. Public Funding Vegetation Management Promote and support the growth of customer owned distributed energy resources. Behind the Meter - Distributed Energy Resources (DER) Grid Modernization & Infrastructure New Carbon Free Electrical Generation & Energy Storage Systems New and Upgraded Transmission Lines, Substations, and Distribution Lines Partner with PSE to effectively meet rapidly increasing electrical demand as the City and region work to achieve a Clean Energy Transition by adopting codes that support siting existing and new technologies. Expedite the local permitting and approval process in order to maintain grid capacity and reliability. PSE Program Model Comp Plan Language Situational Awareness: PSE evaluates the condition of the electric system, as well as the environment around it, using real- time weather data, wildfire risk modeling and pre-wildfire Strengthening the electric system: PSE regularly maintains and updates the electric system to provide safe and reliable power to our customers. In areas of high wildfire risk, we identify maintenance and improvement activities that will further reduce the risk of wildfire, including vegetation management , equipment upgrades, and in some cases, moving power lines underground. Operational Procedures: During wildfire season, PSE may change some device settings or implement operational procedures to reduce the risk of wildfire. In the future, PSE may proactively turn off power during high wildfire risk conditions to help prevent wildfires. This is called a Public Safety Power . Emergency Response: During an emergency, including an active wildfire, PSE will coordinate with local emergency officials and may implement emergency response procedures. This may include turning off power at the request of emergency officials for public and first responder safety. Wildfire Preparedness Wildfire Mitigation Support PSE’s wildfire mitigation efforts including electric system upgrades, year- round vegetation management, and fire weather operational procedures. Work closely with utilities and local fire departments to lessen the risk and impact of wildfires. PSE Program Model Comp Plan Language Renewable Natural Gas Production Utilizing wastewater facility, landfill, or similar system.Evaluate the potential for renewable, recoverable natural gas in exisiting systems. Gas Conservation & Decarbonization Gas Decarbonization This message is from an External Sender This message came from outside the City of Arlington From:Sears, Tricia (DNR) To:Amy Rusko Cc:Sears, Tricia (DNR); Vanegas, Ted (COM) Subject:Arlington Chapter 20.44 Supplemental Use Regulations : WGS comments Date:Friday, June 7, 2024 9:54:31 AM 6/7/24 Hello Amy, In keeping with the interagency correspondence principles, I am providing you with comments on the proposed changes to the Arlington Chapter 20.44 Supplemental Use Regulations (Commerce ID# 2024-S-7115). For this proposal submitted via Planview, I looked at the proposal and focused on areas related to WGS work. Of note, but not limited to, I look for language around the geologically hazardous areas, mineral resource lands, mining climate change, and natural hazards mitigation plans. Specifically in this proposal, I reviewed the Chapter 20.44 Supplemental Use Regulations. Kudos to you for making changes to your provisions. These changes are not specific to the topics I noted above, therefore, WGS does not have recommendations for changes to the proposal. Please consider the items below that could be useful in your comprehensive plan update and in other planning related endeavors. Recognizing the limitations of the current proposals, I want to mention that it would be great for you to consider these in future work, be it in your comprehensive plan, development code, and SMP updates, and in your work in general: Consider adding a reference to WAC 365-190-120 geologically hazardous areas for definitions. In addition, consider adding a reference to WAC 365-196-480 for natural resource lands. Consider adding a reference to the WGS Geologic Information Portal. If you have not checked our interactive database, the WGS Geologic Information Portal, lately, you may wish to do so. Geologic Information Portal | WA - DNR If you have not checked out our Geologic Planning page, you may wish to do so. Geologic Planning | WA - DNR Thank you for considering our comments. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me. For your convenience, if there are no concerns or follow-up discussion, you may consider these comments to be final as of the 60-day comment deadline of 8/2/24. Attachment 8 Cheerio, Tricia Tricia R. Sears (she/her/hers) Geologic Planning Liaison Washington Geological Survey (WGS) Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Cell: 360-628-2867 | Email: tricia.sears@dnr.wa.gov August 14, 2024 Amy Rusko Planning Manager City of Arlington 238 North Olympic Avenue Arlington, WA 98223 RE: CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE and/or COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PERIODIC UPDATE Dear Amy Rusko, On behalf of the Puget Sound Partnership’s (PSP) Ecosystem Coordination Board (ECB), we submit this letter with respect to your jurisdiction's current periodic update process, and associated updates to development regulations. The Puget Sound Partnership’s Ecosystem Coordination Board supports the Leadership Council in carrying out its duties, including the development and implementation of the Action Agenda. The ECB is made up of 33 members, representing local, state, federal, and tribal governments, environmental and business interests. This broad representation supports the ECB to provide cross-caucus reporting and dialogue on priority issues, such as how to ensure the protection and restoration of habitat for ecologically sustainable watersheds for the future of all species through local periodic updates. This letter provides background on the priorities described in the Action Agenda and the resources available to support Comprehensive Plans and Critical Areas Ordinances to align with those priorities. While this letter does not respond to materials produced as part of your comprehensive plan update, it does offer many specific recommendations and resources that we believe will support the protection and recovery of the Puget Sound. The recovery of Puget Sound is vital to human wellbeing in the region, to sustain threatened salmon, orcas, and numerous other species, and to preserve Puget Sound’s ecosystem functions and values for current and future generations. But the Puget Sound ecosystem is under increasing threats from the development of ecologically important habitats, forests, farmlands, and other working lands, especially outside of urban growth areas. The smart growth strategy in the 2022-2026 Action Agenda identifies a key opportunity to “improve the implementation of the Growth Management Act within local jurisdictions land use planning and decisions, and across jurisdictions to include the protection of natural areas and working lands.” New planning requirements, updated science, and learning from the past ~8 years of Growth Management Act (GMA) implementation make this round of Comprehensive Plan updates a critical juncture and inspiring opportunity in our region’s collective work to recover Puget Sound. As you know, the Comprehensive Plan sets the stage for development activities and decisions which all have an impact on how well we achieve our goals to protect and restore Puget Sound. To support recovery of the Puget Sound, we recommend Attachment 9 that jurisdictions in the Puget Sound region make use of the many science-based resources available to support development of Comprehensive Plan and Critical Area Ordinance (CAO) amendments that protect natural areas and working lands. Our collective understanding of the complex relationships between land cover, development, and ecosystem health improves over time, and this is why cities and counties must include current, best available science and information in their local land use planning amendments during the periodic update. Fortunately, our state Departments of Fish and Wildlife, Ecology, Natural Resources, and Commerce have been busy updating and distributing science-based guidance to support local governments in this process. Cities and counties should leverage these resources below, and other science-based resources, to effectively amend their Comprehensive Plans and Critical Areas Ordinances: • Local Integrating Organizations (LIOs) and LIO Ecosystem Recovery Plans • Local Salmon Recovery Watershed Chapters • Department of Fish and Wildlife’s current Priority Habitats and Species information o Riparian Management Zone Checklist for Critical Areas Ordinances • Ecology’s Wetland Guidance for Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) Updates • Ecology’s Climate Resilience and Shoreline Management webpage • Commerce’s Critical Areas Handbook and Checklist To ensure smart growth in the Puget Sound region, the ECB recommends that jurisdictions consider and take action on the following: 1) At key points in the Comprehensive Plan update process, review and apply the Sound Choices Implementation Checklist. The checklist was developed by the Puget Sound recovery community and is intended to help local jurisdictions make updates to their comprehensive plans that align with Puget Sound recovery strategies and actions. 2) Ensure your local planning department takes advantage of funding for additional staff resources to incorporate salmon and Puget Sound recovery into local planning by applying for the Salmon Recovery through Local Planning Grant Program. Depending on funding availability, Washington State Department of Commerce will hold a fall 2024 round of funding. For more information contact angela.sanfilippo@commerce.wa.gov. 3) Understand how your local land use decisions will support region-wide efforts to achieve positive trends in Regional Land Use Indicators. The Puget Sound Partnership assesses the status and trends of threats through a set of regional land use indicators. 4) Reach out to and involve local experts in Puget Sound recovery including Local Integrating Organization members, Salmon Recovery Lead Entities, as well as your local representative on the Ecosystem Coordination Board. For additional support in facilitating connections with these local experts please reach out to Laura.Rivas@psp.wa.gov. As you help shape the future of the City of Arlington at this pivotal moment in time, the ECB requests that you take advantage of the valuable tools and resources included in this letter to ensure we are doing all we can to support our local communities and Puget Sound recovery. Thank you for considering our recommendations, tools, and resources. Sincerely, Julie Watson, Chair Cc: Bill Dewey, co-Vice Chair Ecosystem Coordination Board Ellen Southard, co-Vice Chair Ecosystem Coordination Board Dave Somers, Snohomish County Executive, Snohomish-Stillaguamish LIO representative Gregg Farris, Snohomish County Surface Water Management Director Kathleen Pozarycki, Snohomish-Stillaguamish LIO Coordinator This message is from an External Sender This message came from outside the City of Arlington From:Russell Joe To:Amy Rusko Cc:Marc Hayes Subject:Questions About Housing Element Date:Tuesday, September 10, 2024 11:33:15 AM Attachments:image001.png image002.png image003.png image004.png image005.png Amy, I hope you are well. I had a couple of questions after reviewing the Planning Commission materials from the meeting on September 3rd. CPP: Attachment A contains the Housing Numbers based on the CPP (Table 6). The target is 7399 new housing units. Some cities have broken down those numbers into income categories 60%-80%, 80% to 100% AMI etc. While certainly not required, was there a reason this choice was made? Also, the breakdown is not included in Attachment B. In reading many of the comprehensive plan drafts in the region, cities have included the breakdown to illustrate to the citizens the full requirements that must be planned for by 2044. Is there a plan to include this in an appendix perhaps? HB 1220: The breakdown of the permanent supportive housing is often included in the Housing Element in other cities (0-30% for example). Is there a plan to include those numbers in either Attachment A or B or an appendix? Again, the numbers in a public facing document help the citizens of Arlington understand the reason why City Council or the Planning Department are taking certain actions in the future to accommodate the housing units needed by 2044. Thank you for your attention to this email and the questions. Regards, Russell Joe Attachment 10 Russell JoeSnohomish County Manager Master Builders Association of King and Snohomish Counties p 425.460.8213 335 116th Ave. SE | Bellevue, WA 98004 mbaks.com ­­ ­­­ We believe everyone deserves a place to call home. This message is from an External Sender This message came from outside the City of Arlington From:Sears, Tricia (DNR) To:Amy Rusko Cc:Sears, Tricia (DNR); Aken, Jeff (COM) Subject:Arlington’s Comprehensive Plan update (Commerce ID# 2024-S-7474): WGS comments Date:Friday, October 25, 2024 4:12:06 PM 10/25/24 Hello Amy, In keeping with the interagency correspondence principles, I am providing you with comments on Arlington’s Comprehensive Plan update (Commerce ID# 2024-S-7474). For this proposal submitted via Planview, I looked at the proposal and focused on areas related to WGS work. Of note, but not limited to, I look for language around the geologically hazardous areas, mineral resource lands, mining, climate change, and natural hazards mitigation plans. Specifically in this proposal, I reviewed the Arlington 2024 CP DEIS Chapter 5 Natural Environment for Posting and Arlington 2024 CP DEIS Chapter 6 Land Use Built Form Housing. Chapter 5 Page 5-1 includes Affected Environment, which includes a lot of great information about the landscape and hazards in Arlington. It’s excellent that you included a Geologic Hazards Map. The map does not include erosion, landslides, or slopes information. Suggest adding additional maps for each hazard or adding them to the map. Page 5-2 includes a section Landslides, Seismic, and Coal Mine Areas. There is no mention of coal mine areas in the paragraph or elsewhere in this chapter. Do you have mine hazard areas? Good work including a section called Mitigation Measures. Overall Chapter 5 has good info, nice work! Chapter 6 There is a mention of Mitigation Measures. Suggest adding a statement that directs the reader to see also Chapter 5 where there is a bit more detail on it. Recognizing the limitations of the current proposals, I want to mention that it would be great for you to consider these in current or future work, be it in your comprehensive plan, development code, Attachment 11 Consider adding a reference to WAC 365-190-120 geologically hazardous areas for definitions in other areas besides the CAO. In addition, consider adding a reference to WAC 365-196-480 for natural resource lands. Consider adding a reference to the WGS Geologic Information Portal in other areas besides the CAO. If you have not checked our interactive database, the WGS Geologic Information Portal, lately, you may wish to do so. Geologic Information Portal | WA - DNR If you have not checked out our Geologic Planning page, you may wish to do so. Geologic Planning | WA - DNR Thank you for considering our comments. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me. For your convenience, if there are no concerns or follow-up discussion, you may consider these comments to be final as of the 60-day comment deadline of 12/3/24. Cheerio, Tricia Tricia R. Sears (she/her/hers) Geologic Planning Liaison Washington Geological Survey (WGS) Washington Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Cell: 360-628-2867 | Email: tricia.sears@dnr.wa.gov October 25, 2024 Amy Rusko, Planning Manager City of Arlington 238 North Olympic Avenue Arlington, WA 98223 Subject: PSRC Comments on City of Arlington Draft Comprehensive Plan Dear Ms. Rusko, Thank you for providing an opportunity for the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) to review the City of Arlington draft comprehensive plan. We appreciate that the city has invested a substantial amount of time and effort in developing the draft plan and appreciate the chance to review while in draft form. This timely collaboration provides an opportunity to review plan elements for the 2024 comprehensive plan and prepares the city well for certification by PSRC once the full plan has been adopted. We suggest the city consider the following comments as further work is completed for the comprehensive plan update to align with VISION 2050 and the Growth Management Act. In particular, we encourage the city to work towards a final draft that uses land use assumptions and capacity figures that are consistent with the city’s adopted growth targets and includes a plan for coordinated land use and transportation development around the high-capacity transit station areas. We reviewed the draft plan using the VISION 2050 Consistency Tool. Key sections of the consistency tool are listed below on the left along with relevant comments on the draft plan on the right: Attachment 12 PSRC Comments on City of Arlington Draft Comprehensive Plan October 2024 Page 2 Regional Growth Strategy Plan Review Consistency Tool PSRC Comment on Draft Plan Use land use assumptions substantially consistent with countywide growth targets (RCW 36.70A.070, WAC 365-196- 430, VISION 2050 Regional Growth Strategy) Use consistent land use assumptions throughout plan (RCW 36.70A.070, WAC 365-196-430) The plan’s growth targets in the land use and transportation elements should be internally consistent and aligned with the Snohomish County CPPs. The growth targets presented in the land use supporting analysis should reference the values indicated in the Snohomish County CPPs for the city of Arlington. The same values for housing and employment should be used the transportation modeling analysis, rather than the jurisdiction’s total capacity (as shown in Table 4-1 of the Transportation Demonstrate sufficient zoned development capacity to accommodate targets (RCW 36.70A.115) The plan indicates a desire to expand the UGA. VISION supports a stable UGA, recognizing the transportation and environmental challenges with serving an expanded urban area. Growth in perimeter areas is often more costly to serve than urban areas, and UGA expansions should be based on identified countywide need. Consideration of expanding the UGA PSRC Comments on City of Arlington Draft Comprehensive Plan October 2024 Page 3 Plan Review Consistency Tool PSRC Comment on Draft Plan Work towards annexation and the orderly transition of unincorporated urban areas by: • Joint planning and urban development standards for urban unincorporated areas • Affiliating all unincorporated urban growth areas with adjacent cities • Planning for phased growth of communities to be economically viable, supported by planned urban infrastructure, and served by public The plan should include policy supporting coordination with the county to plan for annexation of all unincorporated areas of the MUGA by the end of the planning period. Maximize the use of existing designated manufacturing/industrial centers by protecting them from incompatible adjacent uses (MPP-Ec-22) The plan’s projected housing growth pattern indicates significant housing growth within the city’s manufacturing/industrial center. MICs are designated to preserve land for industrial uses and to avoid incompatibilities. The plan should include policies to avoid planning for new housing in the MIC and ensure that the MIC subarea plan includes strategies to minimize incompatible Include growth targets for designated regional growth centers and manufacturing/industrial centers (MPP- The plan should include employment targets specific to the Cascade Industrial Center. PSRC Comments on City of Arlington Draft Comprehensive Plan October 2024 Page 4 Plan Review Consistency Tool PSRC Comment on Draft Plan Jurisdictions with regional centers: Support the update of regional center subarea plans to be consistent with the revised Center Plan Tools (DP-Action-8) The Cascade Industrial Center Subarea Plan should be revised to incorporate employment targets to 2044. Please note that PSRC will complete an in-depth review of regional centers in 2025 following comprehensive plan updates. Existing regional manufacturing/industrial centers are expected to meet the standards identified in the Regional Centers Framework to ensure redesignation. Please see the Manufacturing/Industrial Center checklist for more information Identify high- capacity station areas and plan for densities that maximize benefits of transit investments (MPP-DP-22, DP- The Community Transit Swift Gold Line will extend to Arlington by 2029. The plan should address how the city intends to connect housing and employment in the Smokey Point and CIC subareas to : Create and preserve affordable housing near high-capacity transit (MPP-H-8, H-Action-1) The plan should include policies for preservation and/or development of affordable housing near the planned BRT stations of the Community Transit Swift Gold Line, which is anticipated to PSRC Comments on City of Arlington Draft Comprehensive Plan October 2024 Page 5 Plan Review Consistency Tool PSRC Comment on Draft Plan Evaluate planning in areas for potential residential and commercial displacement and use a range of strategies to mitigate displacement impacts (MPP-DP-23, Ec-12) The plan’s racially disparate impact analysis identifies several areas that may redevelop and create displacement, especially around the Smokey Point area. In support of the plan’s policy (LU-10.5) the city is encouraged to identify specific strategies to mitigate the impacts of residential and commercial Provide travel demand forecasts and identify state and local system projects, programs, and management necessary to meet current and future demands and to improve safety and human health (RCW 36.70A.070, MPP-T-4-5) Travel demand forecasts (Table 4-1 of TMP) do not match growth targets. The land use assumptions used for travel demand modeling and project identification must be consistent with the Snohomish County adopted growth targets for housing and employment. See also prior comment under Regional Identify maintenance and system preservation projects and programs necessary to maintain the ability of the transportation system to provide safe, efficient, and reliable movement of people, goods, and services (RCW The city is encouraged to include maintenance and system preservation projects in the plan’s transportation project list and cost summary. Include a 20-year financing plan, as well as an analysis of funding capability for all transportation modes (RCW 36.70A.070(3), RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iv), WAC 365-196-415, WAC 365-196-430, MPP-RC-11-12, T-6, T-15) The plan should include an analysis of funding sufficiency, including identification of potential funding sources to address gaps. The Department of Commerce’s Transportation Element Guidebook (pp. 202-212) is a helpful resource for this PSRC Comments on City of Arlington Draft Comprehensive Plan October 2024 Page 6 Plan Review Consistency Tool PSRC Comment on Draft Plan Ensure mobility choices for people with special needs (MPP-T-10) If the city has completed an ADA transition plan, it should be incorporated into the plan by 2029 per Address affordable housing needs by developing a housing needs assessment and evaluating the effectiveness of existing housing policies, and documenting strategies to achieve housing targets and affordability goals. This includes documenting programs and actions needed to achieve housing availability including gaps in local funding, barriers such as development regulations, and The plan indicates an emergency housing capacity analysis will be completed. This analysis should be included in the final plan, documenting sufficient capacity in line with Commerce’s Guidance for Updating your Housing Element (Book 2). Identify potential physical, economic, and cultural displacement of low- income households and marginalized populations and work with communities to develop anti-displacement strategies in when planning for growth (MPP-H-12, The city is encouraged to elaborate on what anti-displacement strategies will be considered, consistent with the plan’s policies (LU-10.5, H-4.4). PSRC’s Housing Opportunities by Place can be a useful resource. PSRC Comments on City of Arlington Draft Comprehensive Plan October 2024 Page 7 Environment/Climate Change Plan Review Consistency Tool PSRC Comment on Draft Plan Identify open space, trail, and park resources and needs, and develop programs for protecting and enhancing these areas (MPP-En-11-12, En-15, En- Action-4) Consistent with VISION 2050 and national best practices, PSRC recommends including a policy and parks level-of-service to provide parks within a 10-minute walk of all residents. PSRC uses the Trust for Public Land’s ParkServe mapping tool to identify park gaps. ParkServe shows that 62% of Arlington’s residents live within a 10- Address impacts to vulnerable populations and areas that have been or will be disproportionately affected by climate change (MPP-CC-6, CC-8, CC- Action-3, CC-Action-4) The plan includes several policies to adapt to climate change impacts. The city is encouraged to continue this work by identifying community and population vulnerabilities as part of compliance with HB 1181 by 2029. Commerce’s Climate Planning Explore funding sources, changes to regulatory, pricing, taxing, and expenditure practices, and other fiscal tools to meet infrastructure and other needs (MPP-RC-10-11, RC-Action-7, RC- Action-9) The increased development capacity created by the plan provides the opportunity to further develop a transfer of development rights (TDR) program, and pursue revenue incentives, such as the Landscape Conservation and Local Infrastructure Program (LCLIP). These programs can help the city to gain access to flexible infrastructure funding and support goals for both growing neighborhoods and conserving open PSRC Comments on City of Arlington Draft Comprehensive Plan October 2024 Page 8 Plan Review Consistency Tool PSRC Comment on Draft Plan Support inclusive community planning (MPP-DP-2, MPP-DP-8) The city is encouraged to include a summary of the community engagement process conducted to PSRC has resources available to assist the city in addressing these comments and inform development of the draft plan. We have provided links to online documents in this letter, and additional resources related to the plan review process can also be found at https://www.psrc.org/planning-2050/vision/vision-2050-planning- resources. We appreciate all the work the city is doing and the opportunity to review and provide comments. We are happy to continue working with you as the draft progresses through the adoption process. