2010.08.03 CC Agenda Packet
AGENDA
Edmonds City Council
Council Chambers, Public Safety Complex
250 5th Ave. North, Edmonds
______________________________________________________________
August 3, 2010
5:15 p.m. - Executive session regarding labor negotiation strategy and negotiations related to a real estate
matter.
7:00 p.m. - Call to Order and Flag Salute
1. Approval of Agenda
2. Approval of Consent Agenda Items
A. Roll Call
B. AM-3258 Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of July 27, 2010.
C. AM-3253 Approval of claim checks #120331 through #120457 dated July 29, 2010 for $408,351.73.
D. AM-3257 Update on progress of the City of Edmonds Health Benefits Committee.
3. AM-3225
(5 Minutes)
Community Service Announcement: Edmonds Chamber of Commerce - Car Show.
4. AM-3210
(5 Minutes)
Community Service Announcement: Adopt-A-Dog.
5. AM-3250
(30 Minutes)
Update from Mike Carter of Stevens Hospital and Cal Knight of Swedish Hospital
regarding the hospital affiliation and hospital district.
6. AM-3251
(30 Minutes)
Continued Public Hearing on the 2010 Water System Comprehensive Plan Update.
7. AM-3255
(15 Minutes)
Public hearing and second reading of a proposed Ordinance to amend the provisions of
Chapter 3.65 of the Edmonds City Code relating to the Transportation Benefit District
in order to expand the functions and authority of the District to include the construction
of thirty-seven (37) transportation improvements, including street overlays to extend
the life of city streets, construction of key pedestrian connections, intersection
improvements to relieve congestion, traffic calming measures, corridor improvements,
pedestrian lighting, signalization installation and replacement, and bicycle loop signage
with the proceeds of a Forty Dollar ($40) vehicle fee increase, if approved by the voters.
8. AM-3246
(30 Minutes)
Public Hearing on the Planning Board's recommendation regarding updating the
number of permitted permanent signs per site in business and commercial zones.
(Edmonds Community Development Code 20.60.025) (File Number AMD20100014).
9. AM-3252 Presentation and potential action on a recommendation from the Economic
Packet Page 1 of 562
9. AM-3252
(15 Minutes)
Presentation and potential action on a recommendation from the Economic
Development Commission to proceed with a partnership with the University of
Washington Green Futures Lab for development of special district plans for the Five
Corners and Westgate commercial centers.
10.Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)*
*Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed record Review or as Public Hearings.
11. (5 Minutes)Mayor's Comments
12. (15 Minutes)Council Comments
Adjourn
Packet Page 2 of 562
AM-3258 2.B.
Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of July 27, 2010
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:08/03/2010
Submitted By:Linda Hynd
Submitted For:Sandy Chase Time:Consent
Department:City Clerk's Office Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes of July 27, 2010.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
It is recommended that the City Council review and approve the draft minutes.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
Attached is a copy of the draft minutes.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: 07-27-10 Draft City Council Minutes
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Linda Hynd 07/30/2010 11:47 AM APRV
2 Community Services/Economic Dev. Stephen Clifton 07/30/2010 11:50 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Linda Hynd 07/30/2010 11:54 AM APRV
Form Started By: Linda Hynd Started On: 07/30/2010 11:42
AM
Final Approval Date: 07/30/2010
Packet Page 3 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 1
EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES
July 27, 2010
At 5:33 p.m., Mayor Cooper announced that the City Council would meet in executive session regarding
pending litigation. He stated that the executive session was scheduled to last approximately 90 minutes
and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. Elected officials
present at the executive session were: Mayor Cooper, and Councilmembers Bernheim, Plunkett, Fraley-
Monillas, Buckshnis, Petso, and Peterson. Councilmember Wilson joined the executive session at 5:48
p.m. Others present were Special Counsel Grant Weed, Weed Graafstra & Benson
, and Recorder Jeannie
Dines. The executive session concluded at 6:50 p.m.
Mayor Cooper reconvened the executive session regarding pending litigation at 7:00 p.m. He stated that
the executive session was scheduled to last approximately 5 minutes and would be held in the Jury
Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. Elected officials present at the executive session
were: Mayor Cooper, and Councilmembers Bernheim, Plunkett, Fraley-Monillas, Buckshnis, Petso,
Peterson and Wilson. Others present were Special Counsel Grant Weed, Weed Graafstra & Benson
, and
Recorder Jeannie Dines. The executive session concluded at 7:07 p.m.
The regular City Council meeting was called to order at 7:08 p.m. by Mayor Cooper in the Council
Chambers, 250 5th
Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute.
ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT
Mike Cooper, Mayor
Steve Bernheim, Council President
D. J. Wilson, Councilmember
Michael Plunkett, Councilmember
Lora Petso, Councilmember
Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember
Strom Peterson, Councilmember
Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember
STAFF PRESENT
Stephen Clifton, Community Services/Economic
Development Director
Phil Williams, Public Works Director
Rob English, City Engineer
Kernen Lien, Associate Planner
John Westfall, Fire Marshal
Linda Hynd, Deputy City Clerk
Jana Spellman, Senior Executive Council Asst.
Jeannie Dines, Recorder
1.
APPROVAL OF AGENDA
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER WITH THE
ADDITION OF AGENDA ITEM 2A, AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO A
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH ERIC THEUSEN, KEN REIDY AND THE CITY. MOTION
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
2.
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Petso requested Item E be removed from the Consent Agenda.
Packet Page 4 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 2
COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO
APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED
UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows:
A. ROLL CALL
B. APPROVAL OF CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JULY 20, 2010
C. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #120179 THROUGH #120330 DATED JULY 22, 2010
FOR $2,027,444.99. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT AND CHECKS
#49539 THROUGH #49607 FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1 THROUGH JULY 15, 2010 FOR
$751,071.01
D. COMMUNITY SERVICES AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY REPORT
– JULY, 2010
F. BNSF RAILWAY COMPANY TEMPORARY OCCUPANCY PERMIT
ITEM E: AWARD CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT FOR EDMONDS HISTORICAL MUSEUM
EXTERIOR REPAIRS PROJECT
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
PLUNKETT, TO APPROVE ITEM E. MOTION CARRIED (6-0-1), COUNCILMEMBER PETSO
ABSTAINED.
2A. AUTHORIZATION FOR THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
WITH ERIC THEUSEN, KEN REIDY AND THE CITY
.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER WILSON,
TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO A SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH
ERIC THEUSEN, KEN REIDY AND THE CITY IN THE FORM REVIEWED IN EXECUTIVE
SESSION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
3.
SOUND TRANSIT UPDATE
Ric Ilgenfritz, Executive Director, Planning & Project Development, Sound Transit, displayed a map
of the tri-county Sound Transit system, explaining the system extends from Everett to Dupont in Pierce
County and includes the urbanized areas of Snohomish, King and Pierce Counties. Sound Transit operates
three different lines of service: light rail, commuter rail (Sounder) and ST express bus service. They carry
approximately 3.3 million people a year and ridership continues to grow. There are three Sound Transit
Board Members from Snohomish County: Snohomish County Executive Aaron Reardon, the Board
Chair; Joe Marine, Mukilteo’s Mayor; and Paul Rogers, Everett City Council. He recognized past Board
Members from Edmonds: Dave Earling, Deanna Dawson and Richard Marin.
He displayed a chart illustrating growth 1999-2009. The light rail system that began in Seattle a year ago
now carries over 24,000 riders per day. They are experiencing much higher than expected ridership on
weekends and generally to/from the airport station. He highlighted projects in the past ten years in the
north end including construction of the Ash Way and Lynnwood transit center parking facilities and direct
access ramps, improvements at Everett Station, and the Mountlake Terrace facility. Sounder ridership
continues to increase. Orders will be submitted for additional rail cars later this year to expand the fleet,
operate large trains and accommodate demand as it grows. Bus service will continue to grow; Sound
Transit has been phasing in an approximately 17% increase in ST express service in the north end since
the ST 2 plan was approved by voters.
Packet Page 5 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 3
Mr. Ilgenfritz announced a tentative date of August 18 for the groundbreaking on the permanent Edmonds
station. He referred to a site plan for the station that includes improved parking, pedestrian/passenger
facilities, and turning the temporary station into a more attractive and better integrated facility for the
community. Final design of the station is complete and work will begin in August and be completed by
spring 2011.
In 2008 voters approved ST 2, a plan to expand the Sound Transit system by adding approximately 36
miles of new light rail, additional Sounder trips and new bus service. Sound Transit is struggling with a
fairly substantial hit to forecasted revenues as a result of the recession. ST 2 was an $18 billion capital
and operating program over 15 years. Sound Transit is now projecting a $3+ billion or 15% reduction in
forecasted revenues. There was an approximately 15% cushion in the plan so the reduction can be
absorbed. All projects and services will be managed with more than the usual attention to detail with
regard to controlling scope, managing costs and adhering to schedules. A comprehensive review has been
done of the plan to develop strategies for addressing issues. The Sound Transit Board commissioned
development of a white paper that identifies tasks for staff and the CEO that looks primarily at controlling
operating costs whenever possible. Staff expects to submit a reduced budget this year. They will be
advancing some project development work including on the north corridor. Sound Transit adopted a new
scope control policy to help keep tight control on add-ons.
Mr. Ilgenfritz explained the light rail line is open and operating over a 16 mile alignment between
downtown Seattle and SeaTac International Airport. Construction is underway, approximately 20%
complete, on the first extension north, a pair of tunnels from Westlake Center to the University of
Washington serving Capitol Hill. That project came in approximately $150 million under the engineer’s
estimate, an indicator of the market in this economy.
The North Link project extends from the UW to Northgate, a combination of tunnel, surface and elevated
projects. That project recently moved into final design and is almost at 60% design. The goal is to open
that section for service in 2020 and the UW project in 2016.
Sound Transit is beginning work on an alternatives analysis for transit expansion from Northgate to
Lynnwood Transit Center, a 9-mile corridor. They envision four station stops at 145th, 185th
, Mountlake
Terrace and Lynnwood Transit Center. Sound Transit has been successful in obtaining federal grants
including an FTA grant for the first project of $500 million, an $800 million grant for the UW project and
will be seeking approximately $600 million for the extension to Lynnwood. One of the steps in obtaining
federal funds is an alternatives analysis to consider different project alignments and how the rail system
compares with other modes. Sound Transit will create a new analysis of transit performance by mode
between light rail, bus rapid transit and basic bus service. At the conclusion of that process, a report is
created with technology review and a series of potential alignments that inform the EIS scoping process.
He displayed the project schedule, an 18 month process for the alternatives analysis that will include
engaging the public in north King County and Snohomish County this fall to discuss potential alignments
and service configurations. Based on information from the public, the alternatives analysis will be
conducted over the winter and reported to the Sound Transit Board. At that point Sound Transit will begin
to seek funding from the federal government and begin the EIS process. He reviewed the timeline for the
EIS and preliminary engineering process, beginning now and extending approximately 4½ years. He
offered to return to the Council this fall and/or hold an open house to engage Edmonds citizens.
The East Corridor project is a 14 mile extension of the system from downtown Seattle via I-90 to Mercer
Island into Bellevue and ultimately to Redmond. Sound Transit has been working with cities, WSDOT,
Packet Page 6 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 4
the federal government and many other stakeholders during preliminary engineering and to identify a
preferred alternative. The schedule is to complete preliminary engineering by the end of 2010, complete
the EIS by April 2011 and have the Board act between April and July 2011 to adopt the project to be
built. Bellevue has expressed their preference for a tunnel through downtown and Sound Transit has
emphasized that a tunnel is not part of the voter-approved budget. Sound Transit will work with Bellevue
to identify a tunnel alignment provided that the City is able to participate financially in the project in a
way that makes it cost neutral.
Councilmember Wilson commented the Swift Bus Rapid Transit has had unexpectedly high usage and
popularity. He asked whether Sound Transit had considered ways to integrate that success into its longer
term vision. Mr. Ilgenfritz commented it was a great case study for all transit systems in the region. Sound
Transit is looking at increasing its level of service in many corridors particularly those not served by rail
such as the 522, 527 and 167 corridors. Their goal is a complimentary, interlocking grid of services that
provide opportunity for connections. Sound Transit is looking at what they can do to increase reliability
and making buses attractive to riders in order to attract traditionally transit-dependent users as well as
elective riders. Elective riders are typically interested in reliability, safety, and a comfortable, productive
experience.
Councilmember Wilson inquired about service cuts. Mr. Ilgenfritz responded Sound Transit overall is not
contemplating any service cuts. They adjust service annually as part of their budget process via their
service implementation plan. Sound Transit typically does not have enough service to meet demand and is
in a gradual upward trajectory of adding more service hours. There will be more significant adjustments
in bus service as the rail system expands such as on the eastside. Sound Transit’s highest performing bus
route is the 550 that serves Bellevue; he expected that service to be phased out as rail comes on line and
those service hours used elsewhere. The same would be true in the north corridor as the rail system moves
north.
Councilmember Wilson appreciated that there were no subarea equity implications from the tunnel in
Bellevue. Given the funding mechanism of sales tax revenue and accrual necessary to fund such as
project, he asked whether there were implications in the short or long term because a large capital project
requires more funds. Mr. Ilgenfritz assured the financial plan must balance annually. The Snohomish
County subarea is in robust financial condition. Sound Move finished with a surplus in Snohomish
County and the capital investments in Snohomish County as part of Sound Transit are in the second half
of the program. Right now, he was confident about the schedule in the north corridor.
4.
UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE PRESENTATION REGARDING REPLACEMENT OF
THE EDMONDS MAIN STREET POST OFFICE
John Logan, United States Postal Service, explained this is a follow-up to the letter regarding the
USPS’s intent to replace the existing downtown post office with a more appropriately sized facility in the
downtown or as close as they can get to the existing facility. The existing facility is approximately 8,000
square feet; they plan to replace it with approximately 4,100 square feet. This meeting is part of the
community contact process that the USPS has initiated to ensure the community and City is informed,
there are no conflicts and the result is a project everyone is happy with.
Following tonight’s meeting, the USPS will wait 15 days to accept comments from the City and the
community. The USPS will then advertise for space and provide the City a list of spaces that has been
offered. A 60 day comment period will follow. The USPS will then evaluate those sites, conduct a site
selection process and select a favorable site. The USPS will then return to the City with that selection and
allow another 30 days for comment before proceeding with development of the project. The initial
Packet Page 7 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 5
decision-making stage is approximately 3-4 months to ensure they understand the desires of the
community.
Councilmember Plunkett asked why the USPS did not simply use the site they already own. Mr. Logan
answered the USPS leases the current site. The building has been purchased; the current owner intends to
redevelop the site and there is a possibility the post office could be part of that development.
Councilmember Petso asked if any of the services/facilities will be lost when the facility is downsized.
Mr. Logan answered nothing would be lost. The carriers in that facility were moved out because it was
not big enough for that function. All the retail services will remain and be provided in a nicer facility.
Councilmember Petso requested any future facility have comparable parking to the existing facility and
have a drop box. Mr. Logan assured they would do both.
5.
AUDIENCE COMMENTS
Colin Southcote-Want, Edmonds, explained he just came from the Edmonds Conference Center where
the project at Pt. Wells is being presented by the developer. While talking with Richmond Beach
residents, he learned one of their concerns with the proposal was the estimated 2400 car trips per day on
Richmond Beach Road and the determination that this was not significant. He raised this issue because
later on the agenda the Council will be discussing potential changes to Edmonds’ SEPA regulations. He
urged the Council not to weaken the City’s environmental protections. He commented it often seems the
City treats this as proforma, someone completes forms, a determination of non-significance is made and
appealing that determination is very difficult.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, congratulated Mayor Cooper. With regard to his report at the July 6 meeting
that it took 11 minutes for Fire District 1 to respond to a car fire near Old Mill Town, he relayed the Fire
Chief determination that it took 7 minutes and 22 seconds. With regard to SEPA regulations, he expressed
concern that the proposal had gotten this far. He referred to staff’s indication that the SEPA regulations
had not been changed in a number of years and needed to be updated. He questioned why the SEPA
regulations needed to be changed when they seem to have done their job. He was opposed to any changes
that would eliminate environmental protections. Due to the proximity of the Highway 99 Corridor to Lake
Ballinger, he feared flexible SEPA regulations in that area would impact Lake Ballinger. He referred to
the SEPA flexible exemption level map in the packet, expressing concern that the Medical Activity
Center zone extended into single family neighborhoods. He recommended the Council consider amending
the boundary of the Medical Activity Center zone.
6.
INTRODUCTION OF PROPOSED UPDATES TO ECDC 20.15A SEPA REGULATIONS
Associate Planner Kernen Lien explained Washington State’s Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) was first
adopted in 1971. Among other things, the law requires all state and local governments within the state to:
• “Utilize a systematic, interdisciplinary approach which will insure the integrated use of the
natural and social sciences and the environmental design arts in planning and in decision making
which may have impact on man’s environment,” and
• Ensure that “...environmental amenities and values will be given appropriate consideration in
decision making along with economic and technical considerations...” (RCW 43.21C.030(2)(a)
and (2)(b)
He explained any governmental action may be conditioned or denied pursuant to SEPA. The
environmental process in SEPA is designed to work with the other regulations to provide a
comprehensive review of a proposal. Where most regulations focus on a particular aspect of a proposal,
Packet Page 8 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 6
SEPA requires identification and evaluation of probable impacts of all elements of the environment.
Proposals can be project proposals such as fill and grade, new development, etc.; or they can be non-
project proposals such as Comprehensive Plan changes, rezones, adoption of regulations, etc.
The City of Edmonds SEPA regulations are codified in Edmonds Community Development Code
(ECDC) 20.15A. The City’s first SEPA regulations were adopted in 1976. In 1984 the City adopted
Ordinance No. 2461 which created ECDC 20.15A in order to come into compliance with new SEPA rules
in WAC 197-11 and model SEPA ordinances in WAC 173-806. ECDC 20.15A the City uses today is
essentially the same ordinance that was adopted 25 years ago having undergone only minor amendments
during that time. Due to changes in WACs, RCWs and the City’s own code since the SEPA ordinance
was adopted, it was appropriate to adjust the City’s SEPA regulations to be in compliance with the State’s
rules and regulations.
