[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6625740,"mediaKeyId","2756411-0d30bd7771e3cfc630679228c6bf0a54","parentId",2756411,"title","Council reviews updated Commute Trip Reduction plan and proposed code amendments; staff seeks April action","audioSeconds",563,"startMs",6077000,"endMs",6640000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2756411-0d30bd7771e3cfc630679228c6bf0a54&start=6077&end=6640","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2756411-0d30bd7771e3cfc630679228c6bf0a54/thumbnail_6077000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6625740/Shoreline/King-County/Washington/Council-reviews-updated-Commute-Trip-Reduction-plan-and-proposed-code-amendments-staff-seeks-April-action","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6625740-5958b2078ec83039e63dea791677086e/orig.mp4?Expires=1770790051&Signature=cB0CN8asJDjb0o6JDhg-rJr3q~WXXLf65zH7I8yVxwfACwWzCH3iAOndMN-AoC7HZykupIuwU~l42aAA~VOpsQ0hkxDHXOkN-FXYx~P6u~EsBY~DeMgZSlN1~LVp8AXlaqzoSm9H5BVDiSodx-~--~7jaxn3tzRrOMNVPWilT0XCNrfPLvJEw8XOPvyQp1fTSos9QRP0WJchcbDXyDRMTdFiV8XmCumP3KJfusH~k2tC4unoWjCMHewcVH5tYhNyPDqvc7VSzKtyRSatQGc-mANAojykT41oT7lW~UPgKpO1EBR6~wii-AjMaMfay5OzV0dEFzFkrKIvZEs-Afh-DA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Shoreline","date","2025-03-24T19:00:00Z","article","Shoreline City Council discussed proposed Ordinance 1029 on Monday, which would adopt the city’s 2025–2029 Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) plan and replace Municipal Code chapter 14.1 with updated administrative language to reflect recent state changes.

Jeff Rinker, senior transportation planner in Public Works, told the council the CTR program is mandated by Washington state and aims to reduce drive-alone commutes among employees of large employers through employer-based programs, incentives and monitoring. He said the plan addresses seven CTR-affected employers and uses a drive-alone-rate target (the state-established benchmark discussed in the plan) to measure progress.

Why it matters: CTR plans support the city’s climate and transportation goals by encouraging alternatives to single-occupancy vehicle commuting, reducing vehicle miles traveled and improving air quality. The updated plan aligns local code with revised state law and clarifies administrative steps for working with affected employers.

Staff summarized the procedural history: council adopted resolution 531 in October 2024 approving a draft CTR plan submitted to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). WSDOT approved the plan with no changes; staff now present Ordinance 1029 and proposed municipal-code edits for council adoption. Staff recommended bringing the ordinance forward for council action on April 14.

Public comment included a question on how the plan measures vehicle miles traveled (VMT) changes tied to closer housing choices and remote work. A commenter asked whether a shorter commute this year versus a longer commute last year would register in VMT measures; staff responded the state-established target focuses on drive-alone rates but that CTR reporting and related transportation programs also consider distance and VMT trends where applicable.

Councilors asked for implementation aides. Councilmember Musler requested that future code edits be presented with redlines for easier review; staff said the proposed approach was a repeal-and-replace because the state changes were extensive and a simple redline would have been lengthy. Councilmember Moskowitz asked staff to clarify how GFC or other funding decisions interrelate with CTR goals; staff noted CTR is a programmatic requirement primarily aimed at behavior change among employers.

Council discussion also included active-transportation comments. A councilmember urged the city to prioritize protected bicycle facilities rather than sharrows, citing research showing protected lanes increase cycling safety and ridership; staff noted that CTR complements other transportation and infrastructure decisions but that those projects follow separate capital planning and funding processes.