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at 206-464-6172 or ddixon@psrc.org. Sincerely, David Dixon, Growth Management Puget Sound Regional Council cc: Review Team, Growth Management Services, Department of Commerce From:Gayle Roeber To:Ameresia Lawlis; Amy Rusko Subject:A few errors concerning the DEIS Date:Saturday, October 26, 2024 4:55:52 PM October 26, 2024 A few errors, I was hoping we could correct, before it goes to Council. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page v, paragraph titled "Chapter 9, Utilities". Under "Affected Environment". I believe the first word should be "Water". Page vi, sub-category "LIST OF TABLES" Table 7-6 Is Actually titled: City of Arlington Weekday PM Peak Hour Vehicle Trips, and it is actually on 7-32 Table 7-12, title is correct. Page number is not. Actually found on 7-44 Table 8-4, 8-5 and 8-6. Did not find them anywhere in the document. Table 9-3 is listed twice. Second listing should be replaced with 9-4. (title and page number are correct). Page vii: LIST OF FIGURES: Figures 3.2, 3.8,3.10 are missing (2022) at the end of each title. Figure 3.8 'Employment' is mis-typed. Figure 3.10 and Figure 3.11 out of numeric order Figure 5.1 'Arlington' is mis-typed. Figure 5.2 'Waterbodies" is mis-typed Page viii Why are there duplicate titles for Figures 6.5 through 6.16? More questions to follow, under separate email. (Ya!) Figure 6.19 The title shown in the Table of Contents is not the title shown for Figure 6.19 on page 6-20. Fig 6.19 (on page 6-20) is showing a title of " Arlington five-year change in renter households by income and rental units by affordability, 2014-2019". Figure 6.27, 'Categories is mis-typed Figure 6.33 'Capacity' is mis-typed Page ix Figures 6.37-6.44 Actual title on the Figure is "Summary of other Potential Annexation Attachment 13 Locations" Not, Housing and Population Capacity Calculation (as depicted in the Table of Contents). Figure 7.1 "Classification" is mis-typed Figure 7.3 'Average' is mis-typed Page x Figure 8.12 There are two listings. The second listing for Figure 8.12 should be corrected to read 8.13 (title shown in Table of Contents and page number are correct). CHAPTER 1 Page 1-8, third paragraph, second line. I believe it should read "Arlington is a desirable place to live and work and has been growing at a" faster pace......" CHAPTER 2 Page 2-1. second paragraph, second line. "Arlington its Comprehensive Plan....." ?? Something is missing. Page 2-2 , second paragraph under "Summary of Alternatives", first line. Seems like half a thought. What is this sentence trying to tell me? What is the sentence suppose to be further explaIning? CHAPTER 3 Page 3-2, first paragraph, sixth line...need a space between "was13". Page 3-13, first paragraph, fifth line. Should it read "These prices were compared with Arlington's income limits...." (??) Page 3-13 last paragraph, second to last line. There are double commas after 'capacity'. CHAPTER 4 Page 4-10, last paragraph, sixth line. I believe the word "by" shown after "community members", should be removed. Page 4-11, second paragraph, seventh line. I believe the "oof" should be "of". CHAPTER 5 Page 5-4. second paragraph, second line. (This probably has already been addressed). "Error!Reference source not found" CHAPTER 9 Page 9-2, first paragraph, second line "that were was" ?? page 9-7, second paragraph, first sentence. It read a bit rough. Maybe it was me. That's it for the DEIS. Gayle Roeber State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Region 4 Region 4 information: 16018 Mill Creek Blvd, Mill Creek, WA 98012 | phone: (425)-775-1311 1 October 28, 2024 City of Arlington Amy Rusko, Planning Manager 18204 59th Ave NE Arlington, WA 98223 RE: Submittal ID 2024-S-7474A, WDFW draft comments for Arlington’s draft Comprehensive Plan Dear Ms. Rusko, On behalf of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), thank you for the opportunity to comment on Arlington’s draft Comprehensive Plan as part of the current periodic update. Within the State of Washington’s land use decision -making framework, WDFW is considered a technical advisor for the habitat needs of fish and wildlife and routinely provide s input into the implications of land use decisions. We provide these comments and recommendations in keeping with our legislative mandate to preserve, protect, and perpetuate fish and wildlife and their habitats for the benefit of future generations – a mission we can only accomplish in partnership with local jurisdictions. Table 1. Recommended changes to proposed policy language. Policy Number Policy Language (with WDFW suggestions in red) WDFW Comment Environment (this link) Policy E-1.5 Page 2 Locate development in a manner that minimizes impacts to natural features. Promote and incentivize the use of innovative environmentally sensitive development practices, including design, materials, construction, and on-going maintenance. We encourage Arlington to participate in the effort to address environmentally sustainable development by utilizing incentives. See Shoreline’s deep green incentive program which outlines how green development can participate in expedited review as well as fee waivers and/or reductions. The Sustainable Development Code website is also a great resource in outlining how to remove code barriers, create incentives, and fill regulatory gaps in pursuit of this policy’s goals. See also the city of Issaquah and Bellevue’s clean Attachment 14 2 building incentive programs that aim to assist applicants in reaching energy efficiency standards. Policy E-2.5 Page 3 Prioritize urban forestry planning resources and funding for frontline communities that are hurt first and worst by climate change. We encourage the city to conduct an initial urban tree canopy assessment and use it as baseline data to formulate an urban tree canopy management plan to assess trends, set goals, and measure progress toward those goals. This plan should also measure how well the city’s tree-related ordinances are functioning in retaining trees on the landscape. It may not be enough to rely on ordinances if there is not a system in place to track cumulative impacts over time. Resources: • City of Tacoma is a great resource for exploring how tree canopy plans can become a community effort, how data can be presented, and how to track canopy loss/gain. • Data resources include the USDA website, WDFW’s change detection tree canopy data, the Puget Sound Washington Urban Canopy Project, and the WA DNR website. • Example ordinances and plans can be found on the MRSC website. • Funding resources can be found on the DNR website (Commissioner Franz Announces $8 Million in Urban Forestry Grants). • Discover the value of the benefits provided by individual trees around your home and in your community with the National Tree Benefit Calculator. • See also the city of Everett’s Tree Keeper website. • See also WDFW’s Habitat at Home program, which encourages the protection of wildlife through purposeful vegetation planning. E-4.7 Page 4 Reduce energy use by buildings by creating incentives that and advance green building design, including green and cool roofs. See comments in relation to E-1.5 above. We strongly recommend that the city implement an incentive program to help this policy become more actionable. Additionally, see how the city of Boston is identifying priority blocks that could yield the greatest benefits to residents in pursuit of a “cool” roof goal. Similarly, "green" roofs covered with sedum, native flowers, and other low-maintenance vegetation help insulate 3 buildings from solar heat and provide pollinator habitat. Such rooftops help reduce building cooling costs and heat-related illnesses and deaths. E-5.6 Page 5 Obtain stream corridor dedications where reasonable. Please see the WA Department of Ecology’s funding opportunity, Climate Resilient Riparian Systems Grant. E-5.10 Page 6 Support and incentivize environmental stewardship on private and public lands to protect and enhance habitat, water quality, and other ecosystem services, including protection of watersheds, groundwater quantity, and wellhead areas that are sources of the region’s drinking water supplies. We recommend the utilization of WDFW’s Habitat at Home Program. This program is a versatile resource that can be applied to small or large properties, both public and private, as well as across diverse land types. It offers something for everyone, providing practical stewardship techniques suitable for any landscape. E-5.18 Page 7 Protect and restore watershed- scale processes to maximize the ecological benefits and climate resilience of riparian ecosystems. To help address this goal, we strongly encourage Arlington to utilize WDFW’s best available science (BAS) and management recommendations related to riparian ecosystems. Protecting all streams regardless of fish presence, employing riparian management zones (RMZs) to replace outdated ‘stream buffer’ terminology, and utilizing site- specific characteristics to determine RMZ widths (Site Potential Tree Height at 200 years, or SPTH200) are all integral components of ensuring no net loss of ecosystem values or functions occur. See RMZ widths via WDFW’s mapping resource. See also the Department of Ecology’s Climate Resilient Riparian Systems Grant. E-6 Page 8 Suggested Policy: Prioritize the use of softer, bioengineered streambank stabilization methods—such as native vegetation plantings and large woody debris—over hard armoring. Prioritizing bioengineered streambank stabilization methods, such as native vegetation plantings and large woody debris, supports healthier ecosystems by enhancing habitats for wildlife and reducing erosion naturally. Hard armoring methods like concrete or riprap often come with higher maintenance costs and less durability in the long term. These structures can fail during extreme weather events, require frequent repairs, and disrupt natural processes, leading to increased erosion downstream. In contrast, bioengineered solutions like native plantings and large woody debris are more adaptable and sustainable, as they 4 strengthen over time and work with natural systems to stabilize banks and prevent erosion. E-7.2 Page 9 Maintain at a minimum those requirements necessary for qualifying to be a Tree City under the National Arbor Day Foundation, including: As noted in our response to E-2.5, it may not be enough to rely on ordinances if there is not a system in place to track cumulative impacts over time. Critical Area Maps Pages 11-13 General comment We recommend incorporating WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) mapping information within this update. On our website, downloadable priority specie’s location data can be found. The state supreme court has held that PHS is a valid source of BAS for the Growth Management Act. Land Use (this link) LU-1 Page 3 Suggested Policy: Protect and enhance natural areas such as forests, wetlands, and riparian corridors to support climate resilience and preserve the natural beauty that contributes to Arlington's community identity and quality of life. The ‘goal’ of this section states, “Provide unique places and context for the growth of social capital and community resiliency.” The proposed policy supports Arlington's objectives by conserving natural spaces that encourage community interaction and create opportunities for connection. Additionally, these areas offer natural protection against climate impacts like flooding and heat, helping the city adapt to environmental changes. Preserving these landscapes also safeguards the distinctive qualities that reflect Arlington’s community values and sense of place. LU-6.1 Page 7 Amend and adopt land development regulations as needed to adequately protect the attributes, functions, and amenities of the natural environment in all projected growth scenarios for the City. See the resources below: • Whatcom County open space tax incentive program • King County’s Public Benefit Rating System Program (tax incentive program) • Snohomish County TDR Program • Issaquah TDR Program (map) • Redmond TDR Program • Redmond Open Space Preservation • Seattle Green Spaces and TDR LU-6.3 Page 7 Development patterns shall be responsive to critical areas and other environmental factors, and while minimizeing the Planning the built environment around the natural environment allows for the preservation of natural water flow, topography, and vegetation, which reduces the need for costly artificial infrastructure, such as stormwater systems. Natural landscapes are more adaptable and self-sustaining, lowering 5 fragmentation of these built environments. long-term maintenance burdens on municipalities. By integrating built and natural connectivity simultaneously, communities can achieve sustainable development that protects ecosystems, enhances climate resilience, and promotes human well-being, while also minimizing infrastructure costs and fostering a higher quality of life. For example, replacing culverts with larger overpasses can effectively facilitate the connection of fish and wildlife habitats while simultaneously addressing broader transportation needs. See WSDOT’s resource, Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Consideration in Fish Barrier Removal Projects. LU-7.2 Page 8 Support and provide incentives to increase the percentage of new development and redevelopment, both public and private, to be built at higher-performing energy and environmental standards. See resources in our comments for E-1.5 above. Housing (this link) H-6 Page 8 Suggested Policy: Require site plans for new development to show how new open spaces connect with existing adjacent open spaces. Additionally, efforts must be made to maintain connectivity between blocks of critical habitat areas when unavoidable impacts occur. We strongly encourage Arlington to prioritize the strategic placement and retention of natural open spaces to support both ecological integrity and recreational opportunities. Regulations should emphasize the importance of positioning these spaces to promote connectivity for both recreational uses and habitat corridors. Site plans should clearly demonstrate this intent to the greatest extent feasible. H-10.1 Page 11 Encourage Require new residential developments to include community gardens and green spaces to promote outdoor recreation. As mentioned in Arlington’s municipal code, 10% of all developable area for new residential development must be dedicated to open space. A similar requirement should be in place for green/garden spaces, which may be in addition to the comment above. Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (this link) P-2.2 Page 2 Develop at least one community <or neighborhood?> park within each subarea and provide a new central community park within the Smokey Point neighborhood. Strive for every citizen to be within To promote equity and provide a clear metric for park access, we recommend Arlington aim for all residents to be within a 10-minute walking distance of a park. This standard, endorsed by organizations like the Trust for Public Land and the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA), 6 a 10-minute walking distance of a park. is a widely recognized benchmark for equitable park access. It encourages healthier lifestyles, improves social equity, and enhances overall quality of life by ensuring that all residents, particularly underserved populations, have convenient access to green spaces. P-2.3 Page 3 Identify and pursue new parks in areas of potential future urban growth area expansion to serve employees and residents upon annexation. Additionally, ensure these parks are strategically located to support wildlife habitat corridors, promoting both recreational opportunities and the protection of natural ecosystems. We suggest that Arlington regularly update mapping information to clearly depict where open spaces, riparian corridors, and other important habitats and species are located in order to avoid these areas for future development and prioritize them for acquisition. Resources to help address this goal include WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) mapping information, which can be found on our website (link). Planning for wildlife movement before major development is crucial because it preserves essential habitat corridors, ensuring species survival and health, while also reducing the likelihood of future conflicts between citizens and wildlife as urban areas expand. For resources, see The Washington Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Working Group, WSDOT’s Reducing the risk of wildlife collisions website as well as Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Consideration in Fish Barrier Removal Projects, Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks’ How to Build Fence with Wildlife in Mind, and WDFW’s website. P-6.4 Page 5 Develop and improve trails so they are suitable for multi-modal and nonmotorized transportation and so they provide opportunities to connected wildlife habitat corridors and for recreation and education. See resources in comment above. By integrating habitat components, such as wide vegetated buffers into trail designs, communities can enhance the functionality of wildlife corridors while maintaining recreational opportunities for people. Transportation (this link) T-1.3 Page 2 Route new roads to avoid traversing areas identified as critical wildlife habitat or publicly owned natural preserves, parks, and recreation areas, except in cases of overriding public interest. Only allow transportation projects Wildlife habitat connections are crucial for reducing the risk of animal-vehicle collisions by allowing wildlife to move freely between habitats without crossing busy roads. When roads fragment habitats, animals are forced to cross roadways, increasing the likelihood of dangerous encounters with vehicles. By constructing wildlife crossings, 7 in these areas if techniques are utilized to protect wildlife habitat corridor connections, such as constructing large overpasses for wildlife to pass underneath. such as overpasses or underpasses, these corridors allow for safe passage and reduce collisions, enhancing both human safety and wildlife survival. These projects could be as simple as replacing an undersized culvert with a wider bridge (see WSDOT’s Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Consideration in Fish Barrier Removal Projects). T-5.8 Page 5 Develop pedestrian and bicycle level of service guidelines to assess completion of the established pedestrian and bicycle network in the Arlington Complete Streets Plan. As Arlington faces increased development, it is crucial to integrate habitat connectivity features into the Complete Streets Plan while there is still the opportunity to shape growth. By planning now, wildlife corridors can be preserved, reducing future conflicts between development and natural ecosystems. This will promote a safe and sustainable transportation network for both people and wildlife, minimizing the risk of wildlife- vehicle collisions and ensuring that animals have access to essential habitats. Proactively incorporating these features will help maintain Arlington’s ecological integrity as the area develops. T-7 Page 7 General comment We appreciate this section’s attention to Low Impact Development (LID). Integrating LID into Arlington's transportation projects supports regional salmon recovery efforts by improving water quality and reducing pollutants like 6PPD-quinone, a toxic chemical from tire wear. This aligns with the Stillaguamish Watershed Chinook Salmon Recovery Plan, which prioritizes clean water in critical habitat areas. The Green/Duwamish WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan emphasizes similar strategies to mitigate the impacts of urbanization on salmon. By incorporating LID practices, Arlington can contribute significantly to ecosystem health and broader salmon recovery initiatives across the Puget Sound region. Resources include Olympia Rain Garden Incentive Program, Puget Sound Green Stormwater Infrastructure Incentives Programs, Green Stormwater Infrastructure Assistance Programs Guidebook, and the Rain Garden Handbook for Western Washington. 