The City and the Planning Board reviewed a number of issues:
• ECDC 20.15A adopts by reference significant portions of WAC 197-11, the State’s SEPA rules.
Sections of 197-11 have been added or removed since the City adopted its SEPA regulations in
1984 particularly in regard to SEPA-GMA integration; GMA was not in place when the City
adopted the current SEPA regulations. This update reviewed the changes in WAC 197-11, the
adopted list in 20.15A to ensure the City is up-to-date and compliant with the State’s regulations.
• ECDC 20.15A is largely based on the State’s model code in WAC 173-806. There have been
changes to the model code since 1984. This update reviewed the model code and made changes to
the City’s SEPA regulations where appropriate to ensure the City is up-to-date with the State’s
regulations.
• The City’s code has undergone a number of amendments since 1984. This update ensured the
SEPA regulations are consistent with the rest of the City’s development regulations.
• The State’s rules allow local jurisdictions to modify the categorically exempt flexible threshold
levels for certain minor new development. Once the threshold is reached, a SEPA review is
required.
• The City’s Climate Action Team SEPA Implementation Working Group released a report in 2009
in an attempt to clarify how consideration of climate change should be incorporated into
environmental review and decision making. That report included strong consensus from the Work
Group but few recommendations other than the Department of Ecology should consider the
matter and develop guidelines. DOE released draft guidelines on addressing greenhouse gas
emissions in May 2010; the guidelines refer SEPA practitioners to studies and analyses conducted
across the United States and do not provide any clear standard of analysis.
The City has begun groundwork to develop SEPA regulations through the adoption of the
Sustainability Element in the Comprehensive Plan as well as development of a Climate Change
Action Plan. Within those Plans, the City is developing policies that establish the foundation for
the City to begin developing SEPA regulations to evaluate and mitigate impacts of climate
change. The City recently participated in a conference call with other jurisdictions around the
state regarding addressing climate change through the SEPA process. Staff will follow up with
other jurisdictions who participated in the call to see how they are addressing climate change
through their SEPA processes. Developing a program for Edmonds will be very technical and
data intensive and as a result will take a great deal of time to develop. It is not part of this update
and will be incorporated into 20.15A in the future.
Mr. Lien reviewed the Categorical Exemptions Thresholds in WAC 197-11-800(1) where the City could
adjust the thresholds:
Packet Page 9 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 7
• The construction or location of any residential structures of four dwelling unit – Can be modified
up to 20 dwelling units.
• The construction of a barn, loafing shed, farm equipment storage building, produce storage or
packing structure, or similar agricultural structure, covering 10,000 square feet, and to be used
only by the property owner or his or her agent in the conduct of farming the property. The
exemption shall not apply to feed lots – Does not apply in Edmonds.
• The construction of an office, school, commercial, recreational, service or storage building with
4,000 square feet of gross floor area, and associated parking facilities designed for 20
automobiles – Can be modified up to 12,000 square feet and 40 automobiles.
• The construction of a parking lot designed for 20 automobiles – Can be modified up to 40
automobiles.
• Any landfill or excavation of 100 cubic yards – Can be modified up to 500 cubic yards, and has
been at 500 cubic yards since 1984 when the City adopted the ordinance that established 20.15A.
Determining the environmental impact of a development involves context, intensity of the development
and does not lend itself to a quantifiable test. The context may vary by physical setting; intensity depends
on the magnitude and duration of the impact; the same proposal may have a significant impact in one
location and less in another. For instance a 12,000 square foot commercial development in a
neighborhood zone such as Five Corners or Westgate would likely have a greater impact on the
surrounding neighborhood than the same scale commercial development along Highway 99. With this in
mind the Planning Board reviewed the flexible threshold levels for categorical exemptions and discussed
a number of options:
• Leave the levels at the minimums established by WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)
• Increase all, or a portion of the levels, for the entire City
• Establish different threshold levels for different Comprehensive Plan designations
• Establish different threshold levels for different zones
• Establish different threshold levels considering zoning and Comprehensive Plan designation
After considering the above options, the Planning Board recommended the following:
• Increase flexible threshold in the Highway 99 Corridor and Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center
as follows:
o Residential units: 20 units
o New construction: 12,000 square feet
o Parking: 40 spaces
o Landfill or excavation: 500 cubic yards (no change)
• For landfills and excavations in WAC 197-11-800(1)(b)(v) maintain 500 cubic yards in all
locations through the City
The Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center is intended to encourage the development of a pedestrian and
transit oriented area focused on two Master Plan developments, Stevens Hospital and Edmonds-
Woodway High School, along with related high intensity development in the Highway 99 corridor. One
of the goals identified in the Comprehensive Plan for the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center is to
expand the economic and tax base of the City by providing incentives for business and commercial
redevelopment in the planned Activity Center. The Highway 99 corridor is a narrow strip of commercial
and retail uses with some multi family development on the fringes of the corridor. Like the
Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center, in the Highway 99 Corridor area of the City is looking to
encourage economic development and raising the threshold levels that trigger SEPA review may be one
way to simplify the process for developers within these two areas.
Packet Page 10 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 8
When the Planning Board was considering these flexible thresholds, they raised several questions
including the effect of increasing the thresholds. He researched SEPA reviews the City conducted since
2004 and found there have been a total of 193 SEPA reviews since January 2004. Of those 113 would be
subject to the flexible thresholds. With the proposed increase in the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center,
2 projects since 2004 would have been exempt from SEPA review under the proposed changes. He
pointed out there are other regulatory requirements; SEPA is only one part of the review. The City has
other processes and regulations to control issues that would be considered such as transportation impacts
and Critical Areas regulations. SEPA cannot control the level of development of a property; it can only
condition development based on impacts that are not otherwise addressed in the code. There are some
residential areas in the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center, SEPA has very little impact on development
in single family zones. For example the subdivision of five or more units requires a public hearing process
and approval by the City Council. This requirement would not change as a result of changing the SEPA
flexible threshold. SEPA as well as many other processes have a public notice requirement and hearing
opportunities. He referred to the tables in Title 20, Type I-V uses, II-V require public notice.
Councilmember Petso offered to work with staff on some areas in the ordinance that do not appear to be
in the model ordinance, 1) the .025 provision, reliance on existing plans and regulations, and 2) the
provision that would allow a developer to request the City complete the SEPA checklist. With regard to
the .025 provision and reliance on other regulations, Mr. Lien explained that was in WAC 197-11 and
rather than adopt that WAC or insert a reference to WAC 197-11, he included a reference to the section
within Title 20 that is essentially the same as WAC 197-11. With regard to the ability for a developer to
request staff complete the SEPA checklist, Mr. Lien advised that is in the current SEPA regulations. He
explained often the City has more information than the person completing the checklist. One of the most
frequent triggers for SEPA review is fill and grade; 95 of the 193 SEPA reviews were fill and grade and
many of those are for single family residential development. Often they do not have all the information
and staff completes the blanks as a way to assist the citizen. There is also a provision that developers can
be charged for staff completing the SEPA checklist.
Councilmember Plunkett asked how it was determined whether a developer was charged. Mr. Lien
answered there is not a description of how a developer would be charged. Since he has been employed by
the City, no one has asked staff to complete the SEPA checklist. Typically if there is a N/A when he
reviews a SEPA checklist and information should be included, he will fill in the information such as the
zoning, Comprehensive Plan designation, etc.
Councilmember Plunkett asked whether the City was potentially liable if staff was filling out portions of
the SEPA checklist. He asked whether staff had been doing that and whether it was a common practice.
Mr. Lien responded in all the places he has worked, staff typically filled in missing information. The
SEPA checklist also includes a space for staff comment. With regard to liability, there is a SEPA appeal
process; if staff completed the checklist, the applicant could appeal the determination based on the way
the checklist was completed.
Councilmember Plunkett observed under the proposed changes there would have only been two instances
were neighbors surrounding the structure would not have had the benefit of SEPA review. He asked the
rationale of not allowing two groups of neighbors the benefit of a SEPA review. Mr. Lien explained one
of the primary reasons for selecting the Highway 99 Corridor and the Medical/Highway 99 Activity
Center is those are two areas where the City wants to promote economic development. The Planning
Board felt by removing one of the hurdles, SEPA review, it may be more attractive for development. He
reiterated SEPA was only one of the processes. He did not research what other public notice requirements
may have been required for those two developments.
Packet Page 11 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 9
Councilmember Plunkett concluded the rationale was the neighbors would not have the benefit of SEPA
because they lived in a neighborhood that was more industrial oriented. Mr. Lien explained impacts are
different in different areas; a 12,000 square foot commercial development in Five Corners would have the
potential for greater impacts than the same development on Highway 99. That was one of the reasons the
State allows jurisdictions the flexibility to adjust those thresholds. Denying anyone the SEPA process was
not discussed as a reason for adjusting the flexible thresholds, it was viewed as a way to promote
economic development in these two areas by removing one of the regulatory hurdles.
Council President Bernheim acknowledged since it had been 25 years since the SEPA regulations were
adopted and other things are changing, it may be necessary to ensure consistency. He was concerned with
changing policy as part of a statutory update. He asked the impetus for changing the SEPA requirement to
make it more developer friendly. Mr. Lien responded when he presented the update to the Planning
Board, the flexible threshold was the one area the City could change. The Planning Board requested he
provide proposals for the flexible thresholds. His first proposal was changing thresholds in zones
throughout the City. The Planning Board then directed him to look at the corridors. His next proposal was
for four corridors in the City. The proposed changes are what the Planning Board recommended.
Councilmember Peterson asked whether other jurisdictions have adopted these flexible thresholds. Mr.
Lien answered most jurisdictions have increased the thresholds. In his previous position, all the thresholds
were maxed out except for agricultural buildings. Seattle raised thresholds in different zones throughout
the city. He did not research other jurisdictions but found it unlikely that all were at the minimum
established by SEPA.
Councilmember Peterson acknowledged SEPA was not the be all and end all of public notification or
environmental regulation. He assumed any City code changes below this would trump SEPA regulations.
For example if the threshold was 40 parking spaces and the City only allowed 30 spaces in the zone, the
specific zoning would trump the SEPA threshold. Mr. Lien explained SEPA does not set the intensity of
zoning, if a zone only allows a parking lot for 30 automobiles, 30 would be the limit. If it was below the
40 space threshold, SEPA would not be done but the parking lot could not be larger than 30 parking
spaces if that was specified by the zone.
Councilmember Peterson commented he was a fan of SEPA regulations and review, finding it served the
City, citizens and State well. If the Council and City were more proactive in defining zones and
environmental regulations, SEPA may play a smaller role. Mr. Lien agreed SEPA played a smaller role
today than when it was first adopted in 1971. For example when SEPA was first adopted, there was no
GMA, no Critical Areas Ordinance, Traffic Impact Fees, etc. to address potential impact from
development. When an application is received, staff reviews it to ensure it is consistent with the City’s
development regulations. If all the impacts cannot be mitigated through existing development regulations,
conditions can be added via the SEPA process.
Councilmember Wilson commented this was not a limiting of SEPA regulations but an effort to remove
hurdles for economic development. To the question of who has given that policy direction, he answered
the Council has expressed support for incentivizing development on Highway 99 and development in the
area surrounding Stevens Hospital. If Council did not support the proposed thresholds, they should be
clear about what they want from the Planning Board to foster economic development in those areas or
change the Comprehensive Plan. He recognized there may be more concern with the proposed change in
the northern Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center, recalling the Council declined a recent opportunity to
change the zoning in that area.
Packet Page 12 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 10
If the Council was sensitive to changes in the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center, Councilmember
Wilson suggested it may be appropriate to bring changes to the thresholds in that area to Council
separately from changes to the Highway 99 area. Mr. Lien answered one option would be to have three
proposals at the public hearing, 1) keep the flexible threshold levels as they are, and 2) the proposal
recommended by the Planning Board, 3) remove the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center and only
increase the thresholds for the Highway 99 corridor.
Councilmember Wilson pointed out if the Council did not support incentivizing development in the
Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center, the definition of the Activity Center may need to be changed to
focus development around the commercial area and not impact the residential areas. He suggested having
separate public hearings for Highway 99 and the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center. Mr. Lien
suggested it may be more appropriate to have the public hearings together because increasing the
thresholds was only part of the update.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked how the 40 parking spaces and 12,000 square feet were determined. Mr.
Lien answered WAC 197-11-800(1) is the section that contains the flexible thresholds; 40 parking spaces
and 12,000 square feet is the maximum.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether consideration had been given to a flexible threshold that could
be waived on a case-by-case basis based on the project. Mr. Lien answered that would be difficult to
implement for the City and the developer.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to the red area on the SEPA Flexible Categorical Exemptions
Level Map, noting it increases the SEPA thresholds into residential neighborhoods 6-10 blocks off
Highway 99 and in the south section, up to 12 blocks off Highway 99. She asked how that area was
selected. Mr. Lien answered the red area is the Highway 99 corridor as defined in the Comprehensive
Plan.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked the impact to development and economic development if the
nothing was done. Mr. Lien answered the proposed changes would have only exempted 2 developments
out of 193 in the past 6 years. If nothing is done, only 2 proposals would have benefited from the change.
Councilmember Wilson commented the answer to Councilmember Fraley-Monillas’ question was
unknown because although two projects would have been exempt, it is unknown how many would have
been proposed although he anticipated the requirement for a SEPA review would typically not be a deal
breaker for a developer. Mr. Lien explained of the 193 proposals, 12 were within the CG or CG2 zone for
which 2 would not have required SEPA review under this proposal.
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
PETERSON, TO SET A PUBLIC HEARING ON THE PROPOSAL AS RECOMMENDED BY
THE PLANNING BOARD.
Councilmember Plunkett supported the premise that the City needed to be consistent with WACs and
RCWs. With regard to Councilmember Fraley-Monillas’ comment about doing nothing, he pointed out
the update was required to be consistent with those regulations. He did not support the concept of
lowering neighborhood standards.
COUNCILMEMBER PLUNKETT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER PETSO, TO
AMEND THE ORDINANCE THAT ALL INCREASES IN SEPA THRESHOLD LEVELS BE
REMOVED, THEREBY LEAVING THE LEVELS AT THE MINIMUM ESTABLISHED BY THE
WASHINGTON ADMINISTRATIVE CODE.
Packet Page 13 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 11
Councilmember Wilson asked what would be left for the public hearing if those change were removed.
Mr. Lien asked for clarification whether the motion removed the increase in the SEPA threshold that was
done 25 years ago. Councilmember Plunkett clarified only the increases in the Planning Board’s
recommendation.
Councilmember Wilson suggested if the Council did not want the policy to reflect what was in the
Comprehensive Plan, more research should be done with regard to the boarder policy question.
Councilmember Plunkett responded the Planning Board’s recommendation with regard to meeting
consistence complies with the Comprehensive Plan. Their recommendation also complies with reference
in the Comprehensive Plan to encouraging economic development in this area. He did not anticipate that
because a developer was required to complete a SEPA checklist, they would be prevented from seeking
an economic development project.
Councilmember Wilson advised he would oppose the amendment because he wanted to hear from the
public. If the amendment fails he would make a different amendment that would separate consideration of
the two areas in hopes it would better address the concerns with protecting residential rights in places
where there are more residences such as the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center.
Councilmember Petso spoke in favor of the amendment, advising the public hearing could address the
necessary statutory updates as well as other issues such whether staff should be completing the SEPA
checklist for applicants. She was not satisfied with the solution suggested by Councilmember Wilson to
separate the Highway 99 corridor and the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center because under the
Comprehensive Plan, both areas include several residential neighborhoods. The Planning Board minutes
indicate the proposed change would have a minimal time and cost savings to a developer. However she
preferred that projects such as a 20 unit residential development in front of another resident’s solar
collection panels or a project that technically complies with drainage codes but will impact Lake
Ballinger have a SEPA review. She did not want to facilitate economic development at the expense of
these neighborhoods or at the expense of Lake Ballinger.
Council President Bernheim spoke against the amendment, commenting in the pursuit of economic
development consideration is being given to environmental regulations. Although he did not object to that
in principle as long as the right things were relaxed, he supported having a public hearing about the
Planning Board’s recommendation to relax the SEPA standards. The pr oposal could then be amended
after the public hearing if appropriate.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas did not support the amendment, preferring to have a public hearing
regarding the Planning Board’s recommendation. She preferred to have one public hearing because there
are residential neighborhoods in both areas.
Councilmember Peterson did not support the amendment, commenting he did not view the Planning
Board’s recommendation as a relaxation of the environmental standards. He viewed it as an opportunity
to reduce the bureaucratic paperwork and number of steps developers are required to complete. He
commented on the importance of hearing from the public and having an open dialogue about
environmental standards.
MOTION FAILED (2-5), COUNCILMEMBERS PLUNKETT AND PETSO VOTING YES.
Packet Page 14 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 12
Councilmember Petso understood the Planning Board’s recommended proposal could be amended after
the public hearing. She did not support the main motion because there was a good chance the public
would not support the Planning Board’s recommendation.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas spoke in support of the motion to hold a public hearing, commenting it
was important to hear from the public, particularly the residents along the Highway 99 corridor and the
Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center.
Councilmember Wilson asked what it would take for this proposed change to be relevant in a single
family zone. He suggested first a developer would need to be interested in building a commercial
development in a residential which would require a zone change and a Comprehensive Plan designation
change. Mr. Lien answered if there were a proposal for a subdivision of more than 5 lots, although under
this proposal that development would be exempt from SEPA review, it has notice requirements, and it
requires view by the Planning Board and the City Council who ultimately approves/denies a 5-lot
subdivision. Depending on the underlying Comprehensive Plan designation, a Comprehensive Plan
change would require SEPA review. If a rezone was required, a rezone requires SEPA review. Once the
Comprehensive Plan designation change and rezone were accomplished, if the development was under
the thresholds, SEPA would not be required. If the development exceeded the thresholds, a third SEPA
may be required.
Councilmember Wilson supported protecting single family neighborhood, noting there would already be
two SEPA evaluations before a commercial development could occur in a single family zone. He
summarized neighborhoods are not under threat of having an environmentally damaging commercial
developments occur in their backyard as a result of the Council’s consideration of the Planning Board’s
recommendations.