Staff asked for council input and indicated they will return with the ordinance for a formal vote at the April 14 meeting. No vote was taken Monday; the item was set to appear on a consent agenda in a future meeting unless council directs otherwise.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Shoreline - City Council Regular Meeting - Mar 24, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Shoreline staff presented ordinance 1029 to adopt the city’s 2025–2029 Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) plan and accompanying municipal code updates; staff recommended action in April after WSDOT approved the draft plan.","taxTitle","Shoreline, King County, Washington","taxId",5093,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6625745,"Shoreline staff propose ESU stormwater rate structure and $3,585 general facilities charge; council asks for implementation details",2912,3140000,6052000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2756411-0d30bd7771e3cfc630679228c6bf0a54&start=3140&end=6052","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2756411-0d30bd7771e3cfc630679228c6bf0a54/thumbnail_3140000.jpg","/articles/6625745/Shoreline/King-County/Washington/Shoreline-staff-propose-ESU-stormwater-rate-structure-and-3585-general-facilities-charge-council-asks-for-implementation-details","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6625745-e9039d2152f7a3d6d758870596afbd99/orig.mp4?Expires=1770790051&Signature=Hd4PViG17IiGFM1y-0aTe4~v5kklEfbcpZceaVMmN7m~GPF2efcl~YNnQvSApkZT-Zsf-nuQjDj03sXOqRuYXvIr5tZ404w2q2s0YZhnpwr-pMV9Ivfhy9bN~Iwx2xBRQB-jvzlJApGdHCHZE4hnqgjq8Wq0Us6fCpBC7aLdSEUMfdjrpgBIB64cP7l9bzsi4KBtaUXFBPvOmtQApNn~YrMdpwKoVDjBLHypVmwtbOmqP41PphVI6A0~HMVAamonEVDQjUbPL~u3lEvqfjTOfn5tL1T~CD3O5VobPitG7PnfoXWZ5NFdipC9pu5cg8LlFoeczG25A1YoHOU1e5F8Jw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Shoreline City Council on Monday discussed proposed changes to the city’s surface-water rates and a new general facilities charge (GFC) intended to align stormwater fees with the amount of hard surface on a parcel and to require new development to pay a share of system capital costs.

John Featherstone, surface water and wastewater systems manager, and Taghi Aaker from FCS Group briefed the council on two linked proposals: convert the current seven-tier hard-surface billing system to an Equivalent Service Unit (ESU) charge (one ESU defined as roughly 2,600 square feet of hard surface) and adopt a new surface-water GFC calculated at $3,585 per ESU.

Why it matters: the ESU model charges parcels proportionally based on hard surface area rather than flat tiers; the GFC is a one-time charge assessed on new development to help fund existing and planned capital projects so growth pays for growth. Together the policies affect residential, commercial and redevelopment projects and the city’s capital funding strategy for stormwater infrastructure.

FCS presented the methodology and examples. Using updated aerial data the consultant estimated a 2027 fee per ESU of about $440.15 to meet the forecasted revenue requirement (roughly $12.8 million in 2027). FCS showed examples where a commercial bank parcel would see a modest increase under ESU billing while a large impervious facility (a transfer-station-type site) would pay less than under the existing tiered structure.

For the GFC, the consultant summed existing capital costs (about $39 million) and planned future projects (about $78 million), divided that total by estimated system capacity and calculated a defensible maximum GFC of $3,585 per ESU. Staff recommended adopting the full calculated GFC but noted the council could elect to phase in or adopt a lower charge.

Staff outlined implementation steps and timing. Before converting billing systems Shoreline will audit and update hard-surface aerial data, define and rename the residential billing class to reflect middle-housing and new zoning, develop clear class criteria, and coordinate with King County (the city’s billing provider) to implement ESU billing for 2027 billings. For the GFC, Shoreline will adopt a code amendment, create a formal policy, develop permitting processes to assess and collect fees, and provide public notice to developers and property owners.

Council questions touched on equity and housing. Councilmember Adamaso urged that the GFC exemption threshold for very small projects (staff discussed a threshold under half an ESU or 1,300 square feet) apply equally to small residential projects — for example modest ADUs — to avoid disincentivizing affordable housing. Deputy Mayor Mark asked about permeable pavement and staff said the city counts permeable pavement as hard surface for billing because its performance depends on maintenance. Councilmember Ramsdale and others praised the clarity and urged the city to update ESU definitions as redevelopment occurs.

Staff also reported an early success for program expansion: a “Soak It Up” rebate program expansion generated more applications and site visits than expected in the first weeks after the increase in rebates, indicating strong customer interest in onsite stormwater measures.

No ordinance was adopted Monday; staff requested council input on implementation steps and said they plan to return with a final Surface Water Master Plan and implementation schedule in early summer and to target 2027 for ESU billing and GFC collection, subject to completing code amendments and billing-system changes.","Public Works and consultant FCS presented a proposed shift from tiered surface-water rates to an Equivalent Service Unit (ESU) model, a projected 2027 ESU fee of about $440 and a new surface-water general facilities charge (GFC) of $3,585 per ESU; staff outlined auditing, billing and code steps before implementation.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6625749,"Shoreline council hears King County plan for a $0.25-per-$1,000 Medic 1 levy to fund regional EMS",2563,571000,3134000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2756411-0d30bd7771e3cfc630679228c6bf0a54&start=571&end=3134","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2756411-0d30bd7771e3cfc630679228c6bf0a54/thumbnail_571000.jpg","/articles/6625749/Shoreline/King-County/Washington/Shoreline-council-hears-King-County-plan-for-a-025-per-1000-Medic-1-levy-to-fund-regional-EMS","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6625749-305aebb8fee89f14c8924d6efc0d2811/orig.mp4?Expires=1770790051&Signature=OBvQI4EqdebxmU7xZ5Jb9jqYvIUH90Dzbd-srTFIj~HHCOj94~KyXIwEODHGvkvgiL0sVPRniObkMZ32vZEgELAIUqZ6mu7pBF-PRAnFgxpcKWVXS7lCbLsm0e4OHFV-N39QRPSXcmhcMrA~A8sbBDxKKmTYrmtyUvAsD3KCgcHCVLPri-XeArUUB6zG06m--~Srw~VWQLKBuUChzTrDI~VKlUiDJNU5qTcLWuKFbZ2YG4fTh8rlTUnSL7N7y4yvSOA2hh5JK-BNk2KMeut4XOLK8BRYsQUghvCdxG8UbCCskNmLPdGM6Dgp61sRfFEA2fPhR0mHYW8rgd-MpfQDeA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Shoreline City Council on Monday heard a staff presentation from Public Health — Seattle & King County outlining a proposed countywide Medic 1 emergency medical services (EMS) levy that would fund paramedics, basic life-support services and regional programs from 2026 through 2031.