8 T-8.4 Page 9 Implement the adopted Complete Streets Program to ensure that all transportation projects include safe and appropriate facilities infrastructure for pedestrians, wildlife, bicyclists, and transit users, accommodating persons of all ages and abilities. Again, we encourage Arlington to consider wildlife as an integral piece of transportation planning. T-10.1 Page 11 Maintain mapped inventory of the Arlington transportation system, traffic data such as traffic counts and accident data. Conduct studies to support operational and traffic safety improvements. These studies shall also compile and prioritize a list of high wildlife crossing mortality areas for correction. As stated in comments above, it is important to plan for wildlife alongside other transportation plans and projects to avoid future wildlife collision and conflict concerns. Public Safety (this link) PS-5.1 Page 5 Locate critical facilities and utilities in a way that minimizes exposure to hazards and incorporates BAS. As FEMA’s Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) modeling does not consider climate change projections, we suggest Arlington supplement FIRM maps with BAS. For example, King County regulations place ‘Flood Protection Elevations’ three feet above base flood elevation for development within flood-prone areas. For assessing future conditions, see Climate Mapping for a Resilient Washington, as well as FEMA’s Resilience Analysis and Planning Tool (RAPT). Capital Facilities and Utilities (this link) CFU-4 Page 5 Suggested Policy: Coordinate with WSDOT, Snohomish County, and neighboring jurisdictions to plan and prioritize culvert upgrades to ensure consistent fish passage barrier removal, adequate projected stormwater passage, and continued climate-related adaptations to handle water passage into the future throughout Clyde Hill, especially where terrestrial species connectivity can Current fish passage barriers within Arlington can be found through WDFW’s interactive mapping tool. The adjacent suggested policy’s goals can be addressed in tandem with transportation projects, recreational trail linkage projects, redevelopment projects, and more, opening these projects up for diverse funding opportunities. For resources, see WDFW’s Incorporating Climate Change into the Design of Water Crossing Structures: Final Project Report, State Fish Passage web map, and WDOT’s 9 be restored simultaneously (i.e., with wider bridges). Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Considerations in Fish Barrier Removal Projects. Additionally, we suggest utilizing the Sound Choices Checklist in further review of all Comprehensive Plan elements. This checklist utilized broad priorities that are applicable to all jurisdictions. Thank you for taking the time to consider our recommendations to better reflect the BAS for fish and wildlife habitats and ecosystems. We value the relationship we have with your jurisdiction and the opportunity to work collaboratively with you throughout this periodic update cycle. If you have any questions or need our technical assistance or resources at any time during this process, please don’t hesitate to contact me or the Regional Land Use Lead, Morgan Krueger (morgan.krueger@dfw.wa.gov). Sincerely, Signature on final CC: Morgan Krueger, Regional Land Use Lead (Morgan.Krueger@dfw.wa.gov) Kara Whittaker, Land Use Conservation and Policy Section Manager (Kara.Whittaker@dfw.wa.gov) Marian Berejikian, Land Use Conservation and Policy Planner (Marian.Berejikian@dfw.wa.gov) Kirk Lakey, Assistant Regional Habitat Program Manager (Kirk.Lakey@dfw.wa.gov) Kathryn Weilert, Habitat Biologist (Kathryn.Weilert@dfw.wa.gov) Region 4 Central District planning inbox (R4CPlanning@dfw.wa.gov) Jeff Aken, WA Department of Commerce (Jeff.Aken@commerce.wa.gov) EXPANDED HOUSING CHECKLIST – FEBRUARY 2024, Updated May 2024 LOCAL GOVERNMENT DIVISION EXPANDED HOUSING CHECKLIST Periodic Update Checklist for Fully-Planning Cities and Counties1 This checklist provides the framework Commerce regional planners will use to review periodic update submissions. This checklist is NOT required to be completed by each jurisdiction; it is an additional tool to help local planners meet the intent of the statute. Jurisdictions may submit draft housing elements to Laura Hodgson for initial review prior to 60-day review. Jurisdictions in the PSRC region are encouraged to submit draft housing elements to Commerce when it is submitted to PSRC and/or King County, as the requirements from the state are slightly different from the local or regional requirements. Housing element submissions should include a land capacity analysis (LCA) reflecting updated policies. This LCA may be included as a supporting document such as a Housing Needs Assessment (HNA) or simply a separate land capacity analysis document. If the LCA is missing from the submission, it will be requested by Commerce staff. Regional planners will review draft comprehensive plans and development regulations for the items IN BOLD CAPITALIZED TEXT BELOW EACH ITEM. If these materials are not included in the housing submission, Commerce staff will request them. More information on these requirements are included in parenthesis if additional information is needed. (Land use element review items are included for reference to ensure consistency between elements.) Commerce will also be tracking that zoning changes are consistent with comprehensive plan changes and the LCA (RCW 36.70A.115). These zoning changes implement the policies in the comprehensive plan to plan for and accommodate housing affordable to all income brackets. Questions? Contact Laura Hodgson at Laura.Hodgson@commerce.wa.gov or 360-764-3143. 1 The checklist items in this document are applicable to cities and counties, unless otherwise noted, but the headings in the checklist may be slightly different from the county checklist. 2 The May 2024 checklist includes the following updates: (1) Under Section I: Comprehensive Plan Elements, Housing Element, item (e) – clarified that a land capacity analysis is needed for emergency housing. (2) Under Section II: Development Regulations, item (b) – corrected state statute reference which was incorrect. Attachment 15 EXPANDED HOUSING CHECKLIST – FEBRUARY 2024, Updated May 2024 2 Section I: Comprehensive Plan Elements Land Use Element Consistent? Yes/No Changes needed? b. A future land use map showing land uses, city limits and UGA boundaries. RCW 36.70A.070(1) and RCW 36.70A.110(6), WAC 365-196-400(2)(d), WAC 365-196-405(2)(i)(ii) THE LAND USES MUST REFLECT PROJECTED GROWTH INCLUDING FUTURE HOUSING NEEDS. Yes d. jurisdiction’s allocation of projected countywide population and housing needs. RCW 36.70A.115, RCW 43.62.035 and WAC 365-196-405(f) TABLE OR OTHER DOCUMENTION OF LOCAL ALLOCATION OF POPULATION AND HOUSING NEEDS BY INCOME BRACKET FROM THE COUNTYWIDE PROCESS. Yes While this information is in the RCW 36.70A.070(1), the population projection should be included in the Land Use Element. e. Estimates of population densities and building intensities based on future land uses and housing needs. RCW 36.70A.070(1), WAC 365-196-405(2)(i) ESTIMATES SHOULD INCLUDE ASSUMED DENSITIES TO ACCOMMODATE HOUSING NEEDS. (See WAC 365-196-210(6), and Housing Element Book 2: Step C and footnote 30 on page 24.) Yes EXPANDED HOUSING CHECKLIST – FEBRUARY 2024, Updated May 2024 3 Housing Element In the 2021 legislative session, HB 1220 substantially amended the housing-related provisions of the Growth Management Act (GMA), RCW 36.70A.070(2). Local governments should review local comprehensive plan policies and countywide planning policies to be consistent with the updated requirements. Please refer to Commerce’s housing webpages for further information about the new requirements: Updating GMA Housing Elements and Planning for Housing. Consistent? Yes/No Changes needed? . • the preservation, improvement and development of housing, RCW 36.70A.070(2)(b), and • moderate density housing options including, but not limited to, duplexes, triplexes, and townhomes, within an urban growth area boundary. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(b) amended in 2021, and WAC 365-196-410(2)(a) ENSURE THERE ARE POLICY(IES) ON A VARIETY OF MODERATE DENSITY HOUSING TYPES, SUCH AS DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES, AND TOWNHOMES IN URBAN GROWTH AREAS. Yes amended in 2021 LAND USE MAP SHOULD SHOW HIGHER DENSITY HOUSING LOCATED NEAR EMPLOYMENT (COMMERCIAL) AND/OR ADJACENT TO HIGH QUALITY TRANSIT IF APPLICABLE. (Housing Element Book 2: see pages 67-68.) Yes 36.70A.070(2)(d) amended in 2021 TO SHOW CONSIDERATION OF ADUS, DO ONE OR BOTH OF THE FOLLOWING: (1) THE HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT OR HOUSING ELEMENT MUST INCLUDE TEXT AND/OR POLICIES THAT ADDRESSES THE POTENTIAL FOR ADUS TO MEET HOUSING NEEDS, OR (2) INCLUDE ADU CAPACITY IN LAND CAPACITY ANALYSIS. 20-year ADU capacity should not exceed 10% of eligible lots. (See Housing Element Book 2 - ADU narrative guidance: pages 68-69; ADU capacity: see Step 1.6 on pages 27-28.) Yes EXPANDED HOUSING CHECKLIST – FEBRUARY 2024, Updated May 2024 4 Housing Element In the 2021 legislative session, HB 1220 substantially amended the housing-related provisions of the Growth Management Act (GMA), RCW 36.70A.070(2). Local governments should review local comprehensive plan policies and countywide planning policies to be consistent with the updated requirements. Please refer to Commerce’s housing webpages for further information about the new requirements: Updating GMA Housing Elements and Planning for Housing. Consistent? Yes/No Changes needed? income band, consistent with the jurisdiction’s share of countywide housing need, as provided by Commerce. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(a) amended in 2021, WAC 365-196-410(2)(b) and (c) TABLE OR OTHER DOCUMENTATION OF LOCAL ALLOCATION OF HOUSING NEEDS BY INCOME BRACKET. (Housing Element Book 1: see #6 of “Minimum standards for identifying No Please include the city’s housing allocations by income band in the Housing Element. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(a) e. Identification of capacity of land for housing including, but not limited to, government-assisted housing, housing for moderate, low, very low, and extremely low-income households, manufactured housing, multifamily housing, group homes, foster care facilities, emergency housing, emergency shelters, permanent supportive housing. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c) amended in 2021, WAC 365-196-410(e) and (f) STATEMENT SHOWING THERE IS SUFFICIENT CAPACITY OF LAND FOR ALL INCOME HOUSING NEEDS, INCLUDING EMERGENCY HOUSING. INCLUDE A TABLE SHOWING THE BREAKDOWN OF CAPACITY IN ZONES WHICH ADDS UP TO HOUSING NEEDS FOR ALL INCOME LEVELS, INCLUDING EMERGENCY HOUSING. (Supporting documentation of land capacity analysis is encouraged.) (Housing Element Book 2: see bottom table of Exhibit 17 on page 40 and Exhibit 20 on page 48.) ANY LIMITATIONS ON SUPPORTIVE HOUSING TYPES (EMERGENCY HOUSING (EH), EMERGENCY SHELTER (ES), PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING (PSH), AND TRANSITIONAL HOUSING (TH)) MUST ALLOW THE SITING OF A SUFFICENT NUMBER OF UNITS AND BEDS NECESSARY TO MEET PROJECTED NEEDS. (Housing Element Book 2: see pages 41-48.) THE ZONING MAP MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH AND IMPLEMENT THE LAND USE MAP AND LAND CAPACITY FINDINGS. (See RCW 36.70A.115(1), WAC 365-196-800) TBD Please calculate land capacity using assumed density (density likely to occur over the planning horizon) rather than maximum density allowed under the zoning code, unless available data supports the assumption that development is likely to occur at the maximum intensity allowed. spacing, and intensity restrictions for permanent supportive housing on capacity for this housing type, or note if this was included. Please spacing, and intensity restrictions for emergency housing and shelter on capacity for these housing types, or note if this was included. EXPANDED HOUSING CHECKLIST – FEBRUARY 2024, Updated May 2024 5 Housing Element In the 2021 legislative session, HB 1220 substantially amended the housing-related provisions of the Growth Management Act (GMA), RCW 36.70A.070(2). Local governments should review local comprehensive plan policies and countywide planning policies to be consistent with the updated requirements. Please refer to Commerce’s housing webpages for further information about the new requirements: Updating GMA Housing Elements and Planning for Housing. zones that allow emergency housing and shelter. EXPANDED HOUSING CHECKLIST – FEBRUARY 2024, Updated May 2024 6 Consistent? Yes/No Changes needed? the community. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(d) amended in 2021, WAC 365-196-010(g)(ii), WAC 365- 196-300(f), WAC 365-196-410 and see Commerce’s Housing Action Plan (HAP) guidance: Guidance for Developing a Housing Action Plan INCLUDE A LIST OF BARRIERS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEEDS, INCLUDING BARRIERS TO EMERGENCY HOUSING AND PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING. (Housing Element Book 2: see page 50 and Appendix B.) INCLUDE A LIST OF ACTIONS NEEDED TO REMOVE BARRIERS TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING. (Housing Element Book 2: see page 61 and Appendix B.) Note: Identification of barriers to affordable housing and actions to remove barriers do not need to be in table format, but both items need to be present in the housing element. TBD The Adequate Provisions Analysis is off to a great start; we look forward to reviewing the moderate density housing and ADU checklists once they are completed. We recommend including a summary of the Adequate Provisions Analysis in the Housing Element and refer to Appendix D for more details. and exclusion in housing, including: • Zoning that may have a discriminatory effect; • Disinvestment; and • Infrastructure availability RCW 36.70A.070(e) new in 2021 INCLUDE A STATEMENT OF WHETHER DATA SHOWS IF THERE ARE DISPARATE IMPACTS. NOTE: COMMERCE HAS DATA AVAILABLE FOR ALL JURISDICTIONS ON OUR EZVIEW SITE. (Housing Element Book 3: see pages 19-20.) REVIEW OF HOUSING ELEMENT POLICIES AND REGULATIONS THAT HAVE LED TO THESE IMPACTS. (Housing Element Book 3: see pages 33-36; this specific evaluation framework is not required.) Yes We recommend including key findings from the Racially Disparate Impacts Analysis in the Housing Element and refer to Appendix B for more details. EXPANDED HOUSING CHECKLIST – FEBRUARY 2024, Updated May 2024 7 Consistent? Yes/No Changes needed? h. Establish policies and regulations to address and begin to undo racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing caused by loca RCW 36.70A.070(2)(f) new in 2021 INCLUDE POLICIES TO ADDRESS THESE IMPACTS, OR THAT ADDRESS DEVELOPMENT OF MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, PRESERVATION OF EXISTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND PROTECTION OF EXISTING HOUSEHOLDS. (Policies: Housing Element Book 3, see pages 36-39 and Appendix C of Housing Element Book 2; Regulations: Housing Element Book 3, pages 43-44.) Yes occur with changes to zoning development regulations and capital investments. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(g) new in 2021 DISCUSSION AND/OR MAP OF AREAS THAT MAY BE AT RISK OF DISPLACEMENT. (COMMERCE AND PSRC HAVE MAPS AVAILABLE, AND INCLUSION OF ONE WOULD MEET THIS REQUIREMENT.) (Housing Element Book 3: see pages 27-31.) Establish anti-displacement policies, with consideration given to the preservation of historical and cultural communities as well as investments in low, very low, extremely low, and moderate-income housing; equitable development initiatives; inclusionary zoning; community planning requirements; tenant protections; land disposition policies; and consideration of land that may be used for affordable housing. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(h) new in 2021 SEE H ABOVE. Yes Please include a sentence in the Housing Element about displacement risk and refer to Appendix B. for more details. EXPANDED HOUSING CHECKLIST – FEBRUARY 2024, Updated May 2024 8 Consistency is required by the GMA Consistent? Yes/No Changes needed? b. All plan elements must be consistent with each other. RCW 36.70A.070 (preamble) and WAC 365-196-500 ENSURE CAPITAL FACILITIES, TRANSPORTATION AND UTILITIES ELEMENTS INCLUDE IMPROVEMENTS TO SUPPORT ADDED HOUSING DENSITY AND CONSIDER UNDERSERVED AREAS. LIKELY CONSIDERATIONS WILL INCLUDE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS AND PRIORITIZING AND FUNDING THIS WORK. (Housing Element Book 2: see LCA Step 1.3 “Identify gaps in utility infrastructure and services” on page 22, and “Identify related infrastructure and service needs” on page 77.) Yes Public Participation a. Plan ensures public participation in the comprehensive planning process. RCW 36.70A.020(11), .035, and .140, WAC 365-196-600(3) provide possible public participation choices. THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN SHOULD SHOW EFFORTS TO ENGAGE VULNERABLE POPULATIONS, OVERBURDEDED COMMUNITIES, AND THOSE WHO MAY HAVE BEEN DISPARATELY IMPACTED BY HOUSING POLICIES. (Housing Element Book 3: see pages 15- 19.) Yes EXPANDED HOUSING CHECKLIST – FEBRUARY 2024, Updated May 2024 9 Section II: Development Regulations Must be consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan. RCW 36.70A.040, WAC 365-196-800 and 810 Zoning Code Consistent? Yes/No Changes needed? a. Zoning designations are consistent and implement land use designations that accommodate future housing needs by income bracket as allocated through the countywide planning process. (RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c) - Amended in 2021 with HB 1220) If subject to middle housing requirements in RCW 36.70A.635, see material on Commerce’s Middle Housing webpage. ZONING MAP AND TEXT ALLOW FOR THE HOUSING TYPES AND DENSITIES IN THE LAND CAPACITY ANALYSIS. THESE ZONING CHANGES MUST BE COMPLETE BY THE END OF THE PERIODIC UPDATE PERIOD. Yes b. [FOR CITIES] Permanent supportive housing or transitional housing must be allowed where residences and hotels are allowed. RCW 35A.21.430 amended in 2021, RCW 35.21.683, amended in 2021, (HB 1220 sections 3-5) “permanent supportive housing” and “transitional housing” is defined in RCW 36.70A.030; “transitional housing” is defined in RCW 84.36.043(3)(c) [FOR CITIES AND COUNTIES] ANY LIMITATIONS ON PERMANENT SUPPORTIVE HOUSING AND TRANSITIONAL HOUSING MUST BE CONNECTED TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY AND ALLOW THE SITING OF A SUFFICENT NUMBER OF UNITS AND BEDS NECESSARY TO MEET PROJECTED NEEDS. (Housing Element Book 2: see pages 41-48.) No The occupancy, spacing, and intensity restrictions for permanent supportive housing in AMC 20.40.040(c)(14) are not based on a demonstrated connection to a public health and safety need, and so are inconsistent with RCW 35A.21.430. Please see the STEP Model Ordinance and User Guide for further guidance on this requirement. c. [FOR CITIES] Indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing shall be allowed in any zones in which hotels are allowed, except in cities that have adopted an ordinance authorizing indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing in a majority of zones within one-mile of transit. Indoor emergency housing must be allowed in areas with hotels. RCW 35A.21.430 amended in 2021, RCW 35.21.683, amended in 2021, (HB 1220 sections 3- 5) “emergency housing” is defined in RCW 36.70A.030(14) [FOR CITIES AND COUNTIES] ANY LIMITATIONS ON EMERGENCY HOUSING AND EMERGENCY SHELTER MUST BE CONNECTED TO PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY AND ALLOW THE SITING OF A SUFFICENT NUMBER OF UNITS AND BEDS NECESSARY TO MEET PROJECTED NEEDS. (Housing Element Book 2: see pages 41-48.) No The occupancy, spacing, and intensity restrictions for emergency housing and shelter in AMC 20.40.040(c)(15) are not based on a demonstrated connection to a public health and safety need, and so are inconsistent with RCW 35A.21.430. Please see the STEP Model Ordinance and User Guide for further guidance on this requirement. LOCAL GOVERNMENT DIVISION Periodic Update Checklist for Fully-Planning Cities Overview: This checklist is intended to help cities that are fully planning under the Growth Management Act (GMA) conduct the “periodic review and update” of comprehensive plans and development regulations required under RCW 36.70A.130 (5). This checklist identifies components of comprehensive plans and development regulations that may need updating to reflect the latest local conditions or to comply with GMA changes since the last periodic update cycle (2015-2018). Local governments should review local comprehensive plan policies, countywide planning policies and multicounty planning policies (where applicable) to be consistent with the new requirements. Checklist Instructions Please use the most recent versions of your comprehensive plan and development regulations to fill out each item in the checklist and answer the following questions: Is this item addressed in your current plan or development regulations? If YES, fill in the form with citation(s) to where in the plan or regulation the item is addressed. Where possible, we recommend citing policy or goal numbers by element rather than page numbers, since these can change. If you have questions about the requirement, follow the hyperlinks to the relevant statutory provision or rules. If you still have questions, visit the Commerce Periodic Update webpage or contact the Commerce planner assigned to your region. Arlington 10.21.2024________ City _____________________________________________ Jeff Aken & Housing, Climate Teams. _____________________________________________ Staff contact, phone + email Notice: This checklist has been updated with the new 2024 GMA legislation. Rows that include new 2023 and 2024 legislative changes or updated Commerce guidance are shown in light orange , and all statutory changes adopted since 2015 are emphasized in highlighted text to help identify new GMA requirements that may not have been addressed during the last periodic update or through other amendments outside of the required periodic update process. Additionally, amendments to the GMA are summarized in this document on Commerce’s GMA Laws and Rules webpage. Attachment 16 PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 2 Is amendment needed to meet current statute? Check YES to indicate a change to your plan will be needed. Check NO to indicate that the GMA requirement has already been met. Local updates may not be needed if the statute hasn’t changed since your previous update, if your jurisdiction has kept current with required inventories, or if there haven’t been many changes in local circumstances. Use the “Notes” column to add additional information to note where your city may elect to work on or amend sections of your plan or development regulations, to call out sections that are not strictly required by the GMA, or to indicate if the item is not applicable to your jurisdiction. Submit your checklist! This will be the first deliverable under your periodic update grant. PlanView system and instructions: Completed checklists can be submitted through Commerce’s PlanView portal. The PlanView system allows cities and counties to submit and track amendments to comprehensive plans or development regulations online, with or without a user account. You can also submit via email: reviewteam@commerce.wa.gov Fill out and attach a cover sheet, a copy of your submittal and this checklist. Please be advised that Commerce is no longer accepting paper submittals. For further information about the submittal process, please visit Commerce’s Growth Management Act Laws and Rules webpage. Need help? Please visit Commerce’s periodic update webpage for additional resources. Or contact: Suzanne Austin, AICP Senior Planner Growth Management Services WA Department of Commerce 509.407.7955 Suzanne.Austin@commerce.wa.gov Or, your assigned regional planner PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 3 Appendices LAND USE CRITICAL AREAS APPENDIX A: HOUSING UNIT MINIMUMS PER POPULATION HOUSING ZONING CODE APPENDIX B: ELEMENT UPDATES UNDER HB 1181 CAPITAL FACILITIES SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UTILITIES RESOURCE LANDS TRANSPORTATION ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES SHORELINE SUBDIVISION CODE ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES STORMWATER TRIBAL PLANNING ORGANIC MATERIALS MANAGEMENT CLIMATE CHANGE & RESILIENCY IMPACT FEES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CONCURRENCY & TDM PARKS & RECREATION TRIBAL PARTICIPATION OPTIONAL ELEMENTS REGULATIONS FOR OPTIONAL ELEMENTS CONSISTENCY PROJECT REVIEW PROCEDURES PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN & REGULATION AMENDMENTS PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 4 Section I: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes Notice: 2021-2022 legislation ESSB 5593: includes changes to RCW 36.70A.130 regarding UGA size, patterns of development, suitability and infrastructure. Coordinate these efforts with your county. Not planned for this update cycle, but in next 20- years is considering a UGA expansion and working with Snohomish County. Completed: ☐ Date: a. The element integrates relevant county-wide planning policies into the local planning process, and ensures local goals and policies are consistent. For jurisdictions in the central Puget Sound region, the plan is consistent with applicable multicounty planning policies. RCW 36.70A.210 WAC 365-196-305 Coordinate these efforts with your county. Yes, Yes, introduction and community profile page 9. Consider adding policy language to LU Element around consistency to strengthen this piece. Completed: ☐ Date: b. A future land use map showing city limits and UGA boundaries. RCW 36.70A.070(1) amended in 2023 and RCW 36.70A.110(6), WAC 365-196- 400(2)(d), WAC 365-196-405(2)(i)(ii) Yes, Completed: ☐ Date: c. Consideration of urban planning approaches that increase physical activity and reduce per capita vehicle miles traveled within the jurisdiction, but without increasing greenhouse gas emissions elsewhere in the state. RCW 36.70A.070(1) (amended in 2023) and WAC 365-196-405(2)(j). Additional resources: Commerce’s Climate guidance, Transportation Efficient Communities' guidance, and the WA Department of Health Washington State Plan for Healthy Communities and Active Community Environment Toolkit Yes, LU1-1.4, LU4.6, Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 5 Section I: Comprehensive Plan In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes d. A consistent population projection throughout the plan which should be consistent with the jurisdiction’s allocation of countywide population and housing needs. RCW 36.70A.115, RCW 43.62.035 and WAC 365-196-405(f) Yes, Yes, While this information is in the supporting analysis documents, based on RCW 36.70A.070(1), the population projection should be included in the Land Use Element. Completed: ☐ Date: e. Estimates of population densities and building intensities based on future land uses and housing needs. RCW 36.70A.070(1) (amended in 2023), WAC 365-196-405(2)(i) • For cities required to plan under the Buildable Lands Program, RCW 36.70A.215 amended in 2017, some jurisdictions may need to identify reasonable measures to reconcile inconsistencies. See Commerce’s Buildable Lands Program page. Yes, Completed: ☐ Date: f. Provisions for protection of the quality and quantity of groundwater used for public water supplies. RCW 36.70A.070(1) (amended in 2023), WAC 365-196-405(1)(c); WAC 365-196-485(1)(d) Yes, Yes, this shall be in the Land Use Element. Recommendation: Consider adding policy language or reference to the Land Use Element to be consistent with the RCW. Completed: ☐ Date: g. Identification of lands useful for public purposes such as utility corridors, transportation corridors, landfills, sewage treatment facilities, storm water management facilities, recreation, schools and other public uses. RCW 36.70A.150 and WAC 365- 196-340 Yes, Part 3, pg. 67. Book 2 supporting analysis states that public includes public utilities, community facilities, schools etc. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 6 In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes h. Identification of open space corridors and green spaces within and between urban growth areas, including lands useful for recreation, wildlife habitat, trails and connection of critical areas, and urban and community forests within the UGA. RCW 36.70A.070(1) amended in 2023, RCW 36.70A.160 and WAC 365-196-335 TBD. Parks is listed as a category in public/semi- public but not clear if this includes corridors and community forested areas. Completed: ☐ Date: i. If there is an airport within or adjacent to the city: policies, land use designations (and zoning) to discourage the siting of incompatible uses adjacent to general aviation airports. RCW 36.70A.510, RCW 36.70.547 Note: The plan (and associated regulations) must be filed with the Aviation Division of WSDOT. WAC 365-196-455 Yes, the LU Element besides LU-5.1 relating to manufacturing, industrial etc. CFU-3.16 also states working with airport and adopted master plan.PS-2.3 deals with compatible uses. Recommendation: Reference existing policies such as PS-2.3 in LU Element or add policy language about siting incompatible uses Completed: ☐ Date: j. Where applicable, a review of drainage, flooding and stormwater run-off in the area and nearby jurisdictions and provide guidance for corrective actions to mitigate or cleanse those discharges that pollute waters of the state. RCW 36.70A.070(1) (amended in 2023) and WAC 365-196-405(2)(e) Note: RCW 90.56.010(27) defines waters of the state. Additional resources: Commerce’s climate guidance, Protect Puget Sound Watersheds, Building Cities in the Rain, Ecology Stormwater Manuals, Puget Sound Partnership Action Agenda Yes, Book 1 Environment has these policies. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 7 In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes k. Policies to designate and protect critical areas including wetlands, fish and wildlife habitat protection areas, frequently flooded areas, critical aquifer recharge areas and geologically hazardous areas. In developing these policies, the city must have included the best available science (BAS) to protect the functions and values of critical areas, and give “special consideration” to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries. RCW 36.70A.030(6), RCW 36.70A.172, WAC 365- 190-080. Best Available Science: see WAC 365- 195-900 through -925 Yes, LU-6.3, LU-8.7, E-1.2, Completed: ☐ Date: l. If forest or agricultural lands of long-term commercial significance are designated inside a city: a program authorizing Transfer (or Purchase) of Development Rights. RCW 36.70A.060(4), RCW 36.70A.170 N/A Completed: ☐ Date: m. If there is a Military Base within or adjacent to the jurisdiction employing 100 or more personnel: policies, land use designations, (and consistent zoning) to discourage the siting of incompatible uses adjacent to military bases. RCW 36.70A.530(3), WAC 365-196-475 N/A Completed: ☐ Date: n. New section RCW 36.70A.142 (2022), HB 1799: Development regulations newly developed, updated, or amended after January 1, 2025 allow for the siting of organic materials (OM) management facilities as identified in local solid waste management plans (SWMP) to meet OM reduction and diversion goals. Siting must meet criteria described in RCW 70A.205.040(3). See also RCW 36.70.330. For applicability, see RCW 70A.205.540. No, Yes, Recommendation: Work with Snohomish County and solid waste providers to address RCW. Potentially adding organic materials to CFU-8. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 8 In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes o. Give special consideration to achieving environmental justice in goals and policies, including efforts to avoid creating or worsening environmental health disparities. RCW 36.70A.070(1) amended in 2023. Yes, LU-6, Completed: ☐ Date: p. The land use element must reduce and mitigate the risk to lives and property posed by wildfires by using land use planning tools and through wildfire preparedness and fire adaptation measures. RCW 36.70A.070(1) amended in 2023. See also: International Wildland-Urban Interface Code No, Yes, Recommendation: Add policy language consistent with RCW potentially expanding CFU 4.3 to add land use planning. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 9 Housing Element New legislation substantially amended the housing-related provisions of the Growth Management Act (GMA), RCW 36.70A.070 (2) should review local comprehensive plan policies and countywide planning policies to be consistent with the updated requirements. Please refer to Commerce’s housing webpage for further information. See also Appendix A of this checklist for the new 2023 minimum housing unit requirements per city population. In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes housing element requirements involve and what Commerce staff will be reviewing for, please see the Expanded Housing Checklist located on the Updating GMA Housing Completed by Commerce Housing Staff using Expanded Housing Checklist. . • the preservation, improvement and development of housing RCW 36.70A.070(2)(b); • moderate density housing options including, but not limited to, duplexes, triplexes, and townhomes, within an urban growth area boundary, RCW 36.70A.070(2)(b) and WAC 365-196-410(2)(a); and • Consideration of housing locations in relation to employment locations and the role of ADUs. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(d) new in 2021 Notice: These items were separately listed in the previous version of the checklist. No content Yes, Completed: ☐ Date: projected housing needs over the planning period, by income band, consistent with the jurisdiction’s share of countywide housing need, as provided by Commerce. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(a) amended in No, Yes, Please include the city’s housing allocations by income band in the Housing Element. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(a) Currently in Appendix D, Figure 2 Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 10 In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section meet current statute? Yes/No Notes c. Identification of capacity of land for housing including, but not limited to, government-assisted housing, housing for moderate, low, very low, and extremely low-income households, manufactured housing, multifamily housing, group homes, foster care facilities, emergency housing, emergency shelters and permanent supportive housing. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c) amended in 2021, WAC 365-196-410(e) and (f) TBD: Please calculate land capacity using assumed density (density likely to occur over the planning horizon) rather than maximum density allowed under the zoning code, unless available data supports the assumption that development is likely to occur at the maximum intensity allowed. Please evaluate the impact of occupancy, spacing, and intensity restrictions for permanent supportive housing on capacity for this housing type, or note if this was included. Please evaluate the impact of occupancy, spacing, and intensity restrictions for emergency housing and shelter on capacity for these housing types, or note if this was included. For the emergency housing land capacity analysis, please only include capacity in zones Completed: ☐ Date: d. Adequate provisions for existing and projected housing needs for all economic segments of the community, including documenting barriers and actions needed to achieve housing availability. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(d) amended in 2021, WAC 365-196-010(g)(ii), WAC 365-196-300(f), WAC 365-196-410 and see Commerce’s Housing Action Plan (HAP) guidance: Guidance for Developing a Housing Action Plan. TBD great start; we look forward to reviewing the moderate density housing and ADU checklists once they are completed. We recommend including a summary of the Adequate Provisions Analysis in the Housing Element and refer to Appendix D for more details. Completed: ☐ Date: in racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing, including: • Zoning that may have a discriminatory effect; Yes, We recommend including key findings from the Racially Disparate Impacts Analysis in the Housing Element and refer to Appendix B for more details. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 11 In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section meet current statute? Yes/No Notes • Disinvestment; and • Infrastructure availability RCW 36.70A.070 (2)(e) new in 2021 f. Establish policies and regulations to address and begin to undo racially disparate impacts, displacement, and exclusion in housing caused by local policies, plans, and actions. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(f) new in 2021 Yes, Completed: ☐ Date: In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes of displacement from market forces that occur with changes to zoning development regulations and capital investments. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(g) new in 2021 Establish anti-displacement policies, with consideration given to the preservation of historical and cultural communities as well as investments in low, very low, extremely low, and moderate-income housing; equitable development initiatives; inclusionary zoning; community planning requirements; tenant protections; land may be used for affordable housing. RCW 36.70A.070(2)(h) new in 2021 See also: Support Materials for Racially Disparate Impacts, Exclusion and Displacement Work Yes, Please include a sentence in the Housing Element about displacement risk and refer to Appendix B. for more details. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 12 PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 13 Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) Element To serve as a check on the practicality of achieving other elements of the plan, covering all capital facilities planned, provided and paid for by public entities including local government and special districts, etc. including water systems, sanitary sewer systems, storm water facilities, schools, parks and recreational facilities, police and fire protection facilities. Capital expenditures from park and recreation elements, if separate, should be included in the CFP Element. The CFP Element must be consistent with CWPPs, and RCW 36.70A.070(3) amended in 2023. Changes made to this element through HB 1181 (climate change and resiliency) are not required, although jurisdictions should make a good faith effort to incorporate these items to In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. Policies or procedures to ensure capital budget decisions are in conformity with the comprehensive plan. RCW 36.70A.120 No, Yes, Recommendation: Add policy or procedure to Completed: ☐ Date: b. An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, including green infrastructure. RCW 36.70A.070(3)(a) amended in 2023 and WAC 365- 196-415(1)(a) Yes, In CF& U book Completed: ☐ Date: c. A forecast of needed capital facilities. RCW 36.70A.070(3)(b) and WAC 365-196-415(1)(b) Note: The forecast of future need should be based on projected population and adopted levels of service (LOS) over the planning period. Yes, CF & U book Completed: ☐ Date: d. Proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities. RCW 36.70A.070(3)(c) and WAC 365-196-415 (1)(c) and (3)(c) Infrastructure investments should consider equity and plan for any potential displacement impacts. Yes, System Plans and project lists Completed: ☐ Date: e. A six-year plan (at minimum) that will finance such capital facilities within projected funding capacities and identify sources of public money to finance planned capital facilities. RCW 36.70A.070(3)(d), RCW 36.70A.120, WAC 365-196-415(1)(d) TBD: Yes, Checking with Amy Rusk (10.25.2024) Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 14 In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes element if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs. RCW 36.70A.070(3)(e), WAC 365- 196-415(2)(d) Note: park and recreation facilities shall be Yes, CFU-3.6, Completed: ☐ Date: g. If impact fees are collected: identification of facilities on which money is to be spent. RCW 82.02.050(5) and WAC 365-196-850(3) No, Yes, Potentially in CIP, waiting for link from Amy Rusk. Completed: ☐ Date: h. Identify and include information about all public entities, including special purpose districts that own capital facilities. RCW 36.70A.070 (3) amended in 2023 Yes, Completed: ☐ Date: Utilities Element Consistent with relevant CWPPs and RCW 36.70A.070 (4) amended in 2023. Utilities include, but are not limited to: sanitary sewer systems, water lines, fire suppression, electrical lines, telecommunication lines, and natural gas lines. Changes made to this element through HB 1181 (climate change and resiliency) are not required, although jurisdictions should make a good faith effort to incorporate these items to be consistent with the a. The general location, proposed location and capacity of all existing and proposed utilities, to include telecommunications. RCW 36.70A.070(4)(a) amended in 2023 and WAC 365-196-420 No, Yes, Didn’t see telecommunications/broadband identified. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Identify and include information and contact information about all public entities, including special purpose districts that own utility systems. RCW 36.70A.070 (4)(b) new in 2023 Yes, Yes, Didn’t see telecommunications/broadband identified. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 15 Transportation Element Consistent with relevant CWPPs and RCW 36.70A.070 (6) amended in 2023 by HB 1181. See also the new climate element below for jurisdictional requirements. In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. An inventory of air, water and ground transportation facilities and services, including transit alignments, active transportation facilities, state-owned transportation facilities and general aviation airports. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iii)(A) amended in 2023 and WAC 365-196-430(2)(c) No, Yes, Not in comp plan but in TMP. Question for Amy, will TMP be adopted by reference as part of Comp Plan? Completed: ☐ Date: b. Adopted multimodal levels of service standards for all locally owned arterials, locally and regionally operated transit routes that serve UGAs, state- owned or operated transit routes that serve urban areas if the department of transportation has prepared such standards, and active transportation facilities to serve as a gauge to judge performance of the system and success in helping to achieve environmental justice. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iii)(B) and (C) amended in 2023, WAC 365-196-430 Yes, Yes, in TMP not Transportation Element. Completed: ☐ Date: c. Identification of specific actions to bring transportation facilities and services to established multimodal LOS. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iii)(D) amended in 2023, WAC 365-196-430 Yes, TMP Completed: ☐ Date: d. A forecast of multimodal transportation for a minimum of 10 years including land use assumptions used in estimating travel. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(i), RCW 36.70A.070 (6)(a)(iii)(E) amended in 2023, WAC 365-196-430(2)(f) Yes, Yes, Forecast numbers in table 4-1 (jobs, housing) do not match growth targets in comprehensive plan. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 16 In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes e. A projection of state and local system needs to equitably meet current and future demand and equitably implement the multimodal network. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iii)(F) amended in 2023, WAC Yes, Completed: ☐ Date: f. A transition plan for transportation as required in Title II of ADA. Perform self-evaluations of current facilities and develop a program access plan to address deficiencies and achieve the identification of physical obstacles, establish methods, perform modifications and identify leadership roles. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iii)(G) new in 2023. Yes, Under development and will be used to prioritize areas with higher pedestrian traffic levels. Completed: ☐ Date: g. An active transportation component to include collaborative efforts to identify and designate planned improvements for active transportation enhanced community access and promote healthy lifestyles. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(vii) amended in 2023, WAC 365-196-430(2)(j) Yes, T-6.5, PS-9.2, H-10 Completed: ☐ Date: h. A description of any existing and planned transportation demand management (TDM) strategies, such as HOV lanes or subsidy programs, parking policies, etc. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(vi) and WAC 365-196- 430(2)(i)(i) Yes, No, In TMP but not in Transportation element. Completed: ☐ Date: i. An analysis of future funding capability to judge needs against probable funding resources. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iv)(A), WAC 365.196- 430(2)(k)(iv) No, Yes, We did not see this in our review, unless part of CIP which has not been reviewed yet. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 17 In Current Plan? Yes/No Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes j. A multi-year financing plan based on needs identified in the comprehensive plan, the appropriate parts of which serve as the basis for the 6-year street, road or transit program. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iv)(B) and RCW 35.77.010, WAC 365-196-430(2)(k)(ii) Yes, TMP Completed: ☐ Date: k. If probable funding falls short of meeting identified needs of the transportation system, including state transportation facilities, a discussion of how additional funds will be raised, or how land use assumptions will be reassessed to ensure that LOS standards will be met. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iv)(C) amended in 2023, WAC 365-196-430(2)(l)(iii) Yes, Reassessment strategy in the TMP Completed: ☐ Date: l. A description of intergovernmental coordination the transportation plan and land use assumptions on the transportation systems of adjacent jurisdictions and how it is consistent with the regional transportation plan. RCW 36.70A.070(6) (a)(v); WAC 365-196-430(1)(e) and 430(2)(a)(iii) Yes, TMP Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 18 Shoreline For shorelines of the state, the goals and policies of the shoreline management act as set forth in RCW 90.58.020 are added as one of the goals of the Growth Management Act (GMA) as set forth in RCW 36.70A.480. The goals and policies of a shoreline master program for a county or city approved under RCW 90.58 shall be considered an element of the county or city's comprehensive plan. In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. The policies, goals, and provisions of RCW 90.58 and applicable guidelines shall be the sole basis for determining compliance of a shoreline master program with this chapter except as the shoreline master program is required to comply with the internal consistency provisions of RCW 36.70A.070, 36.70A.040(4), 35.63.125, 35A.63.105 36.70A.480 Shoreline Master Program – Ordinance No. 2019- 018 The amendment included updates to ensure compliance and consistency with requirements of the Shoreline Management Act and state regulations that have been added or changed since the last Shoreline Master Program update, and incorporate amendments deemed necessary to reflect changed circumstances, new information, or improved data. Pg. 39 Completed: ☐ Date: b. Shoreline master programs shall provide a level of protection to critical areas located within shorelines of the state that assures no net loss of shoreline ecological functions necessary to sustain shoreline natural resources as defined by department of ecology guidelines adopted pursuant to RCW 90.58.060. See Ecology’s Shoreline planners’ toolbox for the SMP Checklist and other resources. Completed: ☐ Date: c. Shorelines of the state shall not be considered critical areas under this chapter except to the extent that specific areas located within shorelines of the state qualify for critical area designation based on the definition of critical areas provided by RCW 36.70A.030(5) and have been designated as such by a local government pursuant to RCW 36.70A.060(2) Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 19 In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes d. If a local jurisdiction's master program does not include land necessary for buffers for critical areas that occur within shorelines of the state, as authorized by RCW 90.58.030(2)(f), then the local jurisdiction shall continue to regulate those critical areas and their required buffers pursuant to RCW 36.70A.060(2). Completed: ☐ Date: Provisions for siting essential public facilities (EPFs) Consistent with CWPPs and RCW 36.70A.200, amended in 2021. This section can be included in the Capital Facilities Element, Land Use Element or in its own element. Sometimes the identification and siting process for EPFs is part of the CWPPs. a. A process or criteria for identifying and siting essential public facilities (EPFs). RCW 36.70A.200 and WAC 365-196-550(1) Notes: RCW 36.70A.200, amended 2021 reentry and rehabilitation facilities. EPFs are defined in RCW 36.70A.200. Regional transit authority facilities are included in the list of essential public facilities. Yes, CFU-3.11 and Appendix B: Essential Public Facility Siting Process. