City public works and planning staff presented a sweeping package of proposed updates to ECDC Title 18 and related enforcement code (20.110) on June 24 intended to modernize how Edmonds manages its public right‑of‑way, franchises, pole replacements and undergrounding projects.

What staff proposed: Acting Public Works and Utilities Director Phil Williams, Jeanne McConnell (engineering program manager) and legal staff walked council through proposed changes that would (1) require franchises or master permits for right‑of‑way use, (2) require right‑of‑way construction permits with defined expiration and restoration standards, (3) clarify emergency‑work notification and post‑emergency permit timelines, (4) increase restoration and pavement‑cut restrictions and fees for recent overlays, (5) set hollow‑pole design and hollow‑core replacement timelines for poles, and (6) create an enforcement structure with escalating monetary penalties and potential liens for noncompliance.

Why staff said it is needed: Staff framed the package as a response to increasing complexity in the right‑of‑way (more communications attachers, aging utility infrastructure, and visual and safety concerns). "Predictability is the key so they can do planning," Williams said, and he described aging above‑ground attachments and the need to require higher restoration standards and clearer franchise processes.

Key elements summarized by staff: The draft would require utilities that use the right‑of‑way to apply for franchises or master permits; it includes a timeline for utility companies to submit pole design applications and compliance dates (communications‑only pole hollow‑core compliance targeted earlier than electric distribution poles); it would allow the city to restrict cuts in newly reconstructed pavement (first‑year restriction, expanded restoration requirements through years 1–6) and to impose fines for unauthorized use or failure to secure franchises (including a $1,000/day penalty referenced for no‑franchise cases in the draft right‑of‑way enforcement section). Staff said policy choices remain, and that the draft incorporated guidance from the state Department of Commerce where applicable.

Engagement and next steps: Staff said they have provided drafts to utilities and offered to meet individually to resolve technical concerns; the packet calls for follow‑up meetings and for the city to bring the item back for a public hearing (staff suggested an August date in the packet). Councilmembers asked technical questions and asked staff to work with utilities on concerns about timelines and emergency‑work deadlines. City staff said the draft includes an appeals path and the ability to request extensions with documentation.

Ending: The package represents a comprehensive attempt to bring right‑of‑way regulation, franchise procedures and pole/undergrounding standards into one coherent code chapter; staff will continue consultations with utilities and return with revised language and a public hearing packet.