COUNCILMEMBER WILSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO
AMEND THE MOTION TO HAVE TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THE PLANNING BOARD’S
RECOMMENDATION, ONE REGARDING THE MEDICAL/HIGHWAY 99 ACTIVITY CENTER
AND THE OTHER REGARDING THE HIGHWAY 99 CORRIDOR.
Councilmember Wilson explained separating the neighborhoods would allow the public to indicate in
which areas they felt the Planning Board’s recommendations were appropriate.
Councilmember Peterson spoke in favor of the amendment, commenting a one-size-fits-all approach does
not work well for the City and it may be advantageous to separate the public hearings.
Councilmember Petso supported the amendment to hold two public hearing although she did not expect it
would have an impact due to the presence of single family neighborhoods in both areas. She pointed out
this was not applicable only to commercial buildings. She provided as an example a residential
neighborhood faced with development of perhaps 27 homes and under this proposal that would have
required SEPA review. However if the development only had 17 homes it would have been exempt from
SEPA review. In the 27 home development, staff required 6 SEPA conditions, 3 regarding preservation of
trees, 1 regarding a traffic impact fee and 1 that required onsite parking. She summarized the SEPA
process was what allowed those conditions to be placed on a residential development and that protection
should be available to neighbors surrounding Highway 99 and the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas did not want to have neighborhoods on the Highway 99 corridor pitted
against each other. She wanted to maintain unity among the single family residences along the Highway
99 corridor of which she was one.
Packet Page 15 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 13
UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (5-2), COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM,
COUNCILMEMBERS PETSO, BUCKSHNIS, WILSON AND PETERSON VOTING YES; AND
COUNCILMEMBERS FRALEY-MONILLAS AND PLUNKETT VOTING NO.
Councilmember Plunkett understood the Council’s desire for a public hearing. However, he did not
support the motion because he did not support reducing neighborhood protections to allow major projects
in single family neighborhoods.
Councilmember Petso anticipated the public hearing would result in a different proposal than the Planning
Board’s recommendation. For that reason she would not support the motion.
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED (5-2), COUNCILMEMBERS PLUNKETT AND
PETSO VOTING NO.
As staff prepared for the public hearing, Councilmember Wilson said he would be interested in staff’s
response to the Councilmembers’ concerns. He suggested staff prepare a couple case studies such as the
Burnstead example cited by Councilmember Petso.
Mr. Lien clarified the intent was to have two public hearings at the same Council meeting.
Councilmember Wilson explained his intent was for one public hearing applying the Planning Board’s
recommendations to the Highway 99 corridor and a second public hearing on the same night applying the
Planning Board’s recommendations to the Medical/Highway 99 Activity Center.
7.
FIRST READING: PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER
3.65 OF THE EDMONDS CITY CODE RELATING TO THE TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT
DISTRICT IN ORDER TO EXPAND THE FUNCTIONS AND AUTHORITY OF THE DISTRICT
TO INCLUDE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIRTY-SEVEN (37) TRANSPORTATION
IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING THE CONSTRUCTION OF WALKWAYS, INTERSECTION
IMPROVEMENTS, STREET UPGRADES, TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURES, CORRIDOR
IMPROVEMENTS, PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING, SIGNALIZATION INSTALLATION AND
REBUILD, AND BICYCLE LOOP SIGNAGE WITH THE PROCEEDS OF A FORTY DOLLAR
($40) VEHICLE FEE INCREASE, IF APPROVED BY THE VOTERS, AND SETTING A PUBLIC
HEARING FOR AUGUST 3, 2010
Public Works Director Phil Williams explained if passed, the proposed ordinance would expand the
authorities of the existing Edmonds Transportation Benefit District (TBD) which the Council created in
November 2008. The Charter of the TBD at that time was to engage itself in fundraising and provide
funds for preservation and maintenance of the transportation assets within the City’s rights-of-way. The
proposed ordinance would modify those authorities to add to what the TBD can do and specifically
authorize the TBD to seek voter approval of a $40 increase to the local transportation user fee that is now
established at $20. The additional $40 would be allocated toward the completion of a project list that
includes 37 projects of the type outlined in the agenda title. If the ordinances passes with second reading
next week, the TBD would be able to enact an ordinance to place the item on the November general
election ballot, establish voter pamphlet language and a ballot title, and provide voters an opportunity to
approve or reject the proposed additional fee.
Councilmember Plunkett commented this has been discussed by the TBD Board and was now at the City
Council. He asked whether the City Council must approve placing it on the ballot. Mr. Williams
explained because the City Council created the TBD via ordinance, only the Council can change their
charter and give them new authorities. The Edmonds TBD Board can then act as the new authorities
establish.
Packet Page 16 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 14
COUNCIL PRESIDENT BERNHEIM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER
PLUNKETT, TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING ON AUGUST 3, 2010.
Councilmember Wilson asked if this allowed enough time to hold a public hearing. Mr. Clifton answered
City Clerk Sandy Chase has already issued a public notice for the August 3, 2010 public hearing.
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
8.
DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION REGARDING THE 1938 FORD FIRE ENGINE
Greg Jorgenson, President, Edmonds Fire Safety Foundation, explained in 2003 the 1938 Ford fire
engine became available to the City to be used for social events and other activities. The Edmonds Fire
Safety Foundation raised $12,000 to purchase the engine from a retired Edmonds firefighter, Lt. Ron
Barton, and return it to the City of Edmonds. At the Fire Department’s 100th centennial celebration in
2004, the Edmonds Fire Safety Foundation presented the 1938 Ford fire engine back to the City. The
engine was then used from 2004 to 2009 for events such as raffle ticket sales, the 4th
of July parade,
Waterball competition, the Edmonds car show and to transport Santa Clause to the Christmas Tree
Lighting.
When the Edmonds Fire Department was sold to Fire District 1, Fire District 1 leased the fire stations
from the City. The agreement with the City when the 1938 Ford fire engine was presented to the City
prevented the engine from being sold and the Fire Safety Foundation retained the first right of refusal.
The 1938 Ford fire engine has been stored in a back bay at Fire Station 17. Fire District 1 needed the
space for equipment storage and did not want the responsibility of the engine when it was owned by the
City. The Foundation unsuccessful searched for a permanent space earlier this year and the engine was
moved temporarily to the old Public Works shop on 2nd
Avenue. Since it has been stored at the old Public
Works facility, the engine has not been usable/accessible. The Foundation’s goal is to find a permanent
home for the 1938 Ford fire engine in Edmonds so that it can continue to be used in displays and events.
The Foundation has met with the South Snohomish County Historical Society and the Arts Commission
and other organizations to discuss the future of the engine.
Mr. Jorgenson presented the Foundation’s proposal for storing the 1938 engine. He explained the
Foundation searched for a space at the Old Mill Town building; the ramp on Dayton Street is where the
1938 engine was parked for use by volunteers from 1938 – 1965. That space is not available as it is the
designated space for tenant dumpsters. It was then suggested a storage/display case be located outside
Station 17 such as on the plaza outside the Public Safety building on either the walkway or the parking lot
or near the museum. The building would have a steel roof that matched the Public Safety building’s roof
with glass sides, doors and walls such as the glass enclosure in front of Krispy Kreme donuts on
125/Aurora Avenue. A glass enclosure to house the 1938 Ford is estimated to cost $40,000 with a
concrete foundation, steel corner posts, steel roof and glass on four sides and provide access to the engine
for events, displays, etc.
In the process of developing this idea, the Lieutenant in charge of firefighter volunteers for Fire District 1
spoke with Fire District 1 Chief Widdis who suggested if ownership of the 1938 Ford was given to Fire
District 1 they would store the engine in Fire Station 17 temporarily until a structure could be built. In
addition, Fire District 1 would return the restored 1925 REO to the City. A building to display both
vehicles is estimated to cost $60,000.
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether the Fire Safety Foundation would raise the money for the
display case. Mr. Jorgenson answered the Foundation has the capability of reaching that goal. The first
Packet Page 17 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 15
consideration would be whether the City would allow the space outside the Public Safety building to be
used.
Councilmember Buckshnis asked why Edmonds would give the 1938 Ford fire engine to Fire District 1.
Mr. Jorgenson explained Fire District 1’s proposal was for the City to give them the 1938 Ford engine
and they would donate the 1925 REO to the City. Councilmember Buckshnis suggested developing a hold
harmless agreement with Fire District 1 if they stored the 1938 engine and Fire District 1 could use the
engine at events in Snohomish County. Mr. Jorgenson explained Fire District 1 has more resources ability
maintain and move equipment. The City may not have the same capability with regard to the 1938 engine.
The agreement between the Fire Safety foundation and the City required that if at any time the City could
no longer store or maintain the engine, it could not be sold and the Fire Safety Foundation had the first
right of refusal. This was to prevent the engine from leaving the City of Edmonds.
Councilmember Wilson commented none of the Council wanted anything bad to happen to the 1938 Ford
fire engine. He was impressed with the Fire Safety Foundations proposal to raise the money for the glass
enclosure. He asked Mayor Cooper whether he planned to meet with Fire District 1. Mayor Cooper
advised he had a meeting scheduled with Fire District 1 Chief Widdis and Jim Kenny, Chair of the Board
of Fire Commissioners, to discuss a variety of topics. He suggested delaying any action for a few weeks
to allow for further discussions with Fire District 1 regarding a solution.
Council President Bernheim observed Fire District 1 was willing to store the 1938 Ford fire engine in Fire
Station 17. It is a burden on the City’s storage space; and it would be preferable to move it back into the
fire station. He anticipated transferring ownership to the Fire District 1 could be a good thing and the City
could consider alternate storage and display options.
For Councilmember Fraley-Monillas, Mayor Cooper assured he intended to ask Chief Widdis and
Commissioner Kenny to locate the 1938 engine in the fire station immediately.
Councilmember Peterson anticipated this could be a phenomenal opportunity. He agreed the best place
for the 1938 engine was in front of the Public Safety building but there may be technical issues related to
the number of required parking spaces, etc. He suggested staff determine where a 10’x40’ building could
be located.
Councilmember Petso commented there were arts organizations using space in the old Public Works
facility. She asked whether the Fire Safety Foundation had discussed whether those entities could find a
more suitable space and allow the Fire Safety Foundation to use the vehicle bay. Mr. Jorgenson explained
the bay with the closed door is leased by the Edmonds Arts Festival to store their supplies. Artworks uses
the next bay and Driftwood players use the other end of the building for storage and rehearsal space. The
only suitable space available is where the Edmonds Arts Festival stores their supplies. Councilmember
Petso asked whether that space would be suitable if an alternate space were identified for the Arts Festival
supplies. Mr. Jorgenson answered there was discussion about using that space as a fire museum and that
garage space would be advantageous for accessing the engine for events.
It was the consensus of the Council not to take further action until Mayor Cooper had an opportunity to
meet with Fire District 1.
9.
COUNCIL REPORTS ON OUTSIDE COMMITTEE/BOARD MEETINGS
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported the recent Snohomish Health District meeting included
discussion regarding the increase in tuberculosis in the general population nationwide that has not
Packet Page 18 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 16
occurred since the 1950s. She also reported on the Disability Board meeting she attended with
Councilmember Peterson.
Councilmember Wilson reported at the SnoCom Board meeting there was discussion regarding Fire
District 1 not having a seat on that Board. He suggested at the meeting that Edmonds would not object to
Fire District 1 having a full seat on the board. Interlocal Agreements will need to be approved by each
Council to allow Fire District 1 a seat on the SnoCom Board. The Lake Ballinger Forum is developing an
Interlocal Agreement for the next phase of managing the watershed and water quality. That Interlocal
Agreement will be presented to the Council in the near future.
Councilmember Buckshnis reported on the Port of Edmonds Commission meeting. The Port is moving
forward with Phase 1 of the Harbor Square development. She also attended a WRIA 8 meeting where
there was discussion regarding involving the Port. Efforts are underway to move the cleanup of the
Edmonds Marsh from WRIA 8’s 10 year plan to their 3 year plan. The Port is also working on an
improved budgeting method and providing financial to their citizens.
Councilmember Buckshnis reported on the Economic Development Commission meeting where the
Edmonds Film Festival made a presentation. Representatives from Swedish and Stevens Hospital also
made a presentation regarding their affiliation. They will make a similar presentation to the Council on
August 3. The EDC subgroups reported to the Commission regarding their efforts which include
involving the University of Washington students in a study of Five Corners and Westgate for a very
modest cost. Staff hopes to identify funds in the current budget for that effort.
Councilmember Peterson reported he met with the Mayor’s Climate Protection Committee and
participated in a nationwide conference call with several other jurisdictions about ways to challenge
businesses and residences to reduce their carbon footprint and greenhouse gas emissions. He reminded the
reusable bag ordinance goes into effect August 27.
10.
MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Cooper announced he had selected Barbara Chase to serve on the Levy Committee.
Mayor Cooper expressed interest in meeting with Councilmembers individually to discuss their goals and
provide an opportunity to learn about each other. He invited Councilmember to email him to schedule a
meeting.
11.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Plunkett expressed his appreciation for the way Mayor Cooper conducted business in a
calm, relaxed, respectful professional manner.
Councilmember Petso looked forward to an opportunity to meet with Mayor Cooper.
Councilmember Peterson welcomed Mayor Cooper and commented on his outstanding demeanor tonight.
Councilmember Peterson thanked Mr. Hertrich for correcting the record with regarding to Fire District
1’s response to a car fire downtown. He noted Fire District 1, like the Edmonds Fire Department, are
committed fire professionals and among the finest in the State.
Packet Page 19 of 562
Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes
July 27, 2010
Page 17
Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported she attended Edmonds Night Out briefly before the Executive
Session. She welcomed Mayor Cooper and looked forward to meeting with him.
Councilmember Wilson welcomed Mayor Cooper, reporting he met with him today. He complimented
Council President Bernheim in his capacity as Mayor Pro Tem during what could have been a contentious
and unstable period. Council President Bernheim rose to the challenge and he has only heard good things
from staff and others in the community.
Councilmember Buckshnis reported she met with staff and Mayor Cooper about the Levy Committee.
She provided a PowerPoint regarding the Levy Committee:
• Meet: Thursday, July 29, 2010 (last Thursday)
• Time: 6:00 – 8:00 p.m.
• Where: Brackett Meeting Room (City Hall)
• Levy Committee Members: Barbara Chase, John Reed, Jessie Beyer, Darrol Haug, Harry Gatjen,
Bill Vance, and Eve Wellington
• Moderator: Diane Buckshnis
• Public Comment: 3 minutes
With regard how this Levy Committee would differ from the 2009 Levy Committee, she explained this
Levy Committee will review expenses, research and compare salaries and FTEs with surrounding cities,
review the General Fund, review compliance to newly created financial policies, review capital planning,
and establish projections for a sustainable budget to 2015. The Levy Committee plans to be a spectator in
the budget process, research bond financing and/or levy, engage the public in providing their research and
questions, provide presentations to the public, and take their time to provide comprehensive review. With
regard to how the public can help, she encouraged them to get involved; talk about it; give the Committee
their ideas; support staff, the committee and the City Council; and think of how much they are willing to
spend for the City. The Committee also plans to solicit input via the use of Survey Monkey.
Council President Bernheim thanked Andy Eccleshall
who was in the audience for painting a superb
mural that adds to the City’s ambiance. He welcomed Mayor Cooper and looked forward to their
relationship.
12.
ADJOURN
With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:41 p.m.
Packet Page 20 of 562
AM-3253 2.C.
Approval of claim checks
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:08/03/2010
Submitted By:Debbie Karber
Submitted For:Lorenzo Hines Time:Consent
Department:Finance Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:Approved for Consent Agenda
Information
Subject Title
Approval of claim checks #120331 through #120457 dated July 29, 2010 for $408,351.73.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Approval of claim checks.
Previous Council Action
N/A
Narrative
In accordance with the State statutes, City payments must be approved by the City Council.