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Policies or procedures that ensure the comprehensive plan does not preclude the siting of EPFs. RCW 36.70A.200(5) Note: If the EPF siting process is in the CWPPs, this policy may be contained in the comprehensive plan as well. WAC 365-196-550(3) Yes, CFU-3.10 Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 20 Tribal Participation in Planning new in 2022 (see HB 1717) A federally recognized Indian tribe may voluntarily choose (opt-in) to participate in the local and regional planning processes. See Commerce’s new Tribal Planning Coordination for GMA webpage for guidance and staff contacts. In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. Mutually agreeable memorandum of agreement collaboration and participation in the planning process unless otherwise agreed at the end of a mediation period. RCW 36.70A.040(8)(a) new in 2022, RCW 36.70A.190 new in 2022 N/A not see formal agreement. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Port elements, if adopted, are developed collaboratively between the city, the applicable port and the applicable tribe(s), which shall comply with RCW 36.70A.040(8). RCW 36.70A.085 amended in 2022 N/A Completed: ☐ Date: c. Urban Growth Areas: counties and cities coordinate planning efforts for any areas planned for urban growth with applicable tribe(s). RCW 36.70A.110(1) amended 2022, RCW 36.70A.040(8) Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 21 Climate Change and Resiliency New in 2023, see HB 1181. WAC updates are forthcoming. A new required element for comprehensive plans and new goal of the GMA. Designed to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, plan for resilience and support environmental justice. Climate elements must maximize economic, environmental and social co-benefits and prioritize environmental justice in order to avoid worsening environmental health disparities. A climate element can take the form of a single comprehensive plan chapter or be integrated into several chapters/elements such as housing, transportation and land use. Visit Commerce’s Climate Program webpage for further guidance, grants, tools and staff contacts. Per HB 1181, GHG reduction goals in the guidelines must be based on scientifically credible projections and scenarios likely to result in equivalent harm avoidance, GHG emission All fully planning jurisdictions must have a resilience sub-element as part of their broader climate element. The following counties and their cities with a population greater than 6,000 as of April 1, 2021 must also have a greenhouse gas emissions reduction sub-element. Please also review the Appendix for requirements due in the upcoming periodic update. • December 31, 2025 Deadline: Clark, Skagit, Thurston, Whatcom • June 30, 2026 Deadline: Benton, Franklin, Spokane • June 30, 2029 Deadline: These jurisdictions are only required to update two elements this cycle — the transportation and climate elements. Jurisdictions may submit their greenhouse gas emissions reduction sub-element to Commerce for approval per RCW 36.70A.096. Please contact Commerce for submittal requirements if you think your jurisdiction will request approval. In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes Resiliency sub-element: items a through d are required for all fully planning jurisdictions a. Specific goals, policies and programs that identify, protect and enhance natural areas to foster resiliency to climate impacts, as well as areas of vital habitat for safe passage and species migration. RCW 36.70A.070(9) new in 2023 As noted in the Draft Implementation Actions, Arlington is not obligated to meet the climate- related changes to GMA until 2029. However, we appreciate that you have already integrated many climate goals and policies throughout your comprehensive plan. Commerce is updating the Washington Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 22 2023). Rulemaking will be complete by the end of 2025, and we will regularly ask for feedback. Your 2029 implementation progress report will need to include climate change and resiliency policies that meet those standards, so I invite Things to consider as you move forward: • Climate change and resiliency guidance the periodic checklists and guidance documents regarding climate change and resiliency. Be sure to review these updates with future submittals. • New voluntary approval process: Per RCW 36.70A.096, a county or city that develops a GHG emissions reduction sub-element may submit it to Commerce for approval. If your city is interested, then they must notify Commerce in writing 120 days prior to applying for approval of the sub- element. identify, protect and enhance community resiliency to climate change impacts, including social, economic and built environment factors that support adaptation to climate impacts consistent with environmental justice. RCW 36.70A.070(9) new in 2023 Completed: ☐ Date: In Current Plan? Yes/No meet current statute?Notes PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 23 c. Specific goals, policies and programs that address natural hazards created or aggravated by climate change, including sea level rise, landslides, flooding, drought, heat, smoke, wildfire and other effects of changes to temperature and precipitation patterns. RCW 36.70A.070(9) new in 2023 Note: include a goal and supportive policy for each climate-exacerbated hazard that is relevant to your jurisdiction. Completed: ☐ Date: d. Prioritize actions (pursuant to a-c) that benefit overburdened communities that will disproportionately suffer from compounding environmental impacts and will be most impacted by natural hazards due to climate change. RCW 36.70A.070(9) new in 2023 Completed: ☐ Date: Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Reduction sub-element: items e through i are only required for jurisdictions identified above e. Greenhouse gas emissions reduction sub- elements must include goals and policies to reduce emissions and per capita vehicle miles traveled. RCW 36.70A.070(9) new in 2023 Note: Commerce recommends that jurisdictions use 2022 as a baseline year for their GHG inventories and set incremental targets that lead to achieving Washington’s economy-wide target of net zero emissions in 2050 set forth in RCW 70A.45.020(1). Commerce also recommends that jurisdictions should, at a minimum, include goals and policies within the following sectors: Transportation; Buildings & Energy; and, Zoning & Development. The rulemaking process is Completed: ☐ Date: Changes needed to Notes PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 24 If yes, cite section Yes/No f. Identified actions that the jurisdiction will take during the planning cycle that will result in reductions in overall GHG emissions generated by transportation within the jurisdiction. RCW 36.70A.070(9) new in 2023 Completed: ☐ Date: g. Identified actions that the jurisdiction will take during the planning cycle that will result in reductions in overall GHG emissions generated by land use within the jurisdiction. RCW 36.70A.070(9) new in 2023 Completed: ☐ Date: h. Identified actions that the jurisdiction will take during the planning cycle that will result in reductions in per capita vehicle miles traveled (VMT) within the jurisdiction. RCW 36.70A.070(9) new in 2023 Completed: ☐ Date: i. Prioritize GHG and VMT reductions that benefit overburdened communities in order to maximize the co-benefits of reduced air pollution and environmental justice. RCW 36.70A.070(9) new in 2023 Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 25 Future required elements: pending state funding As of 2022, these elements have not received state funding to aid local jurisdictions in implementation. Therefore, these elements are not required to be added to comprehensive plans at this time. Commerce encourages jurisdictions to begin planning for these elements, pending the future mandate. In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Notes Economic Development Although included in RCW 36.70A.070 “mandatory currently required because funding was not provided to assist in developing local elements provisions for economic growth, vitality, and a high quality of life are important, and supporting strategies should be integrated with the land use, housing, utilities, and transportation elements. RCW 36.70A.070(7) amended in 2017 Yes, Completed: ☐ Date: Parks and Recreation Implements and is consistent with the capital facilities plan. Include a ten-year demand estimate, evaluation of service and facilities needs and evaluation of tree canopy coverage within UGAs. RCW 36.70A.070(8) amended in 2023 Although included in RCW 36.70A.070 “mandatory elements” a parks and recreation element is not currently required because the state did not provide funding to assist in developing local elements when this provision was added to the GMA. However, parks, recreation and open space planning are GMA goals, and it is important to plan for and fund these facilities. Yes, E-7 in the Environment Element addresses tree canopy. We did not see an overall tree canopy evaluation within the document. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 26 Optional Elements Pursuant to RCW 36.70A.080, a comprehensive plan may include additional elements, items, or studies dealing with other subjects relating to the physical development within its jurisdiction, including, but not limited to: In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Notes Sub-Area Plans Yes, Section 3 Completed: ☐ Date: Conservation Yes, Part of environment element. Completed: ☐ Date: Recreation Yes, In Parks, Recreation and Open Space Element. Completed: ☐ Date: Solar Energy No Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 27 Consistency is required by the GMA In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. All plan elements must be consistent with relevant county-wide planning policies (CWPPs) and, where applicable, multi-county planning policies (MPPs), and the GMA. RCW 36.70A.100 and 210, WAC 365-196-305; 400(2)(c); 510 and 520 Yes, Introduction and Community profile discusses coordination and consistency. Completed: ☐ Date: b. All plan elements must be consistent with each other. RCW 36.70A.070 (preamble) and WAC 365- 197-040 Yes, Pg. 41 “Other City Plans adopted by Reference” Completed: ☐ Date: c. The plan must be coordinated with the plans of adjacent jurisdictions. RCW 36.70A.100 and WAC 365-196-520 Yes, “Continuing coordination between all jurisdictions of Snohomish County” page 15 introduction. Completed: ☐ Date: Public Participation a. Plan ensures public participation in the comprehensive planning process. RCW 36.70A.020(11), .035, and .140, WAC 365- 196-600(3) provide possible public participation choices. Yes, Appendix K Completed: ☐ Date: b. If the process for making amendments is included in the comprehensive plan: • The plan provides that amendments are to be considered no more often than once a year, not including the exceptions described in RCW 36.70A.130(2), WAC365-196-640 • The plan sets out a procedure for adopting emergency amendments and defines emergency. RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b) and RCW 36.70A.390 new in 2021, (HB 1220 sections 3-5), WAC 365-196-650(4) N/A I did not see comp plan amendments called out. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 28 Consistency is required by the GMA In Current Plan? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes c. Plan or program for monitoring how well comprehensive plan policies, development regulations, and other implementation techniques are achieving the comp plan’s goals and the goals of the GMA. WAC 365-196-660 discusses a potential review of growth management implementation on a systematic basis. New 2021-2022 legislation HB 1241 provides that those jurisdictions with a periodic update due in 2024 have until December 31, 2024 to submit. This legislation also changed the update cycle to every ten years after the 2024-2027 cycle. Jurisdictions that meet the new criteria described in RCW 36.70A.130(9) will be required to submit an years after the review and revision of their comprehensive plan. Yes, Introduction and Section V: Implementation Action & Monitoring posted September 2024. Completed: ☐ Date: d. Considerations for preserving property rights. Local governments must evaluate proposed regulatory or administrative actions to assure that such actions do not result in an unconstitutional taking of private property. RCW 36.70A.370. For further guidance see the 2018 Advisory Memo on the Unconstitutional Taking of Private Property No Yes, Did not see this called out Completed: ☐ Date: e. Encourage the involvement of citizens in the planning process, including the participation of vulnerable populations and overburdened communities, and ensure coordination between communities and jurisdictions to reconcile conflicts. HB 1181 (2023) revised RCW Planning Goals TBD: A public involvement plan is included (appendix k) but did not see process to ensure coordination with vulnerable and overburdened communities. Ask Amy. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 29 Consistency is required by the GMA vulnerable populations and overburdened communities. RCW 36.70A.035 Public was not amended under HB 1181. PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 30 Section II: Development Regulations Must be consistent with and implement the comprehensive plan. RCW 36.70A.040, WAC 365-196-800 and 810 Critical Areas Regulations protecting critical areas are required by RCW 36.70A.060(2), RCW 36.70A.172(1), WAC 365-190-080 and WAC 365-195-900 through 925. Please visit Commerce’s Critical Areas webpage for resources and to complete the Critical Areas Checklist. Critical areas regulations must be reviewed and updated, as necessary, to incorporate legislative changes and best available science. Jurisdictions using periodic update grant funds to update critical areas regulations must submit the critical areas checklist as a first deliverable, in addition to this periodic update checklist. Zoning Code Note: Please review the new 2023 housing laws in the Washington State Housing Laws of 2019 through 2023 guidance, on Commerce’s Planning for Housing webpage and Appendix A of this checklist. In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes Notice: For more information about housing regulatory changes regarding supportive housing types, see Supportive Housing Types Review Checklist on the Updating GMA Housing Elements webpage. And for additional information on middle housing and ADU regulations, see the Middle Housing webpage. a. Zoning designations are consistent and implement land use designations that accommodate future housing needs by income bracket as allocated through the countywide planning process. (RCW 36.70A.070(2)(c) - amended in 2021 (HB 1220) Note: Zoning must reflect sufficient land capacity for all income housing needs, including emergency housing and permanent supportive housing. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 31 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes b. Permanent supportive housing or transitional housing must be allowed where residences and hotels are allowed. RCW 35A.21.430 amended in 2021, RCW 35.21.683, amended in 2021, (HB 1220 sections 3-5) “permanent supportive housing” is defined in RCW 36.70A.030; “transitional in RCW 84.36.043(2)(c) Completed: ☐ Date: c. housing must be allowed in any zones in which hotels are allowed, except in cities that have adopted an ordinance authorizing indoor emergency shelters and indoor emergency housing in a majority of zones within one-mile of transit. Indoor emergency housing must be allowed in areas with hotels. RCW 35A.21.430 amended in 2021, RCW 35.21.683, amended in 2021, (HB 1220 sections 3-5) Any limitations on emergency housing and emergency shelter must be connected to public health and safety and allow the siting of a sufficient number of units and beds necessary to meet projected needs (see 2, pages 41-48), new in 2023 “emergency housing” is defined in RCW 36.70A.030 Completed: ☐ Date: d. The number of unrelated persons that occupy a household or dwelling unit except as provided in state law, for short-term rentals, or occupant load per square foot shall not be regulated or limited by cities. (HB 5235), RCW 35.21.682 new in 2021, RCW 35A.21.314 new in 2022, RCW 36.01.227 new in 2021 Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 32 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes e. Limitations on the amount of parking local governments can require for low-income, senior, disabled and market-rate housing units located near high-quality transit service. RCW 36.70A.620 amended in 2020 and RCW 36.70A.600 amended in 2019 Completed: ☐ Date: f. Parking requirements must allow tandem, gravel or grass pavers, and new spaces must be at least 8 by 20 feet in size. Existing and non-conforming parking must be allowed to meet parking requirements for up to six spaces. SB 6015, new in 2024, must be addressed with the periodic update. Note: guidance coming fall 2024 Completed: ☐ Date: g. Family day care providers are allowed in all residential dwellings located in areas zoned for residential or commercial RCW 36.70A.450. Review RCW 43.216.010 for definition of family day care provider and WAC 365-196-865 for more information. Completed: ☐ Date: h. Manufactured housing is regulated the same as site built housing. RCW 35.21.684 amended in 2019, RCW 35.63.160, RCW 35A.21.312 amended in 2019 and RCW 36.01.225 amended in 2019. A local government may require that manufactured homes: (1) are new, (2) are set on a permanent foundation, and (3) comply with local design standards applicable to other homes in the neighborhood, but may not discriminate against consumer choice in housing. See: National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 33 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes i. Accessory dwelling units (ADUs): cities (and incorporate into their development regulations, zoning regulations and other official controls. RCW 36.70A.680 amended in 2023, RCW 36.70A.681 amended in 2023, RCW 36.70A.696 amended in 2023, RCW 36.70A.697 amended in 2020, RCW 36.70A.698 amended in 2020, RCW 36.70A.699 amended in 2020 Must be adopted by 6 months after the periodic update deadline, or be superseded by state law. Note: see new Commerce ADU guidance and checklist. Completed: ☐ Date: j. Middle housing: if your jurisdiction is one of the 77 cities subject to middle housing, regulations must allow the appropriate amount of middle housing units on a lot by 6 months after the periodic update deadline, or be superseded by state law. RCW 36.70A.635 See Commerce’s model ordinances and user guide on the middle housing web page. Completed: ☐ Date: k. Co-living must be allowed as a permitted use on any lot located within an urban growth area that allows at least six multifamily residential units, including on a lot zoned for mixed use development. HB 1998, new in 2024, contains specific standards for size, density calculations, connection fees and parking. Must be adopted by December 31, 2025 Note: guidance will be available fall of 2024 Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 34 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes l. Residential structures occupied by persons with handicaps, and the definition of “familial status” same as a similar residential structure occupied by a family or other unrelated individuals. No city or county planning under the GMA may enact or maintain ordinances, development regulations, or administrative practices which treat a residential structure occupied by persons with handicaps differently than a similar residential structure occupied by a family or other unrelated individuals. RCW 36.70A.410, RCW 70.128.140 and 150, RCW 49.60.222-225 and WAC 365-196- 860 Completed: ☐ Date: m. Affordable housing programs enacted or expanded under RCW 36.70A.540 amended in 2022 comply with the requirements of this section. Examples of such programs may include: density bonuses within urban growth areas, height and bulk bonuses, fee waivers or exemptions, parking reductions, expedited permitting conditioned on provision of low- income housing units, or mixed-use projects. WAC 365-196-300 See also RCW 36.70A.545 and WAC 365-196- 410(2)(e)(i) “affordable housing” is defined in RCW 84.14.010 new in 2024 (ESSB 6175) Review RCW 36.70A.620 amended in 2020, for minimum residential parking requirements. Completed: ☐ Date: n. Limitations on regulating safe parking efforts, indoor overnight shelters temporary small houses on property owned or controlled by a religious organization. RCW 35.21.915, amended in 2020 Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 35 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes o. local needs for any affordable housing development of any single-family or multi-family residence located on real property owned or controlled by a religious organization. RCW 36.70A.545, amended in 2019 (HB 1377). Completed: ☐ Date: p. Reduce restrictions for additional housing units within existing commercial, mixed-use and multi- family buildings by exempting the added units from density limits, parking and other regulatory requirements. RCW 35A.21.440, new in 2023 and RCW 35.21.990, new in 2023, (HB 1042) Note: These six months after the periodic update due date. Completed: ☐ Date: requirements on an affordable housing development that are different than the generally. RCW 36.130.020 (2008) Note: This applies to cities, counties, other local government entities and agencies. Completed: ☐ Date: r. general aviation airports. RCW 36.70.547 and WAC 365-196-455. Incompatible uses include: high population intensity uses such as schools, wildlife attractants such as solid waste disposal sites, wastewater or stormwater treatment facilities, or stockyards. For more guidance, see WSDOT’s Aviation Land Use Compatibility Program. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 36 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes s. If a U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) military base employing 100 or more personnel is within or adjacent to the jurisdiction, zoning should discourage the siting of incompatible uses adjacent to military base. RCW 36.70A.530(3) and WAC 365-196-475. Visit Military One Source to locate any bases in your area and help make determination of applicability. If applicable, inform the commander of the base regarding amendments to the comprehensive plan and development regulations on lands adjacent to the base. Completed: ☐ Date: t. Electric vehicle infrastructure (jurisdiction specified: adjacent to Interstates 5, 90, 405 or state route 520 and other criteria) must be allowed as a use in all areas except those zoned for residential, resource use or critical areas. 36.70A.695 Completed: ☐ Date: Shoreline Master Program a. Zoning designations are consistent with Shoreline Master Program (SMP) environmental designations. RCW 36.70A.480 Completed: ☐ Date: b. If updated to meet RCW 36.70A.480 (2010), SMP regulations provide protection to critical areas in shorelines that is at least equal to the protection provided to critical areas by the critical areas ordinance. RCW 36.70A.480(4) and RCW 90.58.090(4) See Ecology’s shoreline planners’ toolbox for the SMP Checklist and other resources and Shoreline Master Programs Handbook webpage Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 37 Resource Lands Defined in RCW 36.70A.030(3), (12) and (17) and consistent with RCW 36.70A.060 and RCW 36.70A.170 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. Zoning is consistent with natural resource lands designations in the comprehensive plan and conserves natural resource lands. RCW 36.70A.060(3), WAC 365-196-815 and WAC 365- 190-020(6). Consider innovative zoning techniques to conserve agricultural lands of long- term significance RCW 36.70A.177(2). See also WAC 365-196-815(3) for examples of innovative zoning techniques. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Regulations to assure that use of lands adjacent to natural resource lands does not interfere with natural resource production. RCW 36.70A.060(1)(a) and WAC 365-190-040 Regulations require notice on all development permits and plats within 500 feet of designated natural resource lands that the property is within or near a designated natural resource land on which a variety of commercial activities may occur that are regulations to implement comprehensive plan Completed: ☐ Date: c. For designated agricultural land, regulations encourage nonagricultural uses to be limited to lands with poor soils or otherwise not suitable for agricultural purposes. Accessory uses should be located, designed and operated to support the continuation of agricultural uses. RCW 36.70A.177(3)(b) Completed: ☐ Date: d. Designate mineral lands and associated regulations as required by RCW 36.70A.131and WAC 365-190-040(5). For more information review the WA State Dept. of Natural Resources (DNR)’s Geology Division site Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 38 Siting Essential Public Facilities Regulations for siting essential public facilities should be consistent with RCW 36.70A.200 and consider WAC 365-196-550. Essential public facilities include those facilities that are typically difficult to site, such as airports, state education facilities, state or regional transportation facilities, state and local correctional facilities, solid waste handling facilities, and in-patient facilities including substance abuse facilities, mental health facilities, group homes, and secure community transition facilities. Regulations may be specific to a local jurisdiction, but may be part of county-wide planning policies In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes Regulations for CWPPs include a process for siting EPFs and ensure EPFs are not precluded. RCW 36.70A.200 amended in 2023, WAC 365-196-550(6) lists process for siting EPFs. WAC 365-196-550(3) details preclusions. EPFs should be located of known hazardous areas. Visit Commerce’s Behavioral Health Facilities Program page for information on establishing or expanding new capacity for behavioral health EPFs. Note: RCW 36.70A.200 amended by SB 5536 to include EPFs for opioid treatment programs Completed: ☐ Date: Subdivision Code a. Subdivision regulations are consistent with and implement comprehensive plan policies. RCW 36.70A.030(8), RCW 36.70A.040(4) Completed: ☐ Date: establish adequacy of public facilities. RCW 58.17.110 amended in 2018 • Streets or roads, sidewalks, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, and other features that assure safe walking conditions for students. • Potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, and drainage ways. RCW 36.70A.590 amended 2018 • Open spaces, parks and recreation, and playgrounds • Schools and school grounds Other items related to the public health, safety and general welfare, WAC 365-196-820(1). Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 39 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes c. Preliminary subdivision approvals under RCW 58.17.140 and RCW 58.17.170 are valid for a period of five or seven years (previously five years). Note: preliminary plat approval is valid for: seven years if the date of preliminary plat approval is on or before December 31, 2014; five years if the preliminary plat approval is issued on or after January 1, 2015; and ten years if the project is located within city limits, not subject to the shoreline management act, and the preliminary plat is approved on or before December 31, 2007. Completed: ☐ Date: d. Include in short plat regulations procedures for unit lot subdivisions allowing division of a parent lot into separately owned unit lots. RCW 58.17.060 (3) new in 2023 by SB 5258 - section 11 Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 40 Stormwater In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. Regulations protect water quality and implement actions to mitigate or cleanse drainage, flooding, and storm water run-off that pollute waters of the state, including Puget Sound or waters entering Puget Sound. RCW 36.70A.070(1) Regulations may include: adoption of a stormwater manual consistent with Ecology’s latest manual for Eastern or Western Washington, adoption of a clearing and grading ordinance –See 2005 Technical Guidance Document for Clearing and Grading in Western Washington. Adoption of a low See Puget Sound Partnership’s 2012 Low Impact Development guidance and Ecology’s 2013 Eastern Washington Low Impact Development guidance. Additional Resources: Federal Grants to Protect Puget Sound Watersheds, Building Cities in the Rain, Ecology Stormwater Manuals, Puget Sound Partnership Action Agenda Completed: ☐ Date: b. Provisions for corrective action for failing septic systems that pollute waters of the state. RCW 36.70A.070(1). See also: DOH Wastewater Management, Ecology On-Site Sewage System Projects & Funding Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 41 Organic Materials Management Facilities New in 2022, HB 1799 added a section to the GMA aimed at reducing the volumes of organic materials collected in conjunction with other solid waste and delivered to landfills, supporting productive uses of organic material waste and reduction of methane gas (a greenhouse gas). In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes New section RCW 36.70A.142; new in 2022 legislation HB 1799: Development regulations newly developed, updated, or amended after January 1, 2025 allow for the siting of organic materials (OM) management facilities as identified in local solid waste management plans (SWMP) to meet OM reduction and diversion goals. Siting to meet criteria described in RCW 70A.205.040(3) See also RCW 36.70.330. For applicability, see RCW 70A.205.540 Completed: ☐ Date: Impact Fees May impose impact fees on development activity as part of the financing for public facilities, provided that the financing for system improvements to serve new development must provide for a balance between impact fees and other sources of public funds; cannot rely solely on impact fees. a. If adopted, impact fees are applied consistent with RCW 82.02.050 amended in 2015, RCW 82.02.060 amended in 2023 by SB 5258, .070, .080, .090 amended in 2018 and .100. WAC 365-196-850 provides guidance on how impact fees should be implemented and spent. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Jurisdictions collecting impact fees must adopt and maintain a system for the deferred collection of impact fees for single-family detached and attached residential construction, consistent with RCW 82.02.050(3) amended in 2016 Completed: ☐ Date: c. If adopted, limitations on impact fees for early learning facilities. RCW 82.02.060 amended in 2021 Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 42 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes d. If adopted, exemption of impact fees for low- income and emergency housing development. RCW 82.02.060 amended in 2023. See also definition change in RCW 82.02.090(1)(b) amended in 2018 Completed: ☐ Date: e. Ensure impact fees are not assessed on the construction of accessory dwelling units that are greater than 50 percent (50%) of the impact fees that would be imposed on the principal unit. RCW 36.70A.681 new in 2023 by HB 1337 Completed: ☐ Date: f. The schedule of impact fees reflects the proportionate impact of new housing units, including multifamily and condominium units, based on the square footage, number of bedrooms, or trips generated, in the housing unit in order to produce a proportionally lower impact fee for smaller housing units. RCW 82.02.060 amended in 2023 by SB 5258 Completed: ☐ Date: Concurrency and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ensures consistency in land use approval and the development of adequate public facilities as plans are implemented, maximizes the efficiency of existing transportation systems, limits the impacts of traffic and reduces pollution. a. The transportation concurrency requirement includes specific language that prohibits development when level of service standards for transportation facilities cannot be met. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(b) amended in 2023, WAC 365- 196-840. Note: Concurrency is required for transportation, but may also be applied to park facilities, etc. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 43 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes b. Measures exist to bring into compliance locally owned, or locally or regionally operated, transportation facilities or services that are below the levels of service established in the comprehensive plan. and (D), RCW 36.70A.070(6)(b) amended in 2023 Levels of service can be established for automobiles, pedestrians and bicycles. See WAC 365-196-840(3) on establishing an appropriate level of service. Completed: ☐ Date: c. Highways of statewide significance (HSS) are exempt from the concurrency ordinance. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(iii)(C) Completed: ☐ Date: d. Traffic demand management (TDM) requirements are consistent with the comprehensive plan. RCW 36.70A.070(6)(a)(vi) Examples may include requiring new development to be oriented towards transit streets, pedestrian-oriented site and building design, and requiring bicycle and pedestrian connections to street and trail networks. WAC 365-196-840(4) recommends adopting methodologies that analyze the transportation system from a comprehensive, multimodal perspective. Completed: ☐ Date: e. If required by RCW 82.70, a commute trip reduction (CTR) ordinance to achieve reductions in the proportion of single-occupant vehicle commute trips has been adopted. The ordinance should be consistent with comprehensive plan policies for CTR and Department of Transportation rules. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 44 Tribal Participation in Planning new in 2022 (see HB 1717) A federally recognized Indian tribe may voluntarily choose to participate in the county or regional planning process. See Commerce’s new Tribal Planning Coordination for GMA webpage for guidance and staff contacts. In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. Mutually agreeable memorandum of agreement between local governments and tribes in regard to collaboration and participation in the planning process unless otherwise agreed at the end of a mediation period. RCW 36.70A.040(8)(a) new in 2022. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Policies consistent with countywide planning policies that address the protection of tribal cultural resources in collaboration with federally recognized Indian tribes that are invited, provided that a tribe, or more than one tribe, chooses to participate in the process. RCW 36.70A.210(3)(i) new in 2022. Completed: ☐ Date: Regulations to Implement Optional Elements a. New fully contained communities are consistent with comprehensive plan policies, RCW 36.70A.350 and WAC 365-196-345 Completed: ☐ Date: b. If applicable, master planned resorts are consistent with comprehensive plan policies, RCW 36.70A.360, RCW 36.70A.362 and WAC 365- 196-460 Completed: ☐ Date: c. If applicable, major industrial developments and master planned locations outside of UGAs are consistent with comprehensive plan policies, RCW 36.70A.365, RCW 36.70A.367 and WAC 365- 196-465 Completed: ☐ Date: d. Regulations include procedures to identify, preserve, and/or monitor historical or archaeological resources. RCW 36.70A.020(13), WAC 365-196-450 Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 45 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes e. Other development regulations needed to implement comprehensive plan policies such as energy, sustainability or design are adopted. WAC 365-196-445 Completed: ☐ Date: f. Design guidelines for new development are clear and easy to understand; administration procedures are clear and defensible Completed: ☐ Date: g. Local design review includes one or more ascertainable guideline, standard or criterion by building design is permissible under that development regulation. May not result in a reduction in density, height, bulk or scale below the generally applicable development regulations for a development proposal in the applicable zone. RCW 36.70A.630 new in 2023 by HB 1293 Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 46 Project Review Procedures In 2023, SB 5290 substantially amended local permit review processes. Codification and additional resources from Commerce are forthcoming. In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes Project review processes integrate permit and environmental review. RCW 36.70A.470, RCW 36.70B and RCW 43.21C. Also: WAC 365-196-845, WAC 197-11(SEPA Rules), WAC 365-197 (Project Consistency Rule, Commerce, 2001) and Ecology SEPA Handbook. Integrated permit and environmental review procedures for: • Notice of application • Notice of complete application • One open-record public hearing • Combining public hearings & decisions for multiple permits • Notice of decision • One closed-record appeal Note: new in 2023, see Commerce’s new guidance for Local Project Review and SB 5290 Completed: ☐ Date: Plan & Regulation Amendments If procedures governing comprehensive plan amendments are part of the code, then assure the following are true: a. Regulations limit amendments to the comprehensive plan to once a year exceptions). RCW 36.70A.130(2) and WAC 365- 196-640(3) Completed: ☐ Date: b. Regulations define emergency for an emergency plan amendment. RCW 36.70A.130(2)(b) and WAC 365-196-640(4) Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 47 In Current Regs? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes c. Regulations include a docketing process for requesting and considering plan amendments. RCW 36.70A.130(2), RCW 36.70A.470, and WAC 365-196-640(6) Completed: ☐ Date: d. A process has been established for early and continuous public notification and participation in the planning process. RCW 36.70A.020(11), RCW 36.70A.035 and RCW 36.70A.140. See WAC 365- 196-600 regarding public participation and WAC 365-196-610(2) listing recommendations for meeting requirements. Completed: ☐ Date: e. A process exists to assure that proposed regulatory or administrative actions do not result in an unconstitutional taking of private property RCW 36.70A.370. See the on the Unconstitutional Taking of Private Property Completed: ☐ Date: f. Provisions ensure adequate enforcement of regulations, such as zoning and critical area ordinances (civil or criminal penalties). See implementation strategy in WAC 365-196-650(1). Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 48 Appendix A: Housing unit minimums per population See Commerce’s Middle Housing webpage for more information and the Middle Housing Fact Sheet for the list of cities that must comply with the following requirements. Cities with a population less than 25,000 but within the Contiguous UGA with the largest city in a county with a population greater than 275,000 In Current zoning? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes Zoning and development regulations allow at least two residential units per lot on all lots zoned predominantly for residential use, unless the lot is smaller than 1,000 square feet. RCW 36.70A.635 (1) and (6) HB 1110 Completed: ☐ Date: Cities with a population between 25,000 and 75,000 In Current zoning? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. Zoning and development regulations allow at least: • two residential units on each lot, • four residential units on each lot if at least one unit is affordable, unless the lot is smaller than 1,000 square feet. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Zoning and development regulations allow at least four residential units on each lot, within ¼ mile walking distance of a major transit stop. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 49 Cities with a population greater than 75,000 In Current zoning? Yes/No If yes, cite section Changes needed to meet current statute? Yes/No Notes a. Zoning and development regulations allow at least: • four residential units on each lot, • six residential units on each lot if at least two units are affordable, unless the lot is smaller than 1,000 square feet. Completed: ☐ Date: b. Zoning and development regulations allow at least six residential units on each lot, within ¼ mile walking distance of a major transit stop. Completed: ☐ Date: PERIODIC UPDATE CHECKLIST FOR FULLY PLANNING CITIES – REVISED JULY 2024 50 Appendix B: Element updates per HB 1181– Climate Change and Resiliency From:Gayle Roeber To:Ameresia Lawlis; Amy Rusko Subject:REVIEW OF THE COMP PLAN Date:Wednesday, October 30, 2024 11:04:30 AM October 30, 2024 Good Morning Ameresia and Amy, Here are a few things (mostly simple typing or grammatical errors) I found after reading the Comp Plan. Section 1 Introduction and Community Profile Page 2, first paragraph under "Comprehensive Plan Framework....." 4th line. There are two commas after 'subarea'. Page 4 First line of the paragraph states "presents nine" (referencing Books) My confusion is: If I read Figure 1, it shows nine books, in the outer circle. "Utilities" depicted as a separate book. Yet the listing of "Books" to the left only show 8. (Utilities included in Book #8) If there are only eight books, should Figure 1, not show that Utilities should be shown in the same rectangle box as Capital Facilities? Providing continuity of information. (Also, Page 7 supports the "Eight Book" scenario) Page 15 Second paragraph, end of second line. I believe the word "the" should be deleted. Last line on the right side of the page. What is the word "Planning" attached to? Is there missing information? Should the word "Planning" be deleted? Page 23 Right side of page, to the right of "13%". The word slightly is mis-typed. Page 27 Attachment 17 Center of the page. Health and contrast are mis-typed. Page 32 Second paragraph, 7th line. I believe the comma is misplaced. I believe it should read ".....unincorporated area around it, is...." (Comma being after the word "it". Not before.) Section III, Subareas Page 1 Still find the phrase "broken up" as a lesser grade choice of words. "Arlington has identified fourteen subareas" sounds much more articulate. Page 15 First paragraph, second sentence under "Existing Conditions" "is 0.7 square miles large". Is "large" the appropriate word? 4th paragraph, right side of page, last line. ".... and a painted cows...." Is there a single cow or multiple cows? Book 1 Environment Supporting Analysis Page 2, First Paragraph, 4th line Is the word "and" missing between "species" "their"? Page 4, second paragraph, line 6 "....flood events that there will be..."Awkward wording with both "that" and "there", together. Page 6, first sentence...Should "Burn Hill" be capitalized? Pages 8, 10, 13, 16. Were these intended to be left blank? Page 18, last line on the page. A space is missing between "2019" and "which". Book 2 Land Use Page 7, top part of page is a duplicate of Page 6 Page 10, LU-10 Is not shown in larger print as the other goals. Nor is it in color, as the other goals. Book 3, Housing Page 3, H-1.2 I believe the 'w' at the end of the goal, needs to be removed. Book 3 Housing Support Analysis Appendix D, second line. I believe the HB is missing a digit. Should be HB 1220's not HB 120's. Book 4, Economic Development ED-7.8, second line I believe the word "to" is missing. Should be between "connections" and "the" ? Book 5, Parks, Recreation and Open Spaces Page 2, P-2 This goal is not in the large font. Nor is it bold color, as the other goals. P-2.2 There is a question mark in the first sentence next to "neighborhood". Has this been clarified? Book 6 Transportation Page 7, T-7.3 Would it be valuable information to decode L.I.D. by showing in parenthesis Low Impact Development? Book 6, Transportation Supporting Analysis 3rd line from the bottom. Should read, " implement an Adopt.......". Not "a Adopt". I have not finished reading all the /appendices. Gayle Roeber November 1, 2024 Arlington Planning Commission City of Arlington 238 North Olympic Ave. Arlington, WA 98223 RE: 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update Dear Arlington Planning Commission: The 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update lays the groundwork for policies that shape housing choice, supply, and affordability in the city of Arlington. MBAKS appreciates the hard work conducted by the Planning Commission, city officials, and staff to update the Plan and respectfully submits the following comments for consideration. Scenario 5 MBAKS recognizes the thoughtful planning that was devoted to the analysis of all the scenarios. MBAKS supports the work that Arlington has done to analyze Scenario 5. MBAKS applauds Arlington’s recognition that additional residential capacity may be necessary to align with the regional policies for concentrating growth near the Manufacturing Industrial Center and high-capacity transit stations over the next twenty years. Finally, this option most fulfills Objective 1 from the Arlington Housing Action Plan (also see Middle Housing section below). Permitting and Regulation MBAKS recognizes the Plan is important for protecting the incredible Puget Sound environment, while planning for and updating options and opportunities residents have regarding where they live, work, and play. We want to ensure policymakers remember that new and revised elements within a comprehensive plan often come along with unintended direct, or indirect, added costs to provide housing. We ask that the Planning Commission and staff analyze the proposed implementation of the proposal’s revisions, new requirements arising from implementation, and potential costs to housing or delay in housing permit reviews to determine their impact on the supply and cost of housing. Additionally, the document should reflect that Arlington regards the promotion of adequate and attainable housing as a top priority. MBAKS stands ready to work with the city of Arlington and other stakeholders to further that goal. MBAKS would like to see in the Plan more provisions that recognize Arlington’s role in providing attainable housing and a variety of housing types for all economic segments of the community; that encourage the city to work actively with the building industry to meet our housing needs; and that encourage permit reform consistent with new and existing state law. We support adding language to any provision that clarifies the Attachment 18 goal expressed should not result in increased permit fees and permit timelines. Additionally, MBAKS supports any efforts the City can take to comply ahead of the deadline with the permitting requirements established in SB 5290 this past legislative session. Adhering to the provisions of this new law would help address a key barrier to facilitating more housing choices. Housing  Accessory Dwelling Units: MBAKS supports policies to promote and enable the development of accessory dwelling units (ADUs). The city of Arlington has already made some substantial progress with ADUS. MBAKS supports consideration of additional policy support for ADUs consistent with new state legislation HB 1337. The city of Arlington has already made changes to allow two ADUs per lot and some other changes. Additional policy support now would be advantageous for residents and city policymakers. MBAKS supports the additional adoption of provisions within HB 1337, including:  Allowing impact fees below 50% for ADUs.  