Michelle Plourde, EMS Division director for Public Health — Seattle & King County, told the council the package the EMS advisory task force recommended would raise planning revenues of about $1.5 billion over six years at a proposed levy rate of $0.25 per $1,000 of assessed value and include both programmatic funding and reserves. She said staff will return to Shoreline with a proposed city resolution asking the council to consider placing the countywide ballot measure on the November 2025 general-election ballot.

Why it matters: the Medic 1 levy funds the regional paramedic system that responds to 911 medical calls across King County; the levy supports paramedic (ALS) units, basic life-support (BLS) funding for fire departments, regional services such as medical direction and data systems, and strategic initiatives including mobile integrated health (MIH) and training.

Plourde told the council Medic 1 serves more than 2.3 million people and responded to over 255,000 calls in 2024. “In our community, we are 2 to 3 times more likely to survive from cardiac arrest compared to other cities,” she said, citing the system’s tracked cardiac arrest survival rates. The advisory task force recommended continuing an allocation model for ALS funding, adding targeted BLS increases, and maintaining reserves to mitigate financial risks.

Key details from the presentation: the task force estimated programmatic needs outside Seattle at about $919 million and, including Seattle, a total expenditure plan of about $1.4 billion. Combined with carryforward reserves and projected revenues, staff presented a planning target of roughly $1.5 billion over six years. The task force recommended a funding package that would translate to an estimated $212 annual cost to a homeowner with an $850,000 home, Plourde said.

The package includes a proposed year-one increase in BLS funding of about $5 million (split between base allocations and MIH support), continued funding for regional services and initiatives, and an emphasis on mental wellness and workforce supports for emergency responders. Shoreline-specific estimates shown in the presentation listed approximately $2.1 million in BLS funding for 2025 (including about $338,000 for MIH) and roughly $11.44 million for ALS funding for Shoreline’s three paramedic units in 2025.

Council discussion focused on scope, cost containment and timing. Councilmember Scully, who served on the task force’s ALS subcommittee, said the recommendations aim “to maintain an excellent system without trying to gold plate it or add services we don't need.” Councilmember Adamaso and Councilmember Robertson asked about assessed-value sensitivity and whether the 25-cent rate would be sufficient if assessed values fell; staff said the financial plan includes reserves and a risk analysis that examined variations in assessed value, new construction, and inflation. Plourde noted a recommended reserve cushion of about $47 million to reduce exposure to downside scenarios.

Process and next steps: Plourde said the levy package requires approval by the King County Council and that staff will bring a proposed city resolution for Shoreline to consider formally recommending that the county place the measure on the November 2025 ballot. The presentation noted a procedural requirement that a substantial share of cities (described by staff as a supermajority of jurisdictions above a population threshold) be engaged in the recommendation process; staff are pursuing city approvals before the summer deadlines to meet county procedural needs.

No formal council vote occurred Monday; the item was for discussion and staff requested direction and the opportunity to return with a resolution for council consideration in April or at a later meeting.

Looking ahead: if Shoreline and other jurisdictions formally support placing the measure on the ballot, voters will decide the levy in November 2025. The levy plan includes funding for paramedic staffing, data and quality systems, mental-health supports for responders and a growing MIH program that Mayor and council members described as an important local service.","Public Health — Seattle & King County staff briefed Shoreline City Council on the proposed six-year Medic 1 levy package that would raise an estimated $1.5 billion regionwide; staff will return with a resolution asking the council to consider placing the measure on the November 2025 ballot.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Council reviews updated Commute Trip Reduction plan and proposed code amendments; staff seeks April action

Shoreline staff propose ESU stormwater rate structure and $3,585 general facilities charge; council asks for implementation details

Shoreline council hears King County plan for a $0.25-per-$1,000 Medic 1 levy to fund regional EMS