Ordinance #2896 delegates this approval to the Council President who reviews and recommends
either approval or non-approval of expenditures.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:2010
Revenue:
Expenditure:$408,351.73
Fiscal Impact:
Claims: $408,351.73
Attachments
Link: Claim cks 7-29-10
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 Finance Lorenzo Hines 07/29/2010 03:50 PM APRV
2 City Clerk Linda Hynd 07/30/2010 08:14 AM APRV
3 Community Services/Economic Dev. Stephen Clifton 07/30/2010 08:16 AM APRV
4 Final Approval Linda Hynd 07/30/2010 08:21 AM APRV
Form Started By: Debbie Karber Started On: 07/29/2010 11:51
AM
Final Approval Date: 07/30/2010
Packet Page 21 of 562
Packet Page 22 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
1
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120331 7/29/2010 061029 ABSOLUTE GRAPHIX 710439 DAY CAMP T SHIRTS
DAY CAMP T SHIRTS
001.000.640.575.530.310.00 81.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.575.530.310.00 7.70
Total :88.70
120332 7/29/2010 066054 ADIX'S BED & BATH FOR DOGS AND AUGUST 2010 ANIMAL BOARDING FOR 8/10 EDMONDS AC
ANIMAL BOARDING FOR 08/10
001.000.410.521.700.410.00 2,032.66
Total :2,032.66
120333 7/29/2010 066417 AIRGAS NOR PAC INC 101624840 M5Z34
CARBON MONOXIDE
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 416.42
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 19.00
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 41.36
Total :476.78
120334 7/29/2010 064335 ANALYTICAL RESOURCES INC RD40 EDMONDS
NPDES TESTING
411.000.656.538.800.410.31 130.00
Total :130.00
120335 7/29/2010 066025 ANDERSON, ANGIE ANDERSON0724 PLAZA ROOM MONITOR
PLAZA ROOM MONITOR 7/24/10
001.000.640.574.100.410.00 105.00
Total :105.00
120336 7/29/2010 065378 APPLIED INDUSTRIAL TECH 40357128 Unit 91- Sperical Plane Bearing
Unit 91- Sperical Plane Bearing
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 137.94
Freight
1Page:
Packet Page 23 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
2
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120336 7/29/2010 (Continued)065378 APPLIED INDUSTRIAL TECH
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 21.09
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 15.11
Total :174.14
120337 7/29/2010 069751 ARAMARK 655-5027621 UNIFORM SERVICES
PARK MAINTENANCE UNIFORM SERVICES
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 31.20
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.240.00 2.96
Total :34.16
120338 7/29/2010 069751 ARAMARK 655-5015808 21580001
UNIFORM
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 67.18
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 6.38
21580001655-5027626
UNIFORM SERVICE
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 67.18
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.240.00 6.38
Total :147.12
120339 7/29/2010 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 0091614-IN 01-7500014
OIL/GREASE
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 1,217.69
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 115.69
01-75000140094927-IN
#2 DIESEL
411.000.656.538.800.320.00 747.11
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.320.00 70.97
Total :2,151.46
2Page:
Packet Page 24 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
3
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120340 7/29/2010 064343 AT&T 425-776-5316 PARKS FAX MODEM
PARKS FAX MODEM
001.000.640.576.800.420.00 41.72
Total :41.72
120341 7/29/2010 064343 AT&T 730386050200 425-744-6057 PUBLIC WORKS
Public Works Fax Line
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 7.14
Public Works Fax Line
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 7.14
Public Works Fax Line
511.000.657.548.680.420.00 7.14
Public Works Fax Line
411.000.652.542.900.420.00 7.14
Public Works Fax Line
001.000.650.519.910.420.00 1.88
Public Works Fax Line
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 7.14
Total :37.58
120342 7/29/2010 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 56312 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS
UB Outsourcing area # 500 Printin
411.000.652.542.900.490.00 36.65
UB Outsourcing area # 500 Printin
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 36.65
UB Outsourcing area # 500 Printin
411.000.655.535.800.490.00 37.77
UB Outsourcing area # 500 Postage
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 118.01
UB Outsourcing area # 500 Postage
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 118.00
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.490.00 3.48
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.490.00 3.48
9.5% Sales Tax
3Page:
Packet Page 25 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
4
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120342 7/29/2010 (Continued)070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER
411.000.655.535.800.490.00 3.59
Total :357.63
120343 7/29/2010 073035 AVAGIMOVA, KARINE 267 INTERPRETER FEES
INTERPRETER FEES
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 100.00
INTERPRETER FEES274
INTERPRETER FEES
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 100.00
INTERPRETER FEES275
INTERPRETER FEES
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 100.00
INTERPERTER FEES553
INTERPERTER FEES
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 100.00
Total :400.00
120344 7/29/2010 064706 AWC CNF#932-27577 REGISTRATION FOR AWC FINANCIAL WORKSHOP
Registration for Director to attend AWC
001.000.610.519.700.490.00 87.50
Registration for Director to attend
001.000.240.513.110.490.00 87.50
REGISTRATION FOR MAYOR TO AWC BUDGT WORKCNF#932-27601
Registration for Mayor to attend AWC
001.000.210.513.100.490.00 175.00
Total :350.00
120345 7/29/2010 072319 BEACH CAMP LLC BEACHCAMP12318 BEACH CAMP
CAMP #12318
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 2,400.00
Total :2,400.00
120346 7/29/2010 002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORM CO INC 814842 INV#814842 - EDMONDS PD - LAVELY
BALLISTIC VEST- 2ND CHANCE
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 850.00
9.5% Sales Tax
4Page:
Packet Page 26 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
5
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120346 7/29/2010 (Continued)002500 BLUMENTHAL UNIFORM CO INC
001.000.410.521.220.240.00 80.75
Total :930.75
120347 7/29/2010 060141 BRANOM INSTRUMENT 428773 Water - Pressure Gauge
Water - Pressure Gauge
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 52.02
Freight
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 15.08
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 6.37
Water- Returned Pressure Gauge (we pay436151
Water- Returned Pressure Gauge (we pay
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 -52.02
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 -4.94
Total :16.51
120348 7/29/2010 070483 BREWER, MARTY BREWER0722 SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 150.00
Total :150.00
120349 7/29/2010 072005 BROCKMANN, KERRY BROCKMANN12506 YOGA & PILATES CLASSES
YOGA #12506
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 224.00
YOGA #12509
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 649.60
PILATES RELAXED MAT #12406
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 142.80
YOGA #12514
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 730.80
YOGA & PILATESBROCKMANN12522
YOGA #12522
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 893.20
PILATES YOGA FUSION #12527
5Page:
Packet Page 27 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
6
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120349 7/29/2010 (Continued)072005 BROCKMANN, KERRY
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 638.40
Total :3,278.80
120350 7/29/2010 070482 BROTTEN, BILL BROTTEN0722 SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 50.00
Total :50.00
120351 7/29/2010 066578 BROWN AND CALDWELL 14128231 C-311
C-311 ODOR CONTROL PROJECT
414.000.656.594.320.410.10 1,787.00
Total :1,787.00
120352 7/29/2010 071434 BRUNETTE, SISSEL BRUNETTE12415 PRENATAL YOGA
PRENATAL YOGA #12415
001.000.640.575.540.410.00 154.00
Total :154.00
120353 7/29/2010 073339 CALDWELL, BARBARA CALDWELL0720 REFUND
REFUND OF DAMAGE DEPOSIT
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 500.00
Total :500.00
120354 7/29/2010 003510 CENTRAL WELDING SUPPLY RN06101041 WELDING SUPPLIES
WELDING SUPPLIES
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 8.30
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 0.79
Total :9.09
120355 7/29/2010 064840 CHAPUT, KAREN E CHAPUT12544 FRIDAY NIGHT OUT
FRIDAY NIGHT OUT #12544
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 42.00
Total :42.00
120356 7/29/2010 003710 CHEVRON AND TEXACO BUSINESS 25785688 INV#25785688 ACCT#7898305185 EDMONDS PD
6Page:
Packet Page 28 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
7
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120356 7/29/2010 (Continued)003710 CHEVRON AND TEXACO BUSINESS
FUEL FOR NARCOTICS VEHICLE
104.000.410.521.210.320.00 161.45
ICE FOR THE SHOOTING RANGE
001.000.410.521.400.310.00 1.85
Total :163.30
120357 7/29/2010 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 8014 INV#8014 CUST#47 - EDMONDS PD
PRISONER R&B MAY 2010
001.000.410.523.600.510.00 3,249.00
INV#8037 CUST#47 - EDMONDS PD8037
NARCOTICS SGT. APRIL-JUNE 2010
104.000.410.521.210.510.00 9,982.05
Total :13,231.05
120358 7/29/2010 035160 CITY OF SEATTLE 100112 1-218359-279832
2203 N 205th
411.000.656.538.800.471.62 15.93
Total :15.93
120359 7/29/2010 071389 COASTAL WEAR PRODUCTS INC 1761 Unit 138 - 60" Tube Broom
Unit 138 - 60" Tube Broom
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 401.20
misc sales tax %
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 35.71
Total :436.91
120360 7/29/2010 004095 COASTWIDE LABS W2212931 Fac Maint - TT & Supplies, Towels,
Fac Maint - TT & Supplies, Towels,
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 490.66
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 46.61
Total :537.27
120361 7/29/2010 073292 COBURN, KAI COBURN0726 OUTDOOR VOLLEYBALL ATTENDANT
OUTDOOR VOLLEYBALL ATTENDANT 7/12 -
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 144.00
7Page:
Packet Page 29 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
8
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :144.001203617/29/2010 073292 073292 COBURN, KAI
120362 7/29/2010 061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 16 148298 INV#148298 - EDMONDS PD
CALIBRATION 1834
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 80.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.60
INV#148299 - EDMONDS PD148299
CALIBRATION GHS08722 ~ 16
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 80.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.60
INV#148300 - EDMONDS PD148300
CALIBRATION GHS08723 ~ 16
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 80.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.60
INV#148301 - EDMONDS PD148301
CALIBRATION GHD-02435~16
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 80.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.60
INV#148302 - EDMONDS PD148302
CALIBRATION GHD-03836 ~ 16
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 80.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.60
INV#148303 - EDMONDS PD148303
CALIBRATION GHD-03890 ~ 16
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 80.00
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.60
INV#148304 - EDMONDS PD148304
CALIBRATION GHD-12646 ~ 16
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 80.00
9.5% Sales Tax
8Page:
Packet Page 30 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
9
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120362 7/29/2010 (Continued)061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 16
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.60
INV#148305 - EDMONDS PD148305
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 7.60
CALIBRATION GHD-12654 ~ 16
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 80.00
INV#148391 - EDMONDS PD148391
SPEAKER FOR XE015979 ~ 16
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 36.59
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 3.48
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 11.40
REPLACE SPEAKER XE01579
001.000.410.521.220.480.00 120.00
Total :872.27
120363 7/29/2010 061570 DAY WIRELESS SYSTEMS - 16 148260 Unit 680 - Service and Repairs
Unit 680 - Service and Repairs
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 65.00
9.2% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 5.99
Total :70.99
120364 7/29/2010 073342 DERICKSON, LEONA 4-40238 RE: #4222-11588047 UTILITY REFUND
4222-1588047 Utility Refund Derickson
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 107.95
Total :107.95
120365 7/29/2010 071641 DILL, DEBRA DILL07272010 REIMBURSEMENT
REIMBURSEMENT FOR HORTICULTURE BOOKS
001.000.640.576.800.490.00 157.19
Total :157.19
120366 7/29/2010 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 10-3117 MINUTE TAKING
9Page:
Packet Page 31 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
10
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120366 7/29/2010 (Continued)064531 DINES, JEANNIE
07/20 Council Minutes
001.000.250.514.300.410.00 219.00
Total :219.00
120367 7/29/2010 068803 EAST JORDAN IRON WORKS 3274798 Storm - Storm Grate Bolts
Storm - Storm Grate Bolts
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 850.00
misc sales tax %
411.000.652.542.400.310.00 73.10
Total :923.10
120368 7/29/2010 073037 EDMONDS ACE HARDWARE 001173/1 FACILITIES MAINT
Fac Maint - Unit 26 - Paint Scrapers,
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 15.27
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.45
FACILITIES MAINT001175/1
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.310.514.230.490.00 1.34
City Hall - Finance - Paint Supplies
001.000.310.514.230.490.00 14.07
Total :32.13
120369 7/29/2010 007675 EDMONDS AUTO PARTS 24248 Unit 26 - SAE Tap Set
Unit 26 - SAE Tap Set
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 29.99
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 2.85
Total :32.84
120370 7/29/2010 069523 EDMONDS P&R YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP WINSLOW0628 YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP
YOUTH SCHOLARSHIP: CASEY WINSLOW
122.000.640.574.100.490.00 150.00
Total :150.00
120371 7/29/2010 066987 EDMONDS POLICE FOUNDATION 2010 EDMONDS PD CONTRIBUTION TO ENO
10Page:
Packet Page 32 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
11
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120371 7/29/2010 (Continued)066987 EDMONDS POLICE FOUNDATION
PD CONTRIBUTION TO EDMONDS NIGHT OUT
001.000.410.521.300.410.00 2,000.00
Total :2,000.00
120372 7/29/2010 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 3-01808 LIFT STATION #11
LIFT STATION #11
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 27.88
MEADOWDALE CLUB HOUSE3-03575
MEADOWDALE CLUB HOUSE
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 204.95
LIFT STATION #123-07525
LIFT STATION #12
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 50.50
LIFT STATION #153-07709
LIFT STATION #15
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 25.84
LIFT STATION #43-09350
LIFT STATION #4
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 52.54
LIFT STATION #103-09800
LIFT STATION #10
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 27.88
LIFT STATION #93-29875
LIFT STATION #9
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 29.92
Total :419.51
120373 7/29/2010 069686 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING CO 73601 SOFTWARE SUPPORT
SOFTWARE SUPPORT
411.000.656.538.800.410.11 995.00
Total :995.00
120374 7/29/2010 073327 EULING, MICHIKO bld20100043 r050481 Refund for BLD Permit bld20100043
Refund for BLD Permit bld20100043
001.000.000.257.620.000.00 75.00
11Page:
Packet Page 33 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
12
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :75.001203747/29/2010 073327 073327 EULING, MICHIKO
120375 7/29/2010 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU20409 Fleet Shop Supplies
Fleet Shop Supplies
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.88
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 0.37
Unit 91 - SuppliesWAMOU20568
Unit 91 - Supplies
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 20.85
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.97
Total :27.07
120376 7/29/2010 067042 FINAL TOUCH FINISHING KING12498 ETIQUETTE CLASSES
STARTING POINT #12498
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 280.00
YOUNG LADIES & GENTLEMEN #12497
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 175.00
Total :455.00
120377 7/29/2010 009835 FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS INTL 11495 Unit 649 - Power Seat
Unit 649 - Power Seat
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 500.00
8.6% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 43.00
Total :543.00
120378 7/29/2010 068151 FREEWAY TRAILER SALES INC 090734 Unit eq66.wr (6) - Install Pole Plug
Unit eq66.wr (6) - Install Pole Plug
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 33.74
9.2% Sales Tax
511.100.657.594.480.640.00 3.13
Total :36.87
120379 7/29/2010 072932 FRIEDRICH, KODY FRIEDRICH12563 IRISH DANCE CLASSES
IRISH DANCE 13+
12Page:
Packet Page 34 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
13
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120379 7/29/2010 (Continued)072932 FRIEDRICH, KODY
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 175.50
IRISH DANCE 13+ #12567
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 232.38
IRISH DANCE FOR KIDS #12605
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 61.43
Total :469.31
120380 7/29/2010 011900 FRONTIER 425-744-1681 SEAVIEW PARK IRRIGATION MODEM
SEAVIEW PARK IRRIGATION MODEM
001.000.640.576.800.420.00 40.78
SIERRA PARK IRRIGATION MODEM425-744-1691
SIERRA PARK IRRIGATION MODEM
001.000.640.576.800.420.00 40.12
BEACH RANGER PHONE @ FISHING PIER425-775-1344
BEACH RANGER PHONE @ FISHING PIER
001.000.640.574.350.420.00 53.74
YOST POOL425-775-2645
YOST POOL
001.000.640.575.510.420.00 114.30
Total :248.94
120381 7/29/2010 011900 FRONTIER 425-712-0647 IRRIGATION SYSTEM
IRRIGATION SYSTEM
001.000.640.576.800.420.00 41.10
MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL425-745-5055
MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL
001.000.640.575.560.420.00 58.28
Total :99.38
120382 7/29/2010 011900 FRONTIER 425-AB8-1176 CITY PARK T1 LINE
City Park T1 Line 7/16-8/15/10
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 411.10
Total :411.10
120383 7/29/2010 011900 FRONTIER 425-206-1108 TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS
TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS
13Page:
Packet Page 35 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
14
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120383 7/29/2010 (Continued)011900 FRONTIER
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 145.47
TELEMETRY LIFT STATIONS
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 270.16
SEAVIEW RESERVOIR425-206-1137
SEAVIEW RESERVOIR
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 26.50
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION425-206-1141
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 18.53
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 34.41
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION425-206-4810
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 42.32
TELEMETRY LIFT STATION
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 78.58
TELEMETRY STATIONS425-712-0417
TELEMETRY STATIONS
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 26.55
TELEMETRY STATIONS
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 26.55
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES425-712-8251
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES
001.000.650.519.910.420.00 14.04
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES
111.000.653.542.900.420.00 70.22
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 58.98
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 58.98
P/W FIRE ALARM, FAX LINE & 2 SPARE LINES
511.000.657.548.680.420.00 78.65
PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG ELEVATOR PHONE425-712-8347
PUBLIC SAFETY BLDG ELEVATOR PHONE
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 54.47
14Page:
Packet Page 36 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
15
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120383 7/29/2010 (Continued)011900 FRONTIER
PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE ALARM425-775-2455
PUBLIC SAFETY FIRE ALARM
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 49.92
FRANCES ANDERSON FIRE ALARM SYSTEM425-776-3896
FRANCES ANDERSON FIRE ALARM SYSTEM
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 109.61
VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST425-778-3297
VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST
411.000.654.534.800.420.00 18.81
VACANT PW BLDG 200 DAYTON ST
411.000.655.535.800.420.00 34.93
Total :1,217.68
120384 7/29/2010 073338 GEORGE, LORRAINE 4-22100 #1302-5000700 UTILITY REFUND
#1302-5000700 Utility Ref L George
411.000.000.233.000.000.00 70.03
Total :70.03
120385 7/29/2010 012199 GRAINGER 9291447119 PADLOCKS
PADLOCKS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 106.08
Freight
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 8.37
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 10.87
Total :125.32
120386 7/29/2010 012199 GRAINGER 9299747189 837944131
PSC BLOWER
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 92.03
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 8.74
Total :100.77
120387 7/29/2010 012199 GRAINGER 9286658365 Sewer - Digital Sound Level Meter
15Page:
Packet Page 37 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
16
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120387 7/29/2010 (Continued)012199 GRAINGER
Sewer - Digital Sound Level Meter
411.000.655.535.800.350.00 163.80
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.350.00 15.56
Fac Maint - Small Tools - Rotary Hammer9299976572
Fac Maint - Small Tools - Rotary Hammer
001.000.651.519.920.350.00 300.24
9.2% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.350.00 27.62
Fac Maint - Industrial lube9299976580
Fac Maint - Industrial lube
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 14.21
9.2% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.31
PW - V Belt9302168217
PW - V Belt
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 9.20
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 0.85
Total :532.79
120388 7/29/2010 012560 HACH COMPANY 6813188 112830
PURIFICATION PACK
411.000.656.538.800.310.31 478.00
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.31 45.41
Total :523.41
120389 7/29/2010 012560 HACH COMPANY 6813096 Water Quality - Chlorine Sets
Water Quality - Chlorine Sets
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 532.68
Freight
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 36.95
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 54.11
16Page:
Packet Page 38 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
17
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :623.741203897/29/2010 012560 012560 HACH COMPANY
120390 7/29/2010 060985 HARRINGTON INDUSTRIAL PLASTICS 007B5631 036570
VALVE DIAPHRAGM
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 1,246.50
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 46.11
Total :1,292.61
120391 7/29/2010 070489 HETZEL, BOB HETZEL0722 SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 50.00
Total :50.00
120392 7/29/2010 070042 IKON 82581212 INV#82581212 467070-1005305A3 EDMONDS PD
COPIER RENTAL 07/13-08/12/10
001.000.410.521.100.450.00 340.00
ADDITIONAL IMAGES
001.000.410.521.100.450.00 180.96
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.450.00 49.49
Total :570.45
120393 7/29/2010 068952 INFINITY INTERNET 2915349 PRESCHOOL INTERNET ACCESS