Priority permitting for ADUs.  Developing pre-approve form plans.  Removing off-street parking requirements.  Middle Housing: MBAKS encourages the city of Arlington to include provisions encouraging middle housing production to maximize housing options and incentivize development and supply of middle housing. This will create diverse housing options for community members, access to services and transit, and encourage a better job-housing balance. We encourage the City’s inclusion of proposals that would:  Allow outright duplex, triplex, and fourplex multifamily developments in all residential zones.  Limit building heights to thirty-five feet in lower-density zones, to support compatible development with existing neighborhoods.  Reduce landscaping and on-site recreation requirements, and reduce parking requirements, to incentivize development of the middle housing types and improve affordability. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Update. MBAKS looks forward to engaging with the city of Arlington as these policies are further developed and implemented to support the goal of creating a sustainable Arlington. We appreciate your hard work and want to serve as a trusted resource for you, your staff, and the community. Please let us know if you have any questions or would like to discuss this further. Sincerely, Russell Joe Russell Joe Snohomish County Government Affairs Manager Everyone deserves a place to call home. cc: Marc Hayes, Community and Economic Development Director Amy Rusko, Deputy Community and Economic Development Director State of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Region 4 Region 4 information: 16018 Mill Creek Blvd, Mill Creek, WA 98012 | phone: (425)-775-1311 1 November 4, 2024 City of Arlington Amy Rusko, Planning Manager 18204 59th Ave NE Arlington, WA 98223 RE: Submittal ID 2024-S-7474A, WDFW comments for Arlington’s draft Comprehensive Plan Dear Ms. Rusko, On behalf of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), thank you for the opportunity to comment on Arlington’s draft Comprehensive Plan as part of the current periodic update. Within the State of Washington’s land use decision -making framework, WDFW is considered a technical advisor for the habitat needs of fish and wildlife and routinely provide s input into the implications of land use decisions. We provide these comments and recommendations in keeping with our legislative mandate to preserve, protect, and perpetuate fish and wildlife and their habitats for the benefit of future generations – a mission we can only accomplish in partnership with local jurisdictions. Table 1. Recommended changes to proposed policy language. Policy Number Policy Language (with WDFW suggestions in red) WDFW Comment Environment (this link) Policy E-1.5 Page 2 Locate development in a manner that minimizes impacts to natural features. Promote and incentivize the use of innovative environmentally sensitive development practices, including design, materials, construction, and on-going maintenance. We encourage Arlington to participate in the effort to address environmentally sustainable development by utilizing incentives. See Shoreline’s deep green incentive program which outlines how green development can participate in expedited review as well as fee waivers and/or reductions. The Sustainable Development Code website is also a great resource in outlining how to remove code barriers, create incentives, and fill regulatory gaps in pursuit of this policy’s goals. See also the city of Issaquah and Bellevue’s clean Attachment 19 2 building incentive programs that aim to assist applicants in reaching energy efficiency standards. Policy E-2.5 Page 3 Prioritize urban forestry planning resources and funding for frontline communities that are hurt first and worst by climate change. We encourage the city to conduct an initial urban tree canopy assessment and use it as baseline data to formulate an urban tree canopy management plan to assess trends, set goals, and measure progress toward those goals. This plan should also measure how well the city’s tree-related ordinances are functioning in retaining trees on the landscape. It may not be enough to rely on ordinances if there is not a system in place to track cumulative impacts over time. Resources: •City of Tacoma is a great resource for exploring how tree canopy plans can become a community effort, how data can be presented, and how to track canopy loss/gain. •Data resources include the USDA website, WDFW’s change detection tree canopy data, the Puget Sound Washington Urban Canopy Project, and the WA DNR website. •Example ordinances and plans can be found on the MRSC website. •Funding resources can be found on the DNR website (Commissioner Franz Announces $8 Million in Urban Forestry Grants). •Discover the value of the benefits provided by individual trees around your home and in your community with the National Tree Benefit Calculator. •See also the city of Everett’s Tree Keeper website. •See also WDFW’s Habitat at Home program, which encourages the protection of wildlife through purposeful vegetation planning. E-4.7 Page 4 Reduce energy use by buildings by creating incentives that and advance green building design, including green and cool roofs. See comments in relation to E-1.5 above. We strongly recommend that the city implement an incentive program to help this policy become more actionable. Additionally, see how the city of Boston is identifying priority blocks that could yield the greatest benefits to residents in pursuit of a “cool” roof goal. Similarly, "green" roofs covered with sedum, native flowers, and other low-maintenance vegetation help insulate 3 buildings from solar heat and provide pollinator habitat. Such rooftops help reduce building cooling costs and heat-related illnesses and deaths. E-5.6 Page 5 Obtain stream corridor dedications where reasonable. Please see the WA Department of Ecology’s funding opportunity, Climate Resilient Riparian Systems Grant. E-5.10 Page 6 Support and incentivize environmental stewardship on private and public lands to protect and enhance habitat, water quality, and other ecosystem services, including protection of watersheds, groundwater quantity, and wellhead areas that are sources of the region’s drinking water supplies. We recommend the utilization of WDFW’s Habitat at Home Program. This program is a versatile resource that can be applied to small or large properties, both public and private, as well as across diverse land types. It offers something for everyone, providing practical stewardship techniques suitable for any landscape. E-5.18 Page 7 Protect and restore watershed- scale processes to maximize the ecological benefits and climate resilience of riparian ecosystems. To help address this goal, we strongly encourage Arlington to utilize WDFW’s best available science (BAS) and management recommendations related to riparian ecosystems. Protecting all streams regardless of fish presence, employing riparian management zones (RMZs) to replace outdated ‘stream buffer’ terminology, and utilizing site- specific characteristics to determine RMZ widths (Site Potential Tree Height at 200 years, or SPTH200) are all integral components of ensuring no net loss of ecosystem values or functions occur. See RMZ widths via WDFW’s mapping resource. See also the Department of Ecology’s Climate Resilient Riparian Systems Grant. E-6 Page 8 Suggested Policy: Prioritize the use of softer, bioengineered streambank stabilization methods—such as native vegetation plantings and large woody debris—over hard armoring. Prioritizing bioengineered streambank stabilization methods, such as native vegetation plantings and large woody debris, supports healthier ecosystems by enhancing habitats for wildlife and reducing erosion naturally. Hard armoring methods like concrete or riprap often come with higher maintenance costs and less durability in the long term. These structures can fail during extreme weather events, require frequent repairs, and disrupt natural processes, leading to increased erosion downstream. In contrast, bioengineered solutions like native plantings and large woody debris are more adaptable and sustainable, as they 4 strengthen over time and work with natural systems to stabilize banks and prevent erosion. E-7.2 Page 9 Maintain at a minimum those requirements necessary for qualifying to be a Tree City under the National Arbor Day Foundation, including: As noted in our response to E-2.5, it may not be enough to rely on ordinances if there is not a system in place to track cumulative impacts over time. Critical Area Maps Pages 11-13 General comment We recommend incorporating WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) mapping information within this update. On our website, downloadable priority specie’s location data can be found. The state supreme court has held that PHS is a valid source of BAS for the Growth Management Act. Land Use (this link) LU-1 Page 3 Suggested Policy: Protect and enhance natural areas such as forests, wetlands, and riparian corridors to support climate resilience and preserve the natural beauty that contributes to Arlington's community identity and quality of life. The ‘goal’ of this section states, “Provide unique places and context for the growth of social capital and community resiliency.” The proposed policy supports Arlington's objectives by conserving natural spaces that encourage community interaction and create opportunities for connection. Additionally, these areas offer natural protection against climate impacts like flooding and heat, helping the city adapt to environmental changes. Preserving these landscapes also safeguards the distinctive qualities that reflect Arlington’s community values and sense of place. LU-6.1 Page 7 Amend and adopt land development regulations as needed to adequately protect the attributes, functions, and amenities of the natural environment in all projected growth scenarios for the City. See the resources below: •Whatcom County open space tax incentive program •King County’s Public Benefit Rating System Program (tax incentive program) •Snohomish County TDR Program •Issaquah TDR Program (map) •Redmond TDR Program •Redmond Open Space Preservation •Seattle Green Spaces and TDR LU-6.3 Page 7 Development patterns shall be responsive to critical areas and other environmental factors, and while minimizeing the Planning the built environment around the natural environment allows for the preservation of natural water flow, topography, and vegetation, which reduces the need for costly artificial infrastructure, such as stormwater systems. Natural landscapes are more adaptable and self-sustaining, lowering 5 fragmentation of these built environments. long-term maintenance burdens on municipalities. By integrating built and natural connectivity simultaneously, communities can achieve sustainable development that protects ecosystems, enhances climate resilience, and promotes human well-being, while also minimizing infrastructure costs and fostering a higher quality of life. For example, replacing culverts with larger overpasses can effectively facilitate the connection of fish and wildlife habitats while simultaneously addressing broader transportation needs. See WSDOT’s resource, Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Consideration in Fish Barrier Removal Projects. LU-7.2 Page 8 Support and provide incentives to increase the percentage of new development and redevelopment, both public and private, to be built at higher-performing energy and environmental standards. See resources in our comments for E-1.5 above. Housing (this link) H-6 Page 8 Suggested Policy: Require site plans for new development to show how new open spaces connect with existing adjacent open spaces. Additionally, efforts must be made to maintain connectivity between blocks of critical habitat areas when unavoidable impacts occur. We strongly encourage Arlington to prioritize the strategic placement and retention of natural open spaces to support both ecological integrity and recreational opportunities. Regulations should emphasize the importance of positioning these spaces to promote connectivity for both recreational uses and habitat corridors. Site plans should clearly demonstrate this intent to the greatest extent feasible. H-10.1 Page 11 Encourage Require new residential developments to include community gardens and green spaces to promote outdoor recreation. As mentioned in Arlington’s municipal code, 10% of all developable area for new residential development must be dedicated to open space. A similar requirement should be in place for green/garden spaces, which may be in addition to the comment above. Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (this link) P-2.2 Page 2 Develop at least one community <or neighborhood?> park within each subarea and provide a new central community park within the Smokey Point neighborhood. Strive for every citizen to be within To promote equity and provide a clear metric for park access, we recommend Arlington aim for all residents to be within a 10-minute walking distance of a park. This standard, endorsed by organizations like the Trust for Public Land and the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA), 6 a 10-minute walking distance of a park. is a widely recognized benchmark for equitable park access. It encourages healthier lifestyles, improves social equity, and enhances overall quality of life by ensuring that all residents, particularly underserved populations, have convenient access to green spaces. P-2.3 Page 3 Identify and pursue new parks in areas of potential future urban growth area expansion to serve employees and residents upon annexation. Additionally, ensure these parks are strategically located to support wildlife habitat corridors, promoting both recreational opportunities and the protection of natural ecosystems. We suggest that Arlington regularly update mapping information to clearly depict where open spaces, riparian corridors, and other important habitats and species are located in order to avoid these areas for future development and prioritize them for acquisition. Resources to help address this goal include WDFW’s Priority Habitats and Species (PHS) mapping information, which can be found on our website (link). Planning for wildlife movement before major development is crucial because it preserves essential habitat corridors, ensuring species survival and health, while also reducing the likelihood of future conflicts between citizens and wildlife as urban areas expand. For resources, see The Washington Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Working Group, WSDOT’s Reducing the risk of wildlife collisions website as well as Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Consideration in Fish Barrier Removal Projects, Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks’ How to Build Fence with Wildlife in Mind, and WDFW’s website. P-6.4 Page 5 Develop and improve trails so they are suitable for multi-modal and nonmotorized transportation and so they provide opportunities to connected wildlife habitat corridors and for recreation and education. See resources in comment above. By integrating habitat components, such as wide vegetated buffers into trail designs, communities can enhance the functionality of wildlife corridors while maintaining recreational opportunities for people. Transportation (this link) T-1.3 Page 2 Route new roads to avoid traversing areas identified as critical wildlife habitat or publicly owned natural preserves, parks, and recreation areas, except in cases of overriding public interest. Only allow transportation projects Wildlife habitat connections are crucial for reducing the risk of animal-vehicle collisions by allowing wildlife to move freely between habitats without crossing busy roads. When roads fragment habitats, animals are forced to cross roadways, increasing the likelihood of dangerous encounters with vehicles. By constructing wildlife crossings, 7 in these areas if techniques are utilized to protect wildlife habitat corridor connections, such as constructing large overpasses for wildlife to pass underneath. such as overpasses or underpasses, these corridors allow for safe passage and reduce collisions, enhancing both human safety and wildlife survival. These projects could be as simple as replacing an undersized culvert with a wider bridge (see WSDOT’s Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Consideration in Fish Barrier Removal Projects). T-5.8 Page 5 Develop pedestrian and bicycle level of service guidelines to assess completion of the established pedestrian and bicycle network in the Arlington Complete Streets Plan. As Arlington faces increased development, it is crucial to integrate habitat connectivity features into the Complete Streets Plan while there is still the opportunity to shape growth. By planning now, wildlife corridors can be preserved, reducing future conflicts between development and natural ecosystems. This will promote a safe and sustainable transportation network for both people and wildlife, minimizing the risk of wildlife- vehicle collisions and ensuring that animals have access to essential habitats. Proactively incorporating these features will help maintain Arlington’s ecological integrity as the area develops. T-7 Page 7 General comment We appreciate this section’s attention to Low Impact Development (LID). Integrating LID into Arlington's transportation projects supports regional salmon recovery efforts by improving water quality and reducing pollutants like 6PPD-quinone, a toxic chemical from tire wear. This aligns with the Stillaguamish Watershed Chinook Salmon Recovery Plan, which prioritizes clean water in critical habitat areas. The Green/Duwamish WRIA 9 Salmon Habitat Plan emphasizes similar strategies to mitigate the impacts of urbanization on salmon. By incorporating LID practices, Arlington can contribute significantly to ecosystem health and broader salmon recovery initiatives across the Puget Sound region. Resources include Olympia Rain Garden Incentive Program, Puget Sound Green Stormwater Infrastructure Incentives Programs, Green Stormwater Infrastructure Assistance Programs Guidebook, and the Rain Garden Handbook for Western Washington. 8 T-8.4 Page 9 Implement the adopted Complete Streets Program to ensure that all transportation projects include safe and appropriate facilities infrastructure for pedestrians, wildlife, bicyclists, and transit users, accommodating persons of all ages and abilities. Again, we encourage Arlington to consider wildlife as an integral piece of transportation planning. T-10.1 Page 11 Maintain mapped inventory of the Arlington transportation system, traffic data such as traffic counts and accident data. Conduct studies to support operational and traffic safety improvements. These studies shall also compile and prioritize a list of high wildlife crossing mortality areas for correction. As stated in comments above, it is important to plan for wildlife alongside other transportation plans and projects to avoid future wildlife collision and conflict concerns. Public Safety (this link) PS-5.1 Page 5 Locate critical facilities and utilities in a way that minimizes exposure to hazards and incorporates BAS. As FEMA’s Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) modeling does not consider climate change projections, we suggest Arlington supplement FIRM maps with BAS. For example, King County regulations place ‘Flood Protection Elevations’ three feet above base flood elevation for development within flood-prone areas. For assessing future conditions, see Climate Mapping for a Resilient Washington, as well as FEMA’s Resilience Analysis and Planning Tool (RAPT). Capital Facilities and Utilities (this link) CFU-4 Page 5 Suggested Policy: Coordinate with WSDOT, Snohomish County, and neighboring jurisdictions to plan and prioritize culvert upgrades to ensure consistent fish passage barrier removal, adequate projected stormwater passage, and continued climate-related adaptations to handle water passage into the future throughout Clyde Hill, especially where terrestrial species connectivity can Current fish passage barriers within Arlington can be found through WDFW’s interactive mapping tool. The adjacent suggested policy’s goals can be addressed in tandem with transportation projects, recreational trail linkage projects, redevelopment projects, and more, opening these projects up for diverse funding opportunities. For resources, see WDFW’s Incorporating Climate Change into the Design of Water Crossing Structures: Final Project Report, State Fish Passage web map, and WDOT’s 9 be restored simultaneously (i.e., with wider bridges). Wildlife Habitat Connectivity Considerations in Fish Barrier Removal Projects. Additionally, we suggest utilizing the Sound Choices Checklist in further review of all Comprehensive Plan elements. This checklist utilized broad priorities that are applicable to all jurisdictions. Thank you for taking the time to consider our recommendations to better reflect the BAS for fish and wildlife habitats and ecosystems. We value the relationship we have with your jurisdiction and the opportunity to work collaboratively with you throughout this periodic update cycle. If you have any questions or need our technical assistance or resources at any time during this process, please don’t hesitate to contact me or the Regional Land Use Lead, Morgan Krueger (morgan.krueger@dfw.wa.gov). Sincerely, Timothy Stapleton Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Region 4, Habitat Program Manager CC: Morgan Krueger, Regional Land Use Lead (Morgan.Krueger@dfw.wa.gov) Kara Whittaker, Land Use Conservation and Policy Section Manager (Kara.Whittaker@dfw.wa.gov) Marian Berejikian, Land Use Conservation and Policy Planner (Marian.Berejikian@dfw.wa.gov) Kirk Lakey, Assistant Regional Habitat Program Manager (Kirk.Lakey@dfw.wa.gov) Kathryn Weilert, Habitat Biologist (Kathryn.Weilert@dfw.wa.gov) Region 4 Central District planning inbox (R4CPlanning@dfw.wa.gov) Jeff Aken, WA Department of Commerce (Jeff.Aken@commerce.wa.gov) City of Arlington Council Agenda Bill WS #3 Attachment November 25, 2024 Community and Economic Development Fourth Quarter Report Fourth Quarter Report Community and Economic Development; Marc Hayes, Director EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: 0 BUDGET CATEGORY: 0 BUDGETED AMOUNT: 0 LEGAL REVIEW: DESCRIPTION: Review of current development projects and work being conducted by the department and address any questions that Council may have. ALTERNATIVES: Information only. Community and