INTERNET ACCESS FOR MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL
001.000.640.575.560.420.00 15.00
Total :15.00
120394 7/29/2010 015270 JCI JONES CHEMICALS INC 474602 54278825
HYPOCHLORITE SOLUTION
411.000.656.538.800.310.53 3,177.92
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.310.53 301.90
Total :3,479.82
120395 7/29/2010 070902 KAREN ULVESTAD PHOTOGRAPHY ULVESTAD12372 KIDS DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY
KIDS DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY #12372
17Page:
Packet Page 39 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
18
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120395 7/29/2010 (Continued)070902 KAREN ULVESTAD PHOTOGRAPHY
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 323.40
DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY 101ULVESTAD12598
DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY 101 #12598
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 147.00
Total :470.40
120396 7/29/2010 069355 KLEINFELDER INC 653553 4695
C-311 ODOR CONTROL PROJECT
414.000.656.594.320.410.10 133.35
Total :133.35
120397 7/29/2010 068024 KRUCKEBERG BOTANIC GARDEN KRUCKEBERG12634 ETHNOBOTANY TOUR
ETHNOBOTANY TOUR #12634
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 7.50
GARDEN TOURKRUCKEBERG12649
GARDEN TOUR #12649
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 78.75
Total :86.25
120398 7/29/2010 017050 KWICK'N KLEEN CAR WASH 07082010-03 City Car Washes - (5)
City Car Washes - (5)
511.000.657.548.680.480.00 25.15
Total :25.15
120399 7/29/2010 017135 LANDAU ASSOCIATES INC 26983 C-311
C-311 ODOR CONTROL PROJECT
414.000.656.594.320.410.10 5,015.83
Total :5,015.83
120400 7/29/2010 072059 LEE, NICOLE 545 INTERPRETER FEES
INTERPRETER FEES
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 119.60
INTERPRETER FEES71910
INTERPRETER FEES
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 122.95
18Page:
Packet Page 40 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
19
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :242.551204007/29/2010 072059 072059 LEE, NICOLE
120401 7/29/2010 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 104667 SUPPLIES
SUPPLIES
001.000.230.512.501.310.00 6.89
Total :6.89
120402 7/29/2010 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 104692 BUSINESS CARDS FOR PW AND PD
Business Cards~250-00245
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 23.75
Generic Business Cards for~250-00245
001.000.410.521.110.310.00 23.75
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 2.26
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.110.310.00 2.25
BUSINESS CARDS FOR PD104694
Business Cards~250-00244
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 16.87
Earl Yamane250-00244
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 16.87
B.V. McIntyre250-00244
001.000.410.521.210.310.00 16.87
Michelle Poff250-00244
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 16.87
Rerun of two names
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 16.87
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.220.310.00 6.41
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.210.310.00 1.60
Total :144.37
120403 7/29/2010 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS 104685 Office Supplies DSD
Office Supplies DSD
001.000.620.558.800.310.00 272.40
19Page:
Packet Page 41 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
20
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
(Continued)Total :272.401204037/29/2010 018760 018760 LUNDS OFFICE ESSENTIALS
120404 7/29/2010 019582 MANOR HARDWARE 314473-00 City Hall Finance - Building Supplies
City Hall Finance - Building Supplies
001.000.310.514.230.490.00 50.49
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.310.514.230.490.00 4.80
Total :55.29
120405 7/29/2010 069362 MARSHALL, CITA 952 INTERPRETER FEES
INTERPRETER FEES
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 128.25
INTERPRETER FEES974
INTERPRETER FEES
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.25
INTERPRETER FEES975
INTERPRETER FEES
001.000.230.512.501.410.01 88.25
INTERPRETER FEES977
INTERPRETER FEES
001.000.230.512.500.410.01 88.25
Total :393.00
120406 7/29/2010 019650 MASTER POOLS OF WASHINGTON INC 54987 YOST POOL REPAIR SUPPLIES
THINSET, CHLORINE TABS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 111.45
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 10.59
Total :122.04
120407 7/29/2010 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 59821036 123106800
WATER DYE
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 271.99
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 13.65
12310680060028172
HOSE COUPLING/PIPE FITTING
20Page:
Packet Page 42 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
21
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120407 7/29/2010 (Continued)020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 220.95
Freight
411.000.656.538.800.310.21 6.24
Total :512.83
120408 7/29/2010 073340 MEDA, CATHARINE MEDA0723 REFUND
REFUND OF SWIM LESSONS
001.000.000.239.200.000.00 42.00
Total :42.00
120409 7/29/2010 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0432869-IN Fleet Filter Inventory
Fleet Filter Inventory
511.000.657.548.680.340.40 16.40
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.340.40 1.56
Total :17.96
120410 7/29/2010 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 1-148882 HONEY BUCKET RENTAL
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: PINE STREET PARK
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 189.87
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-155330
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: EDMONDS ELEMENTARY
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 189.87
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-155724
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: MADRONA ELEMENTARY
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 101.20
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-157639
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL - YOST PARK POOL
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 222.89
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL1-157987
HONEY BUCKET RENTAL: HUMMINGBIRD PARK
001.000.640.576.800.450.00 101.20
Total :805.03
120411 7/29/2010 066628 NORTHWEST DISTRIBUTING CO 042570 Unit 91 - Lens repair supplies
Unit 91 - Lens repair supplies
21Page:
Packet Page 43 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
22
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120411 7/29/2010 (Continued)066628 NORTHWEST DISTRIBUTING CO
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 44.68
Freight
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.33
8.3% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 3.98
Total :51.99
120412 7/29/2010 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 302388 INV#302388 ACCT#520437 250POL EDMONDS PD
WITE OUT CORRECTION TAPE
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 18.43
HIGHLIGHTER-YELLOW
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 15.68
HIGHLIGHTER-ORANGE
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 7.84
HIGHLIGHTER-BLUE
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 7.84
MARKS-A-LOT MARKERS
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 5.70
MEDIUM BINDER CLIPS
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 2.00
BLACK MARKERS
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 6.24
RETRACTABLE PENS-BLUE
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 32.85
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.410.521.100.310.00 9.18
Total :105.76
120413 7/29/2010 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 201901 Sewer - Ink Cartridges
Sewer - Ink Cartridges
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 116.32
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 11.05
PW Office Supplies - Pens,251504
PW Office Supplies - Pens,
22Page:
Packet Page 44 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
23
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120413 7/29/2010 (Continued)063511 OFFICE MAX INC
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 190.94
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 18.14
Water/Sewer/Storm - Tri Color359520
Water/Sewer/Storm - Tri Color
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 42.84
Water/Sewer/Storm - Tri Color
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 42.84
Water/Sewer/Storm - Tri Color
411.000.652.542.900.310.00 42.84
PW Admin Office Supplies - Note Pads,
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 40.46
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 4.07
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.655.535.800.310.00 4.07
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.652.542.900.310.00 4.07
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.650.519.910.310.00 3.84
Total :521.48
120414 7/29/2010 025889 OGDEN MURPHY AND WALLACE 685030 JUNE-2010 LITIGATION FEES
June-10 Litigation fees
001.000.360.515.100.410.00 20,773.00
June-10 Basic Legal Fees685035
June-10 Basic Legal Fees
001.000.360.515.100.410.00 1,603.20
June-10 ECDC Rewrite 2006-2007
001.000.620.558.600.410.00 150.30
June-10 Retainer Fees
001.000.360.515.100.410.00 22,902.55
Total :45,429.05
120415 7/29/2010 065704 OMB PRODUCTIONS OMB2010 SUMMER CONCERT MANAGER
23Page:
Packet Page 45 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
24
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120415 7/29/2010 (Continued)065704 OMB PRODUCTIONS
SUMMER CONCERT MANAGER FOR CITY PARK
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 975.00
Total :975.00
120416 7/29/2010 063750 ORCA PACIFIC INC 044608 YOST POOL SUPPLIES
YOST POOL CHEMICALS
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 474.30
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 45.06
YOST POOL SUPPLIES044777
SODIUM HYPOCHLORITE
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 252.40
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.640.576.800.310.00 23.98
Total :795.74
120417 7/29/2010 064951 OTIS ELEVATOR CO SS06279G810 PW Elevator Maint Svc Contract Charges
PW Elevator Maint Svc Contract Charges
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 2,100.90
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.480.00 199.59
Total :2,300.49
120418 7/29/2010 027165 PARKER PAINT MFG. CO.INC.949829 PW - Paint
PW - Paint
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 11.52
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.09
Total :12.61
120419 7/29/2010 066412 PARKS & RECREATION DAYCAMP CAMPCASH0727 DAYCAMP PETTY CASH REIMBURSEMENT
REIMBURSEMENT TO DAYCAMP PETTY CASH
001.000.640.575.530.310.00 155.68
Total :155.68
120420 7/29/2010 071222 PARKS, ELMER PARKS0722 SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
24Page:
Packet Page 46 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
25
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120420 7/29/2010 (Continued)071222 PARKS, ELMER
SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 200.00
Total :200.00
120421 7/29/2010 072384 PLAY-WELL TEKNOLOGIES PLAYWELL0723 103143858
LEGO CAMP #12228
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 3,000.00
LEGO CAMP #12225
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 1,750.00
Total :4,750.00
120422 7/29/2010 065021 PRINTING PLUS 68609 WRITE ON THE SOUND BROCHURES
2010 WRITE ON THE SOUND BROCHURES
123.000.640.573.100.490.00 2,593.58
9.5% Sales Tax
123.000.640.573.100.490.00 246.39
Total :2,839.97
120423 7/29/2010 073056 PROSPECT CONSTRUCTION INC 8 C-311
C-311 ODOR CONTROL PROJECT
414.000.656.594.320.650.10 160,797.02
Total :160,797.02
120424 7/29/2010 064088 PROTECTION ONE 2422756 Alarm Monitoring for Library~
Alarm Monitoring for Library~
001.000.651.519.920.420.00 94.35
Total :94.35
120425 7/29/2010 030780 QUIRING MONUMENTS INC 109733 MARKER
MARKER: KUVARA
130.000.640.536.200.340.00 316.00
MARKER109734
MARKER: HIGGINS
130.000.640.536.200.340.00 316.00
Total :632.00
25Page:
Packet Page 47 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
26
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120426 7/29/2010 070480 RINALDI, MATT RINALDI0722 SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 925.00
Total :925.00
120427 7/29/2010 072802 SCIENCE EXPRESS LLC SCIENCE12245 PRESCHOOL SCIENCE MINI CAMP
PRESCHOOL SCIENCE MINI CAMP #12245
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 357.00
Total :357.00
120428 7/29/2010 067076 SEATTLE PUMP AND EQUIPMENT CO 10-2447A Unit 106 - Hoses, Gaskets, Vacuum Tube
Unit 106 - Hoses, Gaskets, Vacuum Tube
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 209.00
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 19.86
Total :228.86
120429 7/29/2010 070488 SELMANN, DAN SELMANN0722 SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 125.00
Total :125.00
120430 7/29/2010 065803 SKYHAWKS SPORTS ACADEMY SKYHAWKS12348 SPORTS CAMPS
CAMP #12348
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 80.00
CAMP #12345
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 544.00
CAMP #12355
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 1,084.00
Total :1,708.00
120431 7/29/2010 037801 SNO CO HUMAN SERVICE DEPT I000250739 Q2-10 LIQUOR BOARD PROFITS & TAXES
Q2-10 Liquor Board Profits & Taxes
001.000.390.567.000.510.00 2,461.33
Total :2,461.33
120432 7/29/2010 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2007-1403-8 UTILITY BILLING
26Page:
Packet Page 48 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
27
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120432 7/29/2010 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
18500 82ND AVE W
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 73.06
UTILITY BILLING2011-9708-4
8030 185TH ST SW
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 33.87
100 DAYTON ST2012-3682-5
100 DAYTON ST
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 456.81
UTILITY INVOICE2022-5062-7
1341 9TH AVE N
001.000.640.576.800.470.00 31.55
Total :595.29
120433 7/29/2010 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 120208464 2030-9778-7
WWTP ELECTRICITY
411.000.656.538.800.471.61 20,791.32
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.656.538.800.471.61 1,247.48
Total :22,038.80
120434 7/29/2010 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 200202547 SIGNAL LIGHT 21930 95TH AVE W
SIGNAL LIGHT 21930 95th AVE W
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 31.04
SCHOOL LIGHT 20829 76TH W200202562
STREET LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 31.04
MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE200386456
MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 119.58
LIFT STATION #4 8311 TALBOT RD200468593
LIFT STATION #4
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 409.06
4 WAY LIGHT 101 9TH AVE S200592954
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 31.55
27Page:
Packet Page 49 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
28
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120434 7/29/2010 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
200 DAYTON ST-OLD PW BLDG200638609
200 Dayton St-Vacant PW Bldg
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 453.26
SIGNAL LIGHT 200 3RD200678019
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 53.37
SEAVIEW RESERVOIR 18520 90TH W200739845
SEAVIEW RESERVOIR
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 34.28
LIFT STATION #3 1529 NORTHSTREAM LN200865202
LIFT STATION #3
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 98.55
4 WAY LIGHT 9600 BOWDOIN WAY201147063
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 45.40
SCHOOL FLASHING LIGHT 8400 219TH ST SW201151412
School Flashing Light 8400 219th St SW
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 31.04
LIFT STATION #12 16121 75TH PL W201265980
LIFT STATION #12
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 248.17
LIFT STATION #11 6811 1/2 157TH PL W201374964
LIFT STATION #11
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 32.92
LIBRARY201551744
LIBRARY
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 3,801.47
TRAFFIC LIGHT 117 3RD AVE S201572898
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 121.38
LS #15 7710 168TH PL SW201594488
LIFT STATION #15
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 31.55
TRAFFIC LIGHT 20801 76TH W201611951
STREET LIGHT
28Page:
Packet Page 50 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
29
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120434 7/29/2010 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 41.76
TRAFFIC SIGNAL 9932 220TH ST SW201751476
TRAFFIC SIGNAL 9932 220th ST SW
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 87.17
4 WAY LIGHT 901 WALNUT201782646
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 55.25
TRAFFIC LIGHT 7133 212TH SW201907862
STREET LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 39.14
Public Works201942489
Public Works
001.000.650.519.910.470.00 63.92
Public Works
111.000.653.542.900.470.00 242.91
Public Works
411.000.654.534.800.470.00 242.91
Public Works
411.000.655.535.800.470.00 242.91
Public Works
511.000.657.548.680.470.00 242.91
Public Works
411.000.652.542.900.470.00 242.90
TRAFFIC LIGHT 23801 HWY 99202289120
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 100.16
PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX202291662
PUBLIC SAFETY COMPLEX
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 8,348.70
LIGHT 120 5TH N202389375
SIGNAL LIGHT
111.000.653.542.630.470.00 16.43
TRAFFIC LIGHT 8602 188TH ST SW202427803
TRAFFIC LIGHT
111.000.653.542.640.470.00 31.04
29Page:
Packet Page 51 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
30
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120434 7/29/2010 (Continued)037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1
CITY HALL202439246
CITY HALL
001.000.651.519.920.470.00 2,399.90
Total :17,971.67
120435 7/29/2010 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE 7/16/10 INMATE MEDICAL BILL - JUNE 2010 EDMONDS
INMATE PRESCRIPTIONS - 06/10
001.000.410.523.600.310.00 247.71
Total :247.71
120436 7/29/2010 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 7202010 ASH DISPOSAL
ASH DISPOSAL
411.000.656.538.800.474.65 1,776.63
Total :1,776.63
120437 7/29/2010 069997 SRI TECHNOLOGIES INC 106329 E8GC.ROBERTS SERVICES THRU 7/10/10
E8GC.Roberts Services thru 7/10/10
412.200.630.594.320.410.00 1,428.48
E8GC.Roberts Services thru 7/10/10
412.300.630.594.320.410.00 1,428.47
Total :2,856.95
120438 7/29/2010 060371 STANDARD INSURANCE CO August 2010 AUGUST 2010 STANDARD INS
August 2010 Standard Insurance Premiums
811.000.000.231.550.000.00 13,452.65
Total :13,452.65
120439 7/29/2010 039775 STATE AUDITOR'S OFFICE L83505 APRIL 2010 AUDIT FEES
April-2010 Audit Fees
001.000.390.519.900.510.00 11,863.86
April-2010 Audit Fees
411.000.652.542.900.510.00 593.19
April-2010 Audit Fees
411.000.654.534.800.510.00 1,977.31
April-2010 Audit Fees
411.000.655.535.800.510.00 1,977.31
30Page:
Packet Page 52 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
31
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120439 7/29/2010 (Continued)039775 STATE AUDITOR'S OFFICE
April-2010 Audit Fees
411.000.656.538.800.510.00 1,977.31
April-2010 Audit Fees
111.000.653.543.300.510.00 593.19
April-2010 Audit Fees
511.000.657.548.680.510.00 790.93
Total :19,773.10
120440 7/29/2010 009400 STELLAR INDUSTRIAL SUPPLY INC 2948124 Fleet - Plier Retain Ring
Fleet - Plier Retain Ring
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 69.63
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 6.61
Total :76.24
120441 7/29/2010 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY 2251161 City Hall - Elect Supplies
City Hall - Elect Supplies
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 11.54
9.5% Sales Tax
001.000.651.519.920.310.00 1.10
Total :12.64
120442 7/29/2010 072562 STUDIO3MUSIC LLC STUDIO312553 KINDERMUSIK CLASSES
CLASS #12553
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 425.04
CLASS #12555
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 289.80
CLASS #12559
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 294.00
Total :1,008.84
120443 7/29/2010 070864 SUPERMEDIA LLC 360003428566 C/A 360000657091
July-10 Basic e-commerce hosting
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 34.95
C/A 360000764828360003432864
31Page:
Packet Page 53 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
32
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120443 7/29/2010 (Continued)070864 SUPERMEDIA LLC
July 10 Web Hosting for Internet
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 34.95
C/A 430001405909440010527701
Aug-10 P&R Directory Listing
001.000.310.518.880.420.00 130.25
Total :200.15
120444 7/29/2010 068619 SWENSON, LINDA 1211 SEPT - DEC 2010 CRAZE
EDMONDS PORTION OF SEPT - DEC 2010 CRAZE
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 1,327.84
Total :1,327.84
120445 7/29/2010 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 18907046 Fleet - Supplies
Fleet - Supplies
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 15.01
9.5% Sales Tax
511.000.657.548.680.310.00 1.43
Total :16.44
120446 7/29/2010 009350 THE DAILY HERALD COMPANY 1702617 NEWSPAPER ADS
07/20 Hearing (Polystyrene)
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 57.40
NEWSPAPER AD1702713
07/20 Hearing (City Manager)
001.000.250.514.300.440.00 54.04
Total :111.44
120447 7/29/2010 064373 TINGSTAD, CAROL T&R 080110 PARK CONCERT
CITY PARK CONCERT 8/1/10
117.100.640.573.100.410.00 900.00
PARK CONCERT
001.000.640.574.200.410.00 100.00
Total :1,000.00
120448 7/29/2010 072146 TRUAX, BREANNE 07212010 MONITOR FOR ECON DEV COMM MTG 7/21/10
Monitor for Econ Dev Commission meeting
32Page:
Packet Page 54 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
33
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120448 7/29/2010 (Continued)072146 TRUAX, BREANNE
001.000.240.513.110.490.00 36.00
Total :36.00
120449 7/29/2010 061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY 8492310 WATER METER INVENTORY - M-METER-02-010
WATER METER INVENTORY - M-METER-02-010
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 2,797.90
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 265.80
WATER - METER BOX (24) & LIDS (24)8492368
WATER - METER BOX (24) & LIDS (24)
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1,355.16
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 128.74
Water Meter Inventory - M-Meter- 01-0108501428
Water Meter Inventory - M-Meter- 01-010
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 2,294.40
misc sales tax %
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 197.32
Water - ROM Repair Clamps, Meter8505242
Water - ROM Repair Clamps, Meter
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 1,850.18
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 175.77
WATER - METER BOXES (12)8516694
WATER - METER BOXES (12)
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 451.08
9.5% Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.310.00 42.85
WATER METER INVENTORY -8516911
WATER METER INVENTORY -
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 4,545.90
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 390.94
WATER METER INVENTORY -8516917
WATER METER INVENTORY -
33Page:
Packet Page 55 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
34
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120449 7/29/2010 (Continued)061192 UNITED PIPE & SUPPLY
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 4,545.90
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 390.94
WATER METER INVENTORY -8521763
WATER METER INVENTORY -
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 4,545.90
Sales Tax
411.000.654.534.800.342.00 390.94
Total :24,369.72
120450 7/29/2010 069592 USA MOBILITY WIRELESS T0298897G INV#T0298897G - EDMONDS PD
PAGER & MESSAGING 07/27-08/26/10
001.000.410.521.100.420.00 157.48
Total :157.48
120451 7/29/2010 073068 VALLEY BANK 8 C/A 348 OUR PROJECT C311
RETAINAGE PROSPECT CONSTR.