Economic Development Quarterly Status Report Reporting Period: Q4 2024 Staffing Report: • We interviewed for both the Development Services Engineering Manager and Planning Manager positions and found well qualified individuals to fill both positions. Employment offers are going out this week. Update on Current Contracts/Grants/Agreements: • Otak is the prime consultant for the 2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update. The goals and policies have been reviewed by the Planning Commission and revisions are being completed and readied for presentation to Council for review. • Contract has been signed with Rock Project Management Services, to provide project management/construction management services for Phase II of the Smokey Point Community Park project. The bid opening occurred on 10/9, and Capture Energy was the low bid and have been issued a Notice to Proceed. • MAKERS Architecture and Urban Design LLP are putting together the “draft” Subarea Plan for Island Crossing. We should be receiving the draft by mid-December. • Contracted with Peregrin Sorter (Laminar Law) to provide the City’s Hearing Examiner services. • Under agreement with Washington State Food Truck Association to provide oversight of vendor requirements and scheduling for the Pilot Program. • CED is under contract with the Department of Commerce for the Paper to Digital grant in the amount of $325,000.00. • Applied for an Aquatic Organism Passage (AOP) grant in partnership with the Tulalip Tribes for the replacement of the Edgecomb Creek/ 67th Ave. NE culvert crossing. Challenges • Continuing to review/permit the backlog of projects, currently in the que, as time allows. Opportunities: New Programs/General Information Meetings: GIMs • Met with an individual proposing to construct a senior living apartment building at the end of 80th Ave. • Met with an individual proposing to build three T-Hangars at airport. • Met with PUD to discuss the Crosswinds Substation Transmission Line project. • Met with individuals that were proposing to build a drive-thru coffee shop and a chiropractic business on airport property at the NE corner of SR 531/43rd Ave. • Met with the developer who is installing the EV charging stations at Island Crossing. Active Development Projects: • Wet Rabbit Carwash – tunnel-style automated carwash located at the SE corner of SR 9/204th St. • Ironwood Place-102-unit mixed-use project located at 67th Ave.NE/Woodlands Way, • Allen Townhomes- 36-unit residential townhome project located on SR 531 east of SR 9 • Arlington Townhomes- 17 lot residential townhome project located on Highland Dr. • Goldstream Ventures-96-unit mixed-use project located on Smokey Point Blvd. across from the Stillaguamish Senior Center. • Bridgemont-18 lot single family residential project located on 186th St. south of high school • The Outpost-500-unit mixed-use project located on 51st Ave. NE/168th St. NE • SnoCo PUD District Office – commercial office located at 59th Ave. NE, • SnoCo PUD Crosswinds Substation-electrical utility infrastructure • TEC Equipment-motor vehicle sales located on Smokey Point Blvd., east of Pilot Travel Center • McIlrath Hangars- 57 T hangars aircraft hangars located on Airport Blvd. You can always view the project location by clicking this link: https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/b53bc9cf22874530aca0b3fed3853a25 New Programs: Items of Concern: Items for Discussion: Planning Commission Items: November 19, 2024 1. November 19 meeting-2024 Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update. Action item w/Findings of Fact. 2. November 19 meeting-Concurrency and Impact Fees Code Amendment. Action item w/Findings of Fact. Upcoming Council Items: November 25, 2024 /December 2, 2024 1. Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update- presentation. 2. Public Hearing for Comprehensive Plan Periodic Update-adoption. City of Arlington Council Agenda Bill WS #4 Attachment November 25, 2024 Public Works Third Quarter Report Public Works Quarterly Report, 2024-Q3 Public Works; Jim Kelly, Director EXPENDITURES REQUESTED: None N/A BUDGETED AMOUNT: N/A LEGAL REVIEW: DESCRIPTION: Public Works Third Quarter Report Review of current personnel, regulatory, maintenance and project issues affecting Public Works’ Transportation, Utilities, Cemetery, Engineering, GIS and Administration departments for third quarter of 2024. To maximize time and efficiency, please read the attached report and bring questions to the Council Workshop. ALTERNATIVES: None. Workshop; discussion only. Public Works Utilities, Transportation, Cemetery, Engineering & GIS Quarterly Update November 25, 2024 PW Quarterly Report Q3-2024 Page 1 of 5 This summary report will update you on projects and issues at the forefront of our workload. Further project detail is provided for your review on subsequent pages. 2024 Staffing Issues/Updates Status Budgeted 2024 Stormwater Lead Resigns - Nels Rasmussen, Stormwater Lead & Utility Project Manager has resigned to work with Snohomish County Surface Water Management. Engineer II – One of the Engineer II positions has been filled, Nate Thompson started in September. Filled Yes Project Manager – The City has hired Krista Stewart as Project Manager and Krista started on November 18, 2024. Filled Yes CM Team – Rock Project Management Services; we have a contracted person (Steve Sawyer) in house a few days a week to assist with transportation projects. Contracted Yes WWTPO/Lab Operator – This position currently being advertised internally. This position is funded in the 2024/2025 budget. Pending Yes Water Distribution Specialist Vacancy – This position is currently being advertised internally to backfill a vacancy in the Water Distribution Department. Pending Yes 2024 Utility Projects - Current Status Projects in Construction 1.WRF SCADA Update – The Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) new SCADA program, System Platform, has been installed and is going through final punch list items. It will be fully active and complete in December. 2.MBR Program – The current MBR program is 14 years old and no longer serviced by the developer. The City purchased a new MBR program from Kubota, it will be installed after the new SCADA program is operational. Estimated installation start Jan to Feb 2025. 3.WTP New PLC – This project is in process. The new PLC system has been installed and signal/communication wires from the old PLC rack to the new PLC have been dropped in ready for connection. We are now waiting for the system integrator (Process Solutions) to program the new PLC with the new operating system (System Platform). 4.WTP SCADA Update – The Water Treatment Plant (WTP) new SCADA system will be installed simultaneously with the programming of the new PLC, estimated completion is Jan 2025. 5.640 Booster Pump – Project is in construction. The existing building upgrades and modifications will be complete in December. The skid mounted booster pump system was delivered and placed in the building on Nov 22nd, the contractor will start hard piping the system into the City’s water distribution system in December. Electrical components are long-lead items that are driving the project schedule, including start-up. 6.MBR Blower Upgrade – The new MBR blowers were delivered on Nov 22nd. We are waiting on long lead items to modify the existing air header to accept the new pumps. The pump installation work is going out for bid after Thanksgiving. 7.Lift Station 07 New Pump installation – The City’s lift station contractor, APSCO, received faulty motors from the supplier, testing and re-ordering delayed delivery. The two new pumps are in, have passed APSCO testing and will be received before the end of November. Staff will install the pumps during the first week of December. 8.WTP Interior Water Damage Repair – First phase of the WTP office repair work is complete, final repairs are being constructed. Project will be complete by end of December. Public Works Utilities, Transportation, Cemetery, Engineering & GIS Quarterly Update November 25, 2024 PW Quarterly Report Q3-2024 Page 2 of 5 Utility Projects out for Bid/ On Order 1. MBR Blower Installation – The two turbo blowers and Motor Control Unit (MCU) need specialized installation, this work is being bid after the Thanksgiving holiday. Start-up training will be provided by MBR blower manufacturer. Utility Projects Pending Bid 1. Prairie Creek & BNSF Bridge – 90% design was delivered to City, to permitting agencies, and to BNSF. City staff is working with permitting agencies lead (USACOE & WFDW) and Consor is working with BNSF. Utility Projects in Design 1. Haller Well South – We are expecting 60% design in December. This will include improvements for the new wellhouse #4 and stairs from Haller Park to Centennial Trail. 2. WTP Expansion – The 60% design was reviewed and returned to BHC, a 60% follow-up meeting is scheduled for after the Thanksgiving holiday. There is a concern with the quality of soil beneath the planned WTP and needed foundation. This item will be further addressed in December. 2024 Transportation Projects - Current Status Budget Category Status Projects in Construction 1. 204th St & 74th Ave Signal – This project is significantly complete. Outstanding work includes striping (weather dependent) and power from Snohomish PUD. It is anticipated that signals will be activated in January 2025. 2. Cox St Traffic Calming – Installation of the curb ramp and two speed humps is complete; however one speed hump is not per spec and will be removed. Removal and replacement of the east speed is weather dependent. Crosswalk striping is also weather dependent. 3. 3rd & 5th St Parking Lots – This project is complete, going through close out process. 4. 211th Corridor – In process. This project has a great delay in starting due to PUD redesigning their overhead system after the project was bid and awarded for construction. The City worked with PUD during the design phase and their pole layout/design was complete, it is unknown why they had to redesign the project. Transportation Projects Pending Award 1. 74th Ave Trail – Project was bid and 10 bids were received. Due to a minor bidder error, award is pending authorization from WSDOT headquarters. Transportation Projects out for Bid 1. Broadway/Division Rehabilitation – Project is currently out for bid, bids are due December 3rd. Transportation Projects Pending Bid 1. 188th & SPB Roundabout – Staff received WSDOT’s final approval of the NEPA-CE. Our goal is to get this project CN phase obligated and bid in December, bids will be due in early/mid January. Construction will start in early 2025. 2. 2025 Utility and Pavement Preservation – In-house staff is updating the 2024 UPP design to make it the 2025 UPP design. The 2025 UPP package will be complete in December and ready for ad in January. Public Works Utilities, Transportation, Cemetery, Engineering & GIS Quarterly Update November 25, 2024 PW Quarterly Report Q3-2024 Page 3 of 5 Projects in Design 2. Smokey Point Blvd Corridor – Received NEPA-CE approval for the entire corridor (174th St to 200 St) from WSDOT and FHWA, project design will resume. 3. 169th St Connector – Project design is holding at pre-60% level, staff is working with design consultant and geotech consultant on road profile and roadway drainage. Design will resume after HWA completes groundwater mounding analysis (due Dec 22) and drainage system can be completed. 4. 180th St Connector – Design team presented three alternatives to in-house staff and to the community, the alignment that was mutually agreed upon was approved by Council and staff has started full roadway design. 5. SR-531 Trail, Phase 1 – Project received funding for design (PE) and right-of-way (ROW), it has been placed on the state TIP and we are now ready to solicit qualifications for a design firm. A Request for Qualifications (RFQ) will be issued in December. 6. SR-530 & SPB Roundabout – At the request of WSDOT, the City and consultant had to prepare a second Basis of Design (BOD) summary and resubmitted to WSDOT, the BOD #2 was submitted on Nov 19th. 7. SR-531 Widening – Design for project Phase 1 (43rd Ave to 51st Ave) and Phase 2 (51st Ave to 59th Ave) continues to move forward with the City partnering at bi-weekly meetings. The start of both phases is now estimated to be Aug 2025. There is insufficient funding for Phase 3 (59th Ave to 67th Ave), the City is currently soliciting for additional project funding for Phase 3. Phase 3 was also placed on the Snohomish County Priority Projects list. Public Works Grant Update and Status (cont’d) Active Grants 1. SR-531 Trail (PE & ROW phase) – The City received a $1 million grant for this project through Congresswoman DelBene’s office, the City will begin working with WSDOT and start project design. 2. DAHP Cemetery Grant – This grant is active and the Cemetery completed the first of three funded projects, repair of the Cemetery fencing. Staff has also started coordination with the Arlington American Legion for input on the second project, rehabilitation work of the Cemetery War Memorial. 3. FEMA / Prairie Creek: This grant is active and we are ready to bid this project for construction pending execution of an agreement with BNSF. 4. NHS Grant Broadway/Division – Grant active, ready to start construction phase. 5. FHWA 169th St Connector – The City needs to rebalance this grant appropriation between PE, ROW and CN phases. Staff is actively working with WSDOT and PSRC. 6. TIB 211th Corridor Improvements – TIB grant, project is in process. Reimbursement funds are coming in. 7. PSRC Smokey Point Blvd Corridor Design – This project has a target completion in 2025, grant fully billed out, remaining expenditures are local funds. 8. 188th Roundabout (active)- City was supposed to obligate CN phase by Oct 1st, but this won’t happen due to NEPA not being finalized. Staff has been working with PSRC to extend funding obligation deadline. 9. PSRC 74th St Trail – Additional funds are now programmed in STIP, construction ready to start as soon as WSDOT approves award. Public Works Utilities, Transportation, Cemetery, Engineering & GIS Quarterly Update November 25, 2024 PW Quarterly Report Q3-2024 Page 4 of 5 Active Grants (cont’d) 10. PSRC 180th St Connector (PE) – Grant funding for design, project programmed and under way. 11. SR-531 Widening Project (WSDOT project) – Project remains in state budget under the Connecting WA Program. Staff is working to secure funding for project Phase 2 (59th Ave to 67th Ave). 12. Ecology Stormwater Capacity Grant – City has been awarded grant for 2023-2025 cycle, $130,000 grant amount, grant is complete, close out report pending. 13. Coordinated Prevention (Recycling) Grant: Grant awarded for 2023-2025 funding cycle. Additional funds possible, waiting for response from Ecology. Grants Applied for/Pending Notice 1. 180th St Connector – The City made a grant presentation to the PSRC the Regional Project Evaluation Committee (RPEC) and the project did not score high enough for available funding, project is on the contingency list. 2. Island Crossing Utility Improvements – Did not pass out of congressional committee, staff is looking for alternative funding sources. 3. SR-531 Trail (CN phase) – The City submitted Congressional Directed Spending grant for this project through Congresswoman DelBene’s office and it was selected to move forward for congressional committee consideration. We are waiting to see if this passes through the upcoming federal budget. 4. Three Water Projects – $23.8 million grant request for three water projects to US Army Corps of Engineers; pending notice from USACOE by end of year. 5. Haller North – Staff is applying for BRIC funding through FEMA, applications due in December. Detail and Update on Operations and GIS Enterprise Activities 1. Cemetery Operations – As follows: - Grant received for fence repair, Veteran’s Memorial Rehabilitation, and Wayfinding Sign. Fence repair project is complete and other two project are in process. - This is the first year with a full maintenance crew. Cemetery Irrigation system has now been winterized and staff is busy with fall cleanup and winter preparations. - Council approved updated Cemetery Rules & Regulations. - In-house staff is designing the full Garden Glen layout, not just the Columbarium design. A 90% design package will be presented to the Cemetery Board in January and staff will work on collaborative work arrangements for construction in Spring 2025. 2. Water Reclamation & Sewer Collections – As follows: - Sewer Collections are completing necessary in-field measurements requested by RH2 in order to calibrate the sewer model. Sewer model to be ready for staff review in January 2025. - Sewer Collections are preparing to install a third pump into LS-02 due to increased sewer flows, pump is on order. Public Works Utilities, Transportation, Cemetery, Engineering & GIS Quarterly Update November 25, 2024 PW Quarterly Report Q3-2024 Page 5 of 5 - New pumps for LS-05 and LS-07 are in process, existing pumps are 30 years old and have worn parts. - The in-plant lift station had two new pumps and associated electric wiring installed and the wet well was resurfaced, the in-plant lift statin is fully operational. - The procurement and installation of the new MBR blowers is moving forward. - WRF staff continues to work with Process Solutions, Inc. on the upgrade of the SCADA system from Wonderware to System Platform. 3. Water Treatment & Water Distribution – As follows: - Distribution staff are continuing to work with Arlington School District to modify the water metering system at Eagle Creek Elementary school. - Distribution staff have been continuously monitoring pressure throughout the distribution system and providing to RH2 for their Water Model calibration effort. RH2 will be requesting flow data as a follow-up to the pressure data. - Repair of WTP Office interior damage from winter freeze continues to move forward. - WTP staff assisted the WRF staff on the installation of a laser-based turbidity monitor on the WRF effluent stream. The WTP has been using this laser-based turbidity monitoring system for many years and had the experience to assist WRF staff with installation and calibration. 4. Storm Activities – As follows: - Nels Rasmussen resigned for a position with Snohomish County Surface Water, Jason Lum has assumed a greater responsibility managing the department until a reorganization plan can be implemented. Jason is doing a superb job. - Catch basin cleaning is complete and all asset management data on cleaned inlets has been entered into the system. - The stormwater self-inspection program for 2024 has been initiated, 114 inspection reports received as of Nov 15th. - Staff is getting ready to complete inspection of 42 sites for NPDES required source control inventory. 5. GIS Activities: See attached GIS Enterprise Report PW Spatial Technology Report - October 2024 Asset Management The following are some items that were completed for asset management (provided by Abe): • Troubleshooting SQL performance issues with IT and GIS consultant. • Lots of maintenance tasks to keep Elements running smoothly and assist users • Training to Elements Steering members on how to transfer tasks from addresses to actual assets October Task Orders in Elements 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Ho u r s Task Katie Abe Liliana Bill-To Summary October Department AC KH LHB Total Airport 0 0 0.5 0.5 CED 1 2.5 3 6.5 Cemetery 6 0 0 6 Executive 0 0 0 0 External 0 16 0 16 Finance 0 0 0 0 Fire 0 0 0 0 IT 0 23 0 23 M&O 0 0 0 0 Police 0 3.5 0 3.5 PW Admin 116 149 165.5 430.5 Utilities 2 0 11 13 125 194 180 499 Enterprise Data Projects • Katie is on the STEM PAC of the Arlington School District CTE Advisory Board, attended 1st meeting of the year • Already have student interested in an internship and will job shadow in early December • Abe’s work with the LCRR Inventory is complete • Liliana finished up Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) Dashboards for the last 10 years – they will be useful for the traffic safety report and traffic calming plans • Abe updated the Grave Locator app with aggregated burial points (looks great!) • Grave Locator Experience • Arlington pavement segments are updated with their current Overall Condition Index (OCI) values and the Easy Street Analysis worksheet is updated with 2024 OCI and new segments • Katie attended 2 High Injury Network webinars that will be used to draft out the Traffic Safety Plan • Sidewalks, buildings and ramp inventory are updated and a new GIS analysis will be run for the ADA Transition Plan figures • Portal admin account is working again and prepared for early November GIS upgrades which is a three-phrase project – architecture upgrade on servers, new licensing installed and updated software loaded • Traffic collision data is revised for better analysis by future engineers with new dashboards deployed to Engineering and Police staff Web Usage Reports Server Monitor ArcGIS Server monitor is installed and reconfigured to maximize the alerting from the GIS server. The GIS server is not maxing out as much as in September so our usage percentages are much better. The graphic below shows current Portal health status instead of usual GIS server status: Portal (supports staff and asset management) • Staff Users – 69 out of 120 with over 42 logging on • Content – 864 items stored (services, layers and applications) • Katie updated 21 items, Abe worked on 5 items and Liliana updated 11 items • Most popular (viewed by staff) – All Utilities Experience with 2,785 views since Feb 2024 ArcGIS Online (AGOL – supports public use of applications and public downloads of City GIS data) • Staff users – 7 (Jason Lum, Katy Shores, Liliana Hart-Beck, Mike Wolanek, Abe Calderon, IT and Katie Heim) • Content summary includes 672 items that includes direct back up for GIS layers in case City servers are unavailable • Currently transitioning old web app builder applications on ArcGIS Online to Experience Builder to utilize improvements in the technology and uses available in Experience Builder • Most popular public facing apps: o Arlington WA Open Data Portal has been viewed and utilized by over 600 users and viewed over 10,000 times since it opened! In October, the Open Data Portal was viewed 1,771 times. o New Current Developer Activity Experience App has over 5,000 views since Nov 2023 o Sweeping Schedule (soon to be a new Storymap page with sweeping and plowing!) o Grave Locator (now in Experience Builder rather than old format) o Mobile Radar Application (Speed Studies) PW Task Order Summary Report Filters Division: PW Admin-GIS Labor Date from 10/01/2024 to 10/31/2024 Hrs PW Admin-GIS Abe Calderon Division: City of Arlington - PW Admin-GIS 125.00 4.00Task Type: GIS - Administrative Tasks 25.00Task Type: GIS - ArcGIS Online 2.00Task Type: GIS - Data collection 14.00Task Type: GIS - Database Management 45.00Task Type: GIS - Elements 1.00Task Type: GIS - Geocortex 17.00Task Type: GIS - Mapping 17.00Task Type: Recurring (1 Week) Completed Tasks: 50 125.00 TotalsAssigned Tasks With Labor Hours: 51 Katie Heim Division: City of Arlington - PW Admin-GIS 194.00 37.50Task Type: GIS - Administrative Tasks 4.00Task Type: GIS - ArcGIS Online 61.50Task Type: GIS - Database Management 8.00Task Type: GIS - IT web architecture 2.00Task Type: GIS - Mapping 51.00Task Type: GIS - Portal 30.00Task Type: Recurring (1 Week) Completed Tasks: 92 194.00 TotalsAssigned Tasks With Labor Hours: 93 Liliana Hart-Beck Division: City of Arlington - PW Admin-GIS 183.00 1.00Task Type: GIS - Administrative Tasks 53.25Task Type: GIS - ArcGIS Online 96.75Task Type: GIS - Database Management 19.50Task Type: GIS - Mapping .50Task Type: GIS - Trainings 12.00Task Type: Recurring (1 Week) Completed Tasks: 33 183.00 TotalsAssigned Tasks With Labor Hours: 63 Page 1 of 1Wednesday, November 6, 2024