414.000.656.594.320.650.10 7,693.64
Total :7,693.64
120452 7/29/2010 070486 VASCONCELLOS, JOE VASCONCELLOS0722 SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 275.00
Total :275.00
120453 7/29/2010 069836 VOLT SERVICE GROUP 23190019 Temp for Building Division Week of July
Temp for Building Division Week of July
001.000.620.524.100.410.00 416.00
Total :416.00
120454 7/29/2010 070481 WHITE, DAN WHITE0722 SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 275.00
Total :275.00
120455 7/29/2010 070432 ZACHOR & THOMAS PS INC 919 JULY-10 RETAINER
34Page:
Packet Page 56 of 562
07/29/2010
Voucher List
City of Edmonds
35
11:49:39AM
Page:vchlist
Bank code :front
Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO #Description/Account Amount
120455 7/29/2010 (Continued)070432 ZACHOR & THOMAS PS INC
Monthly Retainer
001.000.360.515.230.410.00 11,330.00
Total :11,330.00
120456 7/29/2010 070484 ZYLSTRA, JERRY ZYLSTRA0722 SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 100.00
Total :100.00
120457 7/29/2010 070485 ZYLSTRA, RON ZYLSTRA0722 SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
SENIOR SOFTBALL UMPIRE
001.000.640.575.520.410.00 100.00
Total :100.00
Bank total :408,351.73127 Vouchers for bank code :front
408,351.73Total vouchers :Vouchers in this report127
35Page:
Packet Page 57 of 562
AM-3257 2.D.
Update on progress of the City of Edmonds Health Benefits Committee
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:08/03/2010
Submitted By:Debi Humann Time:Consent
Department:Human Resources Type:Information
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Update on progress of the City of Edmonds Health Benefits Committee.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
This agenda memo is an update on the activities to-date of the Health Benefits Committee.
Previous Council Action
None.
Narrative
As Council is aware, the Association of Washington Cities announced last year that both Regence
Plan A and our Group Health medical plans were being terminated effective January 1, 2012. In
response, the City of Edmonds formed a Health Benefits Committee made up of members of the
four unions (SEIU, Teamsters, EPOA, and Law Support), a valued volunteer consultant in Jack
Loos (Rael & Letson Consultants and Actuaries) along with HR to research medical plan options.
The Health Benefits Committee has been in place for approximately one year and has made
significant progress towards the goal of determining the best health insurance options for the City
(please see the attached "Overview of Health Benefits Committee - Finance Committee" dated
April 2010).
The Health Benefits Committee went out with an RFQ for a health insurance broker/consultant
this past April 5 with the final RFP applications due to the City on May 14. Following the close of
the RFP process, the committee considered ClearPoint, Baldwin Resource Group, Willis, Mercer
Health and Benefits, MCM, and Wells Fargo Insurance Services as potential brokers. After
several interview processes, the Committee selected Wells Fargo Insurance Services as our
broker/consultant.
The Committee met with Wells Fargo on Friday, July 23, to finalize the scope of work (see
attached timeline). The HR Department has completed a comprehensive census of employees and
submitted it to Wells Fargo on Thursday, July 29. The HR Department is also working with
AWC to secure information on our non-LEOFF retired population, our LEOFF 1 members, and
COBRA individuals to make sure they are included in the census.
The Committee expects to have market place data from Wells Fargo on or about September 8. At
that point, the Health Benefits Committee will compare the options provided by Wells Fargo with
Packet Page 58 of 562
other plans offered by AWC and will make recommendations for new health plans.
The cost associated with going out to market with Wells Fargo is $21,500. The City of Edmonds
Purchasing Policies and Procedures states that a department director can approve purchases of
professional services costing $50,000 or less provided the funds have been budgeted and
authorized. These funds have not been budgeted therefore i am requesting that Council approve
payment of $21,500 to Wells Fargo.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Health Benefits Update
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Linda Hynd 07/30/2010 11:29 AM APRV
2 Community Services/Economic Dev. Stephen Clifton 07/30/2010 11:35 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Linda Hynd 07/30/2010 11:49 AM APRV
Form Started By: Debi Humann Started On: 07/30/2010 11:12
AM
Final Approval Date: 07/30/2010
Packet Page 59 of 562
Packet Page 60 of 562
Packet Page 61 of 562
Packet Page 62 of 562
Packet Page 63 of 562
Packet Page 64 of 562
Packet Page 65 of 562
AM-3225 3.
Community Service Announcement: Edmonds Chamber of Commerce - Car Show
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:08/03/2010
Submitted By:Jana Spellman
Submitted For:Council President Bernheim Time:5 Minutes
Department:City Council Type:Information
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Community Service Announcement: Edmonds Chamber of Commerce - Car Show.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Previous Council Action
Narrative
Community Service Announcement: Edmonds Chamber of Commerce - Car Show.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Linda Hynd 07/29/2010 10:07 AM APRV
2 Community Services/Economic Dev. Stephen Clifton 07/29/2010 10:37 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Linda Hynd 07/29/2010 01:53 PM APRV
Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 07/20/2010 11:30
AM
Final Approval Date: 07/29/2010
Packet Page 66 of 562
AM-3210 4.
Adopt-A-Dog
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:08/03/2010
Submitted By:Jana Spellman
Submitted For:Council President Bernheim Time:5 Minutes
Department:City Council Type:Information
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Community Service Announcement: Adopt-A-Dog.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Previous Council Action
Narrative
Darci Bonsen will bring Alvin, a dog from Old Pet Haven to the Council Chambers in hopes of
being adopted.
Alvin is an 8-pound poodle about 12 years old. He's a curious and active senior who loves to
explore the yard, go on walks, and ride in the car. He is very loving and sweet; he loves to snuggle
on your lap or sit next to you on the sofa. Alvin gets along well with other dogs and cats. He
minds well, is crate-trained and housebroken, and isn't much of a barker. He has a heart murmur
(common in small dogs) but doesn't need medication and is in good health otherwise. Alvin would
do best in a home where someone is home most of the time - he loves attention and enjoys the
company very much. The best fit for this sweet boy would be somewhat active people and a home
with a fenced yard and no small children.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
No file(s) attached.
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Linda Hynd 07/29/2010 10:07 AM APRV
2 Community Services/Economic Dev. Stephen Clifton 07/29/2010 10:37 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Linda Hynd 07/29/2010 01:53 PM APRV
Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 07/14/2010 02:58
PM
Final Approval Date: 07/29/2010
Packet Page 67 of 562
AM-3250 5.
Update from Mike Carter of Stevens Hospital and Cal Knight of Swedish Hospital
regarding the hospital affiliation and hospital district.
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:08/03/2010
Submitted By:Jana Spellman
Submitted For:Council President Bernheim Time:30 Minutes
Department:City Council Type:Information
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Update from Mike Carter of Stevens Hospital and Cal Knight of Swedish Hospital regarding
the hospital affiliation and hospital district.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Previous Council Action
Narrative
Update from Mike Carter of Stevens Hospital and Cal Knight of Swedish Hospital regarding the
hospital affiliation and hospital district.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Stevens Swedish Collaboration
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Linda Hynd 07/29/2010 10:07 AM APRV
2 Community Services/Economic Dev. Stephen Clifton 07/29/2010 10:37 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Linda Hynd 07/29/2010 01:53 PM APRV
Form Started By: Jana Spellman Started On: 07/28/2010 03:21
PM
Final Approval Date: 07/29/2010
Packet Page 68 of 562
Packet Page 69 of 562
Packet Page 70 of 562
Packet Page 71 of 562
Packet Page 72 of 562
Packet Page 73 of 562
Packet Page 74 of 562
Packet Page 75 of 562
Packet Page 76 of 562
Packet Page 77 of 562
Packet Page 78 of 562
Packet Page 79 of 562
Packet Page 80 of 562
Packet Page 81 of 562
Packet Page 82 of 562
Packet Page 83 of 562
Packet Page 84 of 562
AM-3251 6.
Continued Public Hearing on the 2010 Water System Comprehensive Plan Update
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:08/03/2010
Submitted By:Robert English
Submitted For:Robert English Time:30 Minutes
Department:Engineering Type:Action
Review Committee:Finance
Committee Action:Recommend Review by Full Council
Information
Subject Title
Continued Public Hearing on the 2010 Water System Comprehensive Plan Update.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Approve the 2010 Water System Comprehensive Plan Update.
Later this year when the City's Comprehensive Plan is amended, adopt this approved Plan as the
Water Utility Element.
Previous Council Action
On July 6, 2010, a public hearing was held on the 2010 Water System Comprehensive Plan
Update.
On June 22, 2010, a presentation was made to the City Council on the 2010 Water System
Comprehensive Plan Update.
On June 9, 2010, the proposed water rate increases were presented to the Finance Committee for
review and discussion.
Narrative
On July 6, 2010, a public hearing was held on the 2010 Water System Comprehensive Plan
Update. The City Council decided to continue the public hearing until August 3rd to provide an
opportunity for staff to meet with Councilmember Petso regarding her questions on the Plan.
After meeting with Councilmember Petso, staff prepared changes to chapters 7 and 9 as shown
in the attachments to address her concerns. The changes can be found on pages 7-9, 7-10, 9-8 and
9-13. The financial consultant also made minor revisions to Chapter 10 to update the Alderwood
water rates, make minor wording changes and update financial tables.
The 2010 Water System Comprehensive Plan is an update to the City of Edmonds June 2002
Water Comprehensive Plan. The purpose for this updated plan is to meet the current drinking
water regulations and to provide the City with a useful working document to guide the planning,
scheduling, and budgeting of water system improvements. This updated plan will also be used by
City staff to help maintain the water system to ensure both existing and future customers are
provided with a safe and reliable supply of drinking water and fire protection. The planning period
Packet Page 85 of 562
for this water system plan is 20 years.
The City's municipal water system started in 1928 and has grown over the years as the City
expanded and annexed more areas. The City's water system provides service to approximately 80
percent of the population within the City limits or more than 10,050 customer accounts. All water
supplied to City customers is currently purchased from Alderwood Water and Wastewater District
(AWWD). The City also has the capability to serve a portion of its system with water purchased
from Seattle Public Utilities (SPU), but currently maintains this source of supply on standby.
The Plan includes an analysis of the City’s existing water system and individual water system
components were analyzed under both existing and future water demand conditions to determine
their ability to meet policies and design criteria. The water system analyses are covered in Chapter
7 and the water system capital improvements and costs that resolve deficiencies are identified in
Chapter 9.
Public Process (2010)
• May 26th - Initial draft Plan posted on the City Website and available at City Hall
• May 26th – Presentation to the Planning Board
• June 3rd – SEPA Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) issued June 3rd
• June 7th – Begin Department of Commerce 60-day review period (GMA)
• June 8th – City Council Finance Committee review of water financial rate proposal
• June 9th - Planning Board Public Hearing
• June 22nd - Presentation to City Council on the 2010 Water System Plan Update
• July 6th - Public Hearing on the 2010 Water System Plan Update
Future Public Process
• August – Submit Plan to DOH and adjacent water purveyors
• Nov- Adopt Water System Plan update as an element of the City’s Comprehensive Plan
The Plan was reviewed by the Planning Board on May 26, 2010 and a public hearing was held on
June 9, 2010. The Planning Board recommended the Water System Comprehensive Plan be sent
to Council for approval with the following additional recommendations:
1. Staff the Public Works Department sufficiently to execute the capital improvement plan at 1%
per year water main replacement, or more.
2. Finance the Capital Improvement Program for the 1% per year water main replacement, at a
minimum.
3. Set water rates to pay for the Capital Improvement Plan as planned.
4. Provide for periodic reports to ensure timely execution of the Capital Improvement Plan.
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Revised Chapter 7
Link: Revised Chapter 9
Link: Revised Chapter 10
Link: Exhibit 4 - Water System Plan (June 2010 Draft)
Link: Exhibit 5 - Water System Plan Figures
Packet Page 86 of 562
Link: Exhibit 6 - Appendices
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 Engineering Robert English 07/30/2010 08:54 AM APRV
2 Public Works Phil Williams 07/30/2010 09:11 AM APRV
3 City Clerk Linda Hynd 07/30/2010 09:16 AM APRV
4 Community Services/Economic Dev. Stephen Clifton 07/30/2010 09:24 AM APRV
5 Final Approval Linda Hynd 07/30/2010 10:03 AM APRV
Form Started By: Robert English Started On: 07/29/2010 10:29
AM
Final Approval Date: 07/30/2010
Packet Page 87 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Page 7-1 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
7
Water System Analyses
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents the analysis of the City of Edmonds (City) existing water system.
Individual water system components were analyzed under both existing and future water
demand conditions to determine their ability to meet policies and design criteria. The City’s
policies and design criteria are presented in Chapter 5 and the water demands are presented
in Chapter 4. A description of the water system facilities and their current operation is
presented in Chapter 2. Planned water system capital improvements that resolve the
deficiencies identified in this chapter are presented in Chapter 9. The last section of this
chapter presents the existing system capacity analysis that was performed to determine the
maximum number of equivalent residential units (ERUs) that can be served by the City’s
water system.
PRESSURE ZONES
Table 7-1 lists each of the City’s seven pressure zones, the highest and lowest elevation
served in each zone, and the minimum and maximum distribution system pressures within
each zone, based on maximum static water conditions (full reservoirs and no system
demands). The City is currently providing water at sufficient pressures throughout the water
system, as shown in the table. The highest pressures in the system occur at the lowest
elevations of each pressure zone. All new water services with pressures greater than 80 psi
must have individual pressure reducing valves to reduce the pressure to 80 psi or less, in
accordance with the plumbing code.
Table 7-1
Minimum and Maximum Distribution System Pressures
596 452 ft 62 psi 275 ft 139 psi
505 376 ft 56 psi 194 ft 135 psi
500 368 ft 57 psi 162 ft 146 psi
486 375 ft 48 psi 127 ft 156 psi
425 300 ft 54 psi 185 ft 104 psi
420 250 ft 74 psi 154 ft 115 psi
325 220 ft 45 psi 15 ft 134 psi
Static Pressure
at Lowest
Elevation
(psi)
Pressure
Zone
Highest
Elevation
Served
(feet)
Static Pressure
at Highest
Elevation
(psi)
Lowest
Elevation
Served
(feet)
Packet Page 88 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-2 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
It is the City’s policy to provide water service at a pressure of at least 40 psi, which has been
accomplished with the design of the system and location of pressure zone boundaries. Due
to the challenging topography throughout the system, high pressures do occur in several
areas of the service area.
ALDERWOOD SUPPLY STATION
This section evaluates the City’s Alderwood Supply Station to determine if it has sufficient
capacity to provide water supply to the system at a rate that meets the existing and future
demands of the system. In the past, the City operated its water system as two independent
operating areas, based on the north operating area being supplied with water from the
Alderwood Water & Wastewater District (AWWD) and the south operating area being
supplied with water from the Seattle Public Utilities (SPU). The City now operates the
system as one operating area with all water supply from AWWD, due to the rising cost of
water purchased from SPU. The City’s SPU Supply Station remains in service, but operates
in a standby mode to provide supplemental supply to the system when needed.
Analysis Criteria
Supply facilities must provide a sufficient quantity of water at pressures that meet the
requirements of WAC 246-290-230 and must be reliable. The capacity of supply facilities in
a pressure zone that has adequate storage must be sufficient to provide water at a rate that is
equal to or greater than the peak day demand of the zone being served. This approach
assumes that demands in excess of the peak day demand will be supplied from the equalizing
storage portion of reservoirs. Since the City’s Alderwood Supply Station provides supply to
pressure zones that can also be supplied from storage for intraday peak demands, the supply
requirement for the supply station is equal to the peak day demand of the system.
Analysis Results
The Alderwood Supply Station delivers water to the entire water system. Water is supplied
directly into the 596 Zone, meeting customer demands and filling the two reservoirs at the
Five Corners site. Water to the remaining lower pressure zones are supplied from the 596
Zone through multiple pressure reducing valve (PRV) stations.
Table 7-2 summarizes the evaluation of the City’s Alderwood Supply Station to determine if
it has sufficient capacity to meet the existing and future demands of the system. The existing
system evaluation is based on the current state of the existing facility, which has a maximum
supply capacity of approximately 5,500 gpm. The capacity of the existing facility is limited
to flow through the larger mainline portion of the station only, which includes a 10-inch
turbine meter and 12-inch control valve. The existing facility also contains 8-inch bypass
piping with an 8-inch turbine meter and 6-inch control valve, but is not setup to operate
automatically in conjunction with the larger mainline when needed during high demand
periods. The evaluation of the supply station with future year 2028 demands is based on
improvements to the facility that enables flow through both the mainline and bypass portions
of the station, thereby enabling the station to supply at a higher flow rate up to approximately
Packet Page 89 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-3 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
7,000 gpm, as shown in the table. These improvements were initiated in 2010 and are
discussed further in Chapter 9.
The results of the evaluation, as shown in Table 7-2, indicate the City’s Alderwood Supply
Station has sufficient capacity to meet the existing and future supply requirements of the
system through the year 2028. While the existing supply station has sufficient capacity for
the existing and future demands of the system, the City is proceeding with improvements to
expand the capacity of the station to improve system operation during peak demand periods
when the Five Corners Pump Station is operating in conjunction with the supply station.
Table 7-2
Alderwood Supply Station Capacity Evaluation
Peak Day Demand (PDD)4,267 5,163
Alderwood Supply Station 5,500 7,000
Surplus Capacity 1,233 1,837
Surplus Supply Capacity (gpm)
Description
Existing System
Year 2008 (gpm)
Future System
Year 2028 (gpm)
Required Supply Capacity (gpm)
Available Supply Capacity (gpm)
FIVE CORNERS PUMP STATION
This section evaluates the Five Corners Pump Station to determine if it has sufficient
capacity to meet the existing and future demands of the system.
Analysis Criteria
The primary purpose of the pump station is to pump stored water from the Five Corners 3.0
MG Reservoir to the 596 Zone to supplement supply from the Alderwood Supply Station
during peak demand periods, to provide supplemental fire flow, and to provide emergency
supply if the Alderwood Supply Station is out of service by utilizing standby storage from
the Five Corners 3.0 MG Reservoir.
The criteria for evaluating the capacity of the Five Corners Pump Station is based on the
most stringent condition where the system is experiencing peak hour demands and a
simultaneous fire flow in the 596 Zone, based on the largest fire flow requirement of 5,000
gpm. Supply to the system during this condition is provided by the Alderwood Supply
Station, Five Corners Pump Station, and SPU Supply Station, which is configured to
automatically activate during this type of an event. The analysis is based on the pump station
with improvements that were underway in 2009 and completed in 2010, as described in
Chapter 9.
Packet Page 90 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-4 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Analysis Results
The results of the evaluation, as shown in Table 7-3, indicate the Five Corners Pump Station
has sufficient capacity to serve its purpose in providing supplemental supply to the system,
based on both the existing and future supply requirements of the system.
Table 7-3
Five Corners Pump Station Capacity Evaluation
System Peak Hour Demand (PHD)7,681 9,293
Maximum Fire Flow Requirement 5,000 5,000
Total Required Supply 12,681 14,293
Alderwood Supply Station Capacity 5,500 7,000
SPU Supply Station Capacity 5,500 5,500
Total Supply Capacity 11,000 12,500
Required Supply from Pump Station 1,681 1,793
Five Corners Pump Station Capacity 2,400 2,400
Surplus Pump Station Capacity 719 607
Surplus Pump Station Capacity (gpm)
Description
Existing System
Year 2008
(gpm)
Future System
Year 2028
(gpm)
Required Supply (gpm)
Available Supply (gpm)
Available Supply from Five Corners Pump Station (gpm)
Required Supply from Five Corners Pump Station (gpm)
STORAGE FACILITIES
This section evaluates the City’s four existing water storage facilities to determine if they
have sufficient capacity to meet the existing and future storage requirements of the system.
Analysis Criteria
Water storage is provided in a public water system for different purposes and can be
represented by the following components: operational storage, equalizing storage, standby
storage, fire flow storage, and dead storage. A description of each storage component and
the criteria used to evaluate the capacity of the City’s reservoirs is provided below.
Packet Page 91 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-5 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Operational Storage
Operational storage is the upper portion of the reservoir that is used to supply the water
system under normal demand conditions. Operational storage is the average amount of draw
down in the reservoir during normal operating conditions, which represents a volume of
storage that will most likely not be available for other purposes. The operational storage in
all four of the City’s reservoirs is the volume of storage between the average water level of
the reservoirs and the maximum water level (i.e., overflow elevation) of the reservoirs.
Equalizing Storage
Equalizing storage is the portion of the reservoir below operational storage that is used to
supply the water system under peak demand conditions when the system demand exceeds the
total rate of supply of the sources. The criteria for determining the equalizing storage
requirements for the City’s system, which is supplied continuously from the Alderwood
Supply Station, is based on the Department of Health (DOH) formula that considers the
difference between peak hour demand and supply capacity.
Standby Storage
Standby storage is the portion of the reservoir used to supply the water system under
emergency conditions when supply facilities are out of service. Considering the City’s
historically reliable supply from AWWD, standby supply from SPU, and eight emergency
interties with two adjacent water systems, the need for a large amount of standby storage is
not warranted. Therefore, the standby storage requirement is based on a sufficient volume to
provide all water supply to the system for one day during an average day demand condition
when the Alderwood Supply Station is out of service and no other supply is provided by
other facilities.
Fire Flow Storage
Fire flow storage is the portion of the reservoir with sufficient volume to supply water to the
system at the maximum rate and duration required to extinguish a fire at the building with the
highest fire flow requirement. The magnitude of the fire flow storage is the product of the
fire flow rate and duration of the system’s maximum fire flow requirement. The required
volume of fire flow storage for the 325 Zone is based on a 3,000 gpm fire flow for a 3-hour
duration. The required volume of fire flow storage for the remaining pressure zones is based
on a 5,000 gpm fire flow for a 4-hour duration.
Both standby storage and fire flow storage are considered emergency storage components.
The City has elected to nest these two storage components, which results in the larger of the
two individual components being used for both standby and fire flow purposes.
Dead Storage
Dead storage is the bottom portion of the reservoir that cannot be used because water is
stored at an elevation that is too low to pump or flow by gravity to provide sufficient
Packet Page 92 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-6 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
pressure. This unusable storage occupies the lower portion of most ground-level standpipe
style reservoirs.
Analysis Approach
The storage analysis is based on an evaluation of the existing reservoirs providing water to
the two operating areas that they serve. The Five Corners 3.0 MG Reservoir and 1.5 MG
Reservoir provide storage to an operating area that includes all pressure zones, except for the
325 Zone. The 1.5 MG Yost Reservoir and 1.5 MG Seaview Reservoir provide storage for
the 325 Zone.
Existing Storage Analysis Results
The results of the storage analysis for the existing system indicate that the existing storage
facilities have sufficient capacity to meet existing demands, as shown in Table 7-4. The two
Five Corners reservoirs have approximately 0.81 MG of excess storage for the pressure zones
that they serve. The Yost Reservoir and Seaview Reservoir have approximately 0.58 MG of
excess storage for the 325 Zone.
Table 7-4
Existing Storage Capacity Evaluation
Maximum Storage Capacity 4.50 3.00 7.50
Dead (Non-usable) Storage -0.38 0.00 -0.38
Total Usable Storage 4.12 3.00 7.12
Operational Storage 1.02 1.31 2.33
Equalizing Storage 0.22 0.11 0.33
Standby & Fire Flow Storage 2.07 1.00 3.07
Total Required Storage 3.31 2.42 5.73
Surplus Storage 0.81 0.58 1.39
Description
All Zones except 325 Zone
(MG)
325 Zone
(MG)
Total System
(MG)
Usable Storage (MG)
Required Storage (MG)
Future Storage Analysis Results
The future storage analysis was performed to determine the adequacy of the City’s existing
reservoirs to meet the future storage requirements, based on projected demands for the year
2028. The demands used in this analysis are projected demands without reductions from
conservation efforts. The results of the future storage analysis indicate that the existing storage
facilities have sufficient capacity to meet the future demands of the system in 2028, as shown in
Table 7-5. Therefore, additional storage capacity is not required within the 20-year planning
period. A number of improvements to the existing reservoirs, not related to capacity, are
planned by the City and identified in Chapter 9.
Packet Page 93 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-7 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Table 7-5
Future Storage Capacity Evaluation
Maximum Storage Capacity 4.50 3.00 7.50
Dead (Non-usable) Storage -0.38 0.00 -0.38
Total Usable Storage 4.12 3.00 7.12
Operational Storage 1.02 1.31 2.33
Equalizing Storage 0.23 0.11 0.34
Standby & Fire Flow Storage 2.50 1.21 3.72
Total Required Storage 3.75 2.64 6.39
Surplus Storage 0.37 0.36 0.73
Description
All Zones except 325 Zone
(MG)
325 Zone
(MG)
Total System
(MG)
Usable Storage (MG)
Required Storage (MG)
DISTRIBUTION AND TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
This section evaluates the City’s existing distribution and transmission water mains to
determine if they are sized and looped adequately to provide the necessary flow rates and
pressures to meet the existing and future requirements of the system.
Analysis Criteria
The criteria used to evaluate the City’s distribution and transmission system is contained in
WAC 246-290-230 Distribution Systems. The pressure analysis criteria states that the
distribution system “…shall be designed with the capacity to deliver the design peak hour
demand quantity of water at 30 psi under peak hour demand flow conditions measured at all
existing and proposed service water meters”. It also states that if fire flow is to be provided,
“… the distribution system shall also provide maximum day demand (MDD) plus the
required fire flow at a pressure of at least 20 psi at all points throughout the distribution
system”.
Hydraulic Model
A hydraulic computer model of the City’s water system was used to evaluate the existing
system and identify proposed improvements to resolve deficiencies. The hydraulic model
was also used to evaluate the system to demonstrate that the proposed improvements will
eliminate the identified deficiencies and meet the future demand requirements. A description
of the hydraulic model and settings used for the analyses follows.
Packet Page 94 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-8 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Description
The City’s existing water system was modeled with InfoWater version 7.0, a GIS based
modeling program developed by MWH Soft. All existing facilities and water mains in the
City’s water system were modeled, including recent improvements.
Demand Data
The hydraulic model contains average day demands of the existing system, based on 2008
demand data. A global demand factor was used to adjust the demands to reflect future 2028
demand levels. Demand peaking factors from Chapter 4 were used to adjust demand levels
to peak day demand for the fire flow analyses and peak hour demand for the pressure
analysis.
Facility Data
The hydraulic model of the existing system for the pressure analysis contains all active
existing system facilities with settings that correspond to peak hour demand events. The
Alderwood Supply Station was operating in pressure control mode to maintain pressures in
the 596 Zone. The Five Corners Pump Station was modeled to reflect the recent pump
replacement improvements. The reservoirs were modeled with water levels that reflect full
utilization of operational and equalizing storage. All active pressure reducing stations were
modeled as being in service and at their normal set points.
The hydraulic model of the existing system for the fire flow analyses contains all active
existing system facilities with settings that correspond to peak day demand events. The
Alderwood Supply Station was operating in pressure control mode to maintain pressures in
the 596 Zone. The Five Corners Pump Station was modeled to operate according to recent
pump replacement improvements. The reservoirs were modeled with water levels that reflect
full utilization of operational, equalizing and fire flow storage. The depletion of fire flow
storage for the analyses in all pressure zones, except the 325 Zone, was based on a maximum
fire flow requirement of 5,000 gpm for a 4-hour duration. The depletion of fire flow storage
for the analyses in the 325 Zone was based on a maximum fire flow requirement of 3,000
gpm for a 3-hour duration. All active pressure reducing stations were modeled as being in
service and at their normal set points.
The hydraulic model of the proposed system in the year 2028 contains all active existing
system facilities and planned system improvements that are identified in Chapter 9. The
settings for all active existing and proposed facilities were set to correspond to the future
peak day demand events for the fire flow analysis of the proposed water system. Otherwise,
facility settings were the same as in the existing system analyses.
Calibration
Hydraulic model calibration is the process of using field pressure and flow data to improve
the accuracy of the hydraulic model so that it can be used to accurately simulate operation of
the actual water system. Initial calibration was accomplished by adjusting water main
roughness coefficients based on a compilation of pipe material and year data. Additional
Packet Page 95 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-9 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
calibration of the model was achieved using field flow and pressure data, which was
collected from flow tests that the City performed throughout the system for this task.
Hydraulic Analyses Results
Several hydraulic analyses were performed to determine the capability of the system to meet
the pressure and flow requirements identified in Chapter 5 and contained in WAC 246-290-
230. The first analysis was performed to evaluate pressures throughout the system under
existing (i.e., 2008) peak hour demand conditions. The results of this analysis were used to
identify locations of low and high pressures. To satisfy the minimum pressure requirements,
the pressure at all water service locations must be at least 30 psi during these demand
conditions. The results of this analysis indicated that all areas of the system have pressures
greater than 30 psi.
Fire flow analyses were performed throughout the system to determine the capability of the
existing water system to provide adequate fire flow under peak day demand conditions. A
separate fire flow analysis was performed for each node in the hydraulic model to determine
the available fire flow at a minimum residual pressure of 20 psi. For each node analyzed, the
resulting fire flow was compared to its target fire flow requirement, which was assigned
according to the land use classification that it is located within, as summarized in Table 4-9.
A summary of the results of the analyses for representative locations with the lowest fire
flow in each pressure zone is shown in Table 7-6. The available fire flow shown in the table
represents the lowest flow in the area from a single fire hydrant location. The available fire
flow from other nearby hydrants that would also be used to fight an actual fire is greater than
the amounts shown in the table. Multiple fire hydrants are generally used to extinguish a fire
in order to generate higher flows and simultaneously fight the fire from multiple locations.
The single hydrant modeling approach is used primarily for planning purposes only in order
to locate areas in the system that should be improved to ensure sufficient fire flow is
available in each area of the system.
The results of the fire flow analyses were used to identify improvements for water mains that
are undersized or not looped adequately to provide sufficient fire flow. Upon completion of
the existing system fire flow analyses, proposed water main improvements were included in the
model and fire flow analyses were performed throughout the system to demonstrate that the
improvements eliminate the existing system deficiencies and meet the future requirements of
the system. These analyses were modeled under future year 2028 demand conditions without
planned reductions from conservation to ensure that the improvements are sized sufficiently to
meet the most stringent requirements anticipated in the future.
The results of the fire flow analyses with planned improvements are summarized in Table 7-6.
These results show that fire flows are significantly increased with the proposed water main
improvements. A description of the planned improvements and a figure that shows their
location is presented in Chapter 9.
Packet Page 96 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-10 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Table 7-6
Fire Flow Analysis Summary
Single Family Residential Area 172nd St & 67th Ave 596 390 1,570 1,000
Seaview Elementary School 188th St & 86th Pl 596 390 3,530 3,000
Single Family Residential Area Sierra Dr & 81st Pl 596 390 1,570 1,000
Multi Family Residential Area 212th St & 81st Pl 596 1,180 3,700 3,000
Stevens Hospital 212th St & 76th Ave 596 4,300 6,000 5,000
Stevens Hospital 216th St & 76th Ave 596 4,520 5,870 5,000
Commercial Area 212th St & 72nd Ave 596 2,630 5,490 3,000
Single Family Residential Area Lake Ballinger Way 596 820 1,570 1,000
Maplewood School 200th St & 84th Ave 596 1,600 4,370 3,000
Commercial Area 244th St SW 596 1,500 2,440 3,000
Commercial Area Edmonds Way & Hwy 99 596 2,250 4,140 3,000
Single Family Residential Area 192nd St & 93rd Pl 505 390 1,570 1,000
Single Family Residential Area 164th St & 72nd Ave 500 390 1,570 1,000
Single Family Residential Area 9th Ave & Sea Vista Pl 486 480 1,740 1,000
Single Family Residential Area 76th Ave & Braemar Dr 425 870 1,560 1,000
Single Family Residential Area 176th St & Sound View Dr 425 880 1,570 1,000
Single Family Residential Area Viewland Way & 12th Ave N 420 400 3,860 1,000
Single Family Residential Area Olympic Ave & Glen St 420 800 1,590 1,000
Single Family Residential Area Sea Lawn Dr 325 880 1,570 1,000
Single Family Residential Area Northern Ocean Ave 325 390 1,570 1,000
Commercial Area Daley St & 3rd Ave N 325 2,760 3,100 3,000
Multi Family Residential Area Glen St & 6th Ave N 325 2,320 4,730 3,000
Holy Rosary School Daley St & 8th Ave N 325 1,400 4,960 3,000
Commercial Area Main St & Railroad Ave 325 880 2,440 1,000
Commercial Area Erben Dr & 4th Ave S 325 1,000 4,110 3,000
Available Fire Flow (gpm) at 20 psi
Description Approximate Location
Pressure
Zone
Existing
System 1
Future System with
Improvements 1
Target
Fire Flow
(gpm)
1. Fire flows shown are from a single fire hydrant. Higher flows are commonly available from nearby hydrants. See page 7-9 for more information.
SYSTEM CAPACITY
System capacity analyses were performed to determine the maximum number of equivalent
residential units (ERUs) that the system can serve, based on an independent evaluation of
each component of the City’s water system. A separate analysis was performed for the
existing system with 2008 demand levels and the future system with year 2028 projected
demand levels. The results of these analyses provide the City with information to ensure
sufficient capacity is available when reviewing applications for new connections to the water
system.
Determining Adequate Water Supply for New Buildings
By law, governments cannot issue a building permit until water is available for the
applicant’s property. The requirement for providing evidence of an adequate water supply
was codified in 1990 under Title 19.27.097 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) in
the Building Code Section. To assist governments with implementing these requirements,
Packet Page 97 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-11 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
the Department of Health has developed a handbook titled Guidelines for Determining Water
Availability for New Buildings. A public water system will issue a "Certificate of Water
Availability" or similar document during the building permit review process when there is
sufficient water supply to meet the domestic water service and fire flow requirements of the
applicant’s proposed project.
Analysis Criteria
The capacity of the City’s water system and ability to serve additional customers is based on
the limiting capacity of either supply or storage, whichever facility has the least capacity.
The capacity analysis for supply was computed from the Alderwood Supply Station capacity
and the system’s peak day demand per ERU. The capacity analysis for storage was
computed from the total usable capacity of the storage facilities and the storage requirement
per ERU. The storage requirement per ERU was determined from the existing storage
requirement presented in this chapter and existing ERUs presented in Chapter 4.
Existing System Capacity Analysis Results
The results of the existing system capacity analysis, as shown in Table 7-7, indicate that the
existing system has sufficient capacity to serve an additional 2,276 ERUs. The Alderwood
Supply Station is the limiting facility of the system, as shown in the table.
Table 7-7
Existing System Capacity Analysis
Average Day Demand Per ERU (gal/day)236
Peak Day Demand Per ERU (gal/day)472
Peak Hour Demand Per ERU (gal/day)850
Limiting Supply Rate - AWWD Supply Station (gal/day)7,920,000
Peak Day Demand Per ERU (gal/day)472
Maximum Supply Capacity (ERUs)16,776
Maximum Storage Capacity (gal)7,118,725
Storage Requirement Per ERU (gal)395
Maximum Storage Capacity (ERUs)18,011
Based on Limiting Facility - Supply 16,776
Maximum System Capacity (ERUs)16,776
Existing (2008) ERUs 14,500
Available System Capacity (ERUs)2,276
Demands Per ERU Basis
Supply Capacity
Storage Capacity
Maximum System Capacity
Available System Capacity
Packet Page 98 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-12 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Future System Capacity Analysis Results
The results of the 20-year projected system capacity analysis, as shown in Table 7-8,
indicate that the water system in the year 2028 will have sufficient capacity to serve an
additional 1,783 ERUs. Whereas supply was the limiting facility for the existing system
capacity analysis, storage is the limiting facility for this analysis. This is due to the increased
capacity of the City’s Alderwood Supply Station upon completion of planned improvements
for this facility, which is discussed in Chapter 9.
Table 7-8
20-Year Projected System Capacity Analysis
Average Day Demand Per ERU (gal/day)236
Peak Day Demand Per ERU (gal/day)472
Peak Hour Demand Per ERU (gal/day)850
Limiting Supply Rate - AWWD Supply Station (gal/day)10,080,000
Peak Day Demand Per ERU (gal/day)472
Maximum Supply Capacity (ERUs)21,351
Maximum Storage Capacity (gal)7,118,725
Storage Requirement Per ERU (gal)407
Maximum Storage Capacity (ERUs)17,483
Based on Limiting Facility - Storage 17,483
Maximum System Capacity (ERUs)17,483
Projected (2028) ERUs 15,700
Available System Capacity (ERUs)1,783
Demands Per ERU Basis
Supply Capacity
Storage Capacity
Maximum System Capacity
Available System Capacity
Packet Page 99 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Page 9-1 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
9
Water System Improvements
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents water system improvements that the City plans to implement within the
20-year planning period to resolve existing system deficiencies and meet the future demands
of the water system. The water system improvements were identified from the results of the
water system analyses presented in Chapter 7 and have been sized to accommodate the
projected demands shown in Chapter 4. This chapter also presents criteria used for
prioritizing the capital improvements, planning level project cost estimates, and an
implementation schedule for the improvements.
DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS
This section provides a general description of capital improvements that have been completed
since the last water system plan was prepared in 2002 and provides a brief description of the
currently planned capital improvements. The water system improvements are shown
schematically in Figure 9-1 and summarized in a table near the end of this chapter.
The water system improvements are grouped into the following categories and briefly
described following the discussion of recently completed improvements:
Water Main Improvements
PRV Station and Pressure Relief Improvements
Facility Improvements
Other Improvements
Water System Improvements Completed Since 2002
The City has completed several water system improvements that were identified in the 2002
Comprehensive Water System Plan. These include an upgrade to the Five Corners Pump
Station, seismic and control valve improvements at the reservoir sites, pressure reducing
station improvements, and replacement of old and undersized water main. A summary of
water system improvements completed since 2002 is shown in Table 9-1.
Packet Page 100 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-2 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Table 9-1
Water System Improvements Completed Since 2002
2002 WSP
CIP No.Project Description Length
T-1 South Perrinville Area Water Main Improvements 4,470 LF
T-2 Seaview Area Water Main Improvements 4,140 LF
T-3 Alderwood Master Meter Improvements N/A
T-4 Chase Lake Area Water Main Improvements 4,560 LF
T-5 North Ballinger Water Main Improvements 2,345 LF
T-6 77th Place W Water Main Improvements 2,000 LF
T-7 South Ballinger Area Water Main Improvements 4,760 LF
T-8 College Place Area Water Main Improvements 5,610 LF
T-9 80th Place W Water Main Improvements 640 LF
T-11 Cory Road Water Main Improvements 250 LF
T-12 81st Place W Water Main Improvements 1,340 LF
T-15 215th Street SW Water Main Improvements 200 LF
T-15 215th Place SW Water Main Improvements 300 LF
T-15 92nd Place W Water Main Improvements 350 LF
SC-1 Five Corners Pump Station Improvements N/A
SC-2 Seismic Improvements for Reservoirs N/A
SC-3 Reservoir Security Study & Improvements N/A
SC-4 Chlorine Residual Analyzers N/A
SC-5 Miscellaneous PRV Improvements N/A
Water Main Improvements
The following water main improvements were identified from the results of the distribution
system analyses presented in Chapter 7 and from the City’s list of planned projects.
CIP WM1: Annual Water Main Replacement Program
Deficiency: Most of the water mains to be replaced within this ongoing program are aging,
undersized water mains that do not provide adequate fire flow to meet current requirements.
Much of this water main is older cast iron pipe and some areas have had occurrences of leaks
or breaks. Water main improvement projects previously identified in the City’s CIP program
in 2006, 2007 and 2008 have been carried forward and are included within this CIP project.
Improvement: Replace existing water main with new ductile iron water main in accordance
with the City’s construction standards. The individual water main improvements grouped
under this project are shown in Figure 9-1. Information on the individual projects, including
proposed water main size, location and project cost estimate is presented later in this chapter
in Table 9-6. The selection of specific projects will be accomplished annually during the
City’s budget development process and will be guided by the prioritization presented later in
this chapter. This provides the City with the flexibility to coordinate these projects with
other projects that may occur within the same area. The fire hydrant portion of the new water
main installations has been separated from this project and grouped under project CIP M1 for
cost allocation purposes.
Packet Page 101 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-3 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
CIP WM2: 24-inch Transmission Main Isolation Valves
Deficiency: The existing 24-inch transmission main provides water from the Alderwood
Supply Station to the 596 Zone and does not have enough valves to shut down and isolate
portions of the transmission main for maintenance or repairs.
Improvement: Install up to approximately six isolation valves along the 24-inch transmission
main. The total number of valves and valve locations will be determined during design.
CIP WM3: BNSF Crossings Water Main
Deficiency: The City’s existing water main crossings beneath BNSF’s right of way are not
adequate for BNSF’s future second track.
Improvement: Upgrade the existing 12-inch diameter water main crossings beneath BNSF’s
right of way at Main Street and Dayton Street by installing 18-inch diameter steel casings
that will house the City’s 12-inch diameter water mains. The project will also replace an
existing water main at Brackett’s Landing North Park and add a new water main in James
Street between Sunset Avenue and Railroad Street to improve fire flow service.
CIP WM4: Shell Valley Access Road Water Main
Deficiency: The existing 8-inch diameter water main in Pioneer Way is a dead-end service.
Improvement: Install approximately 300 feet of new 8-inch diameter water main from Main
Street to the existing valve on the water main in Pioneer Way. The new water main will
eliminate the dead-end main on Pioneer Way and improve the water system. The water main
will be installed during construction of the Shell Valley Access Road improvements.
PRV Station and Pressure Relief Improvements
The following PRV station improvements and pressure relief improvements include new
facilities, abandoning old facilities, and improvements to existing facilities.
CIP PRV1: New 596/420 Zone Pressure Reducing Station
Deficiency: Water supply to the 420 Zone is conveyed from the 596 Zone through one
pressure reducing station, thereby lacking supply redundancy. Without a second supply
connection and sufficient water main looping, the single PRV station does not provide
adequate fire flow into the 420 Zone.
Improvement: Install a new PRV station near the intersection of Viewland Way and 12th
Avenue. The size of the control valves and exact location of the station will be determined
during design.
Packet Page 102 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-4 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
CIP PRV2: PRV Station 11 Abandonment (184th St & 84th Ave)
Deficiency: This existing PRV station has been off-line for several years and is no longer
needed.
Improvement: Abandon the PRV station to eliminate any future maintenance requirements
of this facility.
CIP PRV3: PRV Station 12 Abandonment (Olympic View Drive & Sunset Way)
Deficiency: This existing PRV station has been off-line for a several years and is no longer
needed.
Improvement: Abandon the PRV station to eliminate any future maintenance requirements
of this facility.
CIP PRV4: System-Wide Pressure Relief Improvements
Deficiency: The existing water system does not have sufficient pressure relief facilities in all
pressure zones to protect the system from excessively high pressures that would occur if a
control valve fails in the open position in one of the pressure reducing stations or supply
stations.
Improvement: Install new pressure relief stations or modify existing pressure reducing
stations to include a pressure relief valve. A system-wide evaluation will be performed
during the preliminary design phase of the project to determine the size, location, and
recommended improvements to provide pressure relief to the entire water system.
CIP PRV5: Annual PRV Station Improvements Program
Deficiency: Several of the existing PRV stations are old and have reached the end of their
useful service life. Other PRV stations are in need of minor improvements to ensure long-
term operation and reliability.
Improvement: Annually improve or replace PRV stations throughout the system. The City
will evaluate needs and select one or more PRV stations to be improved each year.
Facility Improvements
The following water system facility projects consist of improvements to existing facilities to
improve operation, increase capacity, or to ensure long-term performance of the facility.
CIP F1: Alderwood Supply Station Improvements
Deficiency: The supply station is not setup to operate correctly with the Five Corners Pump
Station and requires manual operation during high demand periods. The station also lacks
sufficient integration with the City’s SCADA system.
Packet Page 103 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-5 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Improvement: Implement improvements to expand the capacity of the station to improve
system operation during peak demand periods when the Five Corners Pump Station is
operating in conjunction with the supply station, including improvements to properly
integrate the station with the City’s SCADA system.
CIP F2: Seaview Reservoir Improvements
Deficiency: The existing reservoir vents are not secure and could allow stormwater to enter
the reservoir. Better monitoring of water quality is needed at the reservoir site.
Improvement: Replace the existing reservoir vents with new vents and install water quality
sampling improvements.
CIP F3: Yost Reservoir Improvements
Deficiency: The existing reservoir vents are not secure and could allow stormwater to enter
the reservoir. Better monitoring of water quality is needed at the reservoir site. Access into
the reservoir for inspection or maintenance purposes is difficult through the existing manhole
structure, located at the outer edge of the Yost Park tennis court.
Improvement: Replace the existing reservoir vents with new vents and install water quality
sampling improvements. Replace the existing access manhole cover with a new locking
access hatch.
CIP F4: Five Corners Pump Station Improvements
Deficiency: The pump station has insufficient capacity and control capabilities to properly
operate in conjunction with the Alderwood Supply Station and meet the supply requirements
of the 596 Zone.
Improvement: Replace the existing pumps with new pumps and VFDs (variable frequency
drives). Install piping, control valve, and SCADA improvements. These improvements were
underway in 2009 and completed in 2010.
CIP F5: Five Corners 3.0 MG Reservoir Recoating
Deficiency: The last interior and exterior coating of the steel reservoir was completed in
1994. The reservoir should be recoated every 15 to 20 years, based on the typical life of
coating on steel reservoirs.
Improvement: Recoat the interior and exterior of the reservoir to prevent premature
corrosion of the facility. Inspect and sample the interior and exterior reservoir coatings
approximately one year prior to commencement of the project to determine the properties of
the existing coatings and requirements for the project.
Packet Page 104 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-6 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
CIP F6: Five Corners 1.5 MG Reservoir Recoating
Deficiency: The last interior and exterior coating of the steel reservoir was completed in
1994. The reservoir should be recoated every 15 to 20 years, based on the typical life of
coating on steel reservoirs.
Improvement: Recoat the interior and exterior of the reservoir to prevent premature
corrosion of the facility. Inspect and sample the interior and exterior reservoir coatings
approximately one year prior to commencement of the project to determine the properties of
the existing coatings and requirements for the project.
Other Improvements
CIP M1: Fire Hydrant Improvements
Deficiency: The City has identified approximately 12 fire hydrants that are old and have
reached the end of their useful service life. Fire hydrants on water mains to be replaced
under the Annual Water Main Replacement Program (CIP WM1) are old and will not be
reused on the new water mains.
Improvement: Replace the 12 old fire hydrants with new fire hydrants. This project also
includes the fire hydrant portion of the new water main installations planned under CIP
WM1.
CIP M2: AMR Meter Evaluation Study
Deficiency: The City’s existing water customer meters will eventually reach the end of their
useful service life and need replacing. New automatic meter reading (AMR) technologies are
available that offer improved metering accuracy, reduced labor requirements, and capabilities
that support water conservation efforts.
Improvement: Conduct a study that evaluates the different AMR technologies and costs,
potential benefits to the City, and provides recommendations for meter replacements and
implementation of a long-term metering system.
CIP M3: Telemetry System Improvements
Deficiency: The telemetry system will need to be upgraded on a regular basis to maintain up-
to-date equipment to ensure reliable and continuous operation, with a major system upgrade
anticipated in approximately 2020.
Improvement: Upgrade the hardware and software, as necessary, to keep the system up-to-
date. Replacement of major components is anticipated in approximately 2020.
Packet Page 105 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-7 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
CIP M4: Comprehensive Water System Plan Update
Deficiency: The City is required to update its Comprehensive Water System Plan every six
years and submit to the Department of Health for review and approval. Drinking water
regulations are continuously changing and must be addressed in the City’s Comprehensive
Water System Plan.
Improvement: Update the Comprehensive Water System Plan every six years to meet the
requirements that are in effect at the time of the update and to provide the City with an
updated plan for implementing water system improvements.
PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
Project costs were estimated for each of the planned improvements and are presented in 2009
dollars. The planning level project cost estimates include the estimated construction cost and
indirect costs. The construction cost estimate portion includes all construction related costs,
sales tax and a 10 percent contingency. The indirect cost portion is estimated at 35 percent of
the construction cost and includes engineering (preliminary design, final design, and
construction management services), surveying, permitting, legal, and administrative services.
Water Main Cost Estimates
Construction costs for water main projects were estimated using the water main unit costs
(i.e., cost per foot length) shown in Table 9-2. The unit cost of construction for each water
main size is based on estimates of all construction-related improvements, which include
materials and labor for the water main installation, water services, fittings, valves,
connections to the existing system, trench restoration, full-width roadway asphalt overlay,
and other work for a complete installation. The indirect cost component is not included in
the water main unit costs.
Table 9-2
Water Main Unit Costs for Construction
Water Main Construction Cost
Diameter per Foot Length
(inches)(2009 $$/LF)
8 $230
12 $280
Costs related to the fire hydrant portion of the water main improvements are included in the
unit costs shown in Table 9-2, but have been removed from project CIP WM1 and shown
separately under project CIP M1 in Table 9-7 near the end of this chapter.
Packet Page 106 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-8 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
PRIORITIZING IMPROVEMENTS
The planned improvements were prioritized using established criteria to help guide the City
with scheduling and budgeting water system improvement projects in future years. A
description of the criteria is provided below.
Prioritizing Water Main Improvements
Table 9-3 shows the criteria used for prioritizing the water main improvements. The criteria
are based on the existing water main deficiencies, as determined by the categories shown in
the table. Each category is assigned a weight factor that reflects the relative importance of
each category compared to the others. The Existing Water Main Fire Flow Capability
category ranks the water main improvements based on the ability of the existing water mains
to provide the required fire flow, as determined from the results of the hydraulic analyses
presented in Chapter 7. The Occurrence of Leaks or Breaks category ranks the water main
improvements based on the amount of leaks or breaks incidents and maintenance required in
the past. The Existing Water Main Year of Installation and Existing Water Main Material
categories rank the water main improvements based on the existing pipe age and material.
The water main priority ranking criteria was applied to each water main improvement
project, which resulted in a total ranking score for each project. The results of the priority
ranking are summarized in Table 9-4. Table 9-5 presents the results in an order that is
sorted according to total ranking points.
Table 9-3
Water Main Improvements Priority Ranking Criteria
Weight
Factor
Weighted
Points
Available Fire Flow is 69%or 4 12
Available Fire Flow is 70%or 80%of Target Fire Flow 4 8
Available Fire Flow is 90%or 100%of Target Fire Flow 4 4
4 8
4 4
1929 -3 9
1950 -3 6
1970 &3 3
2 6
2 4
HDPE or 2 2Ductile Iron
3
2
1
Points
Existing Water Main Fire Flow Capability
3
2
1
Category
Less of Target Fire Flow
Occurrence of Leaks or Breaks
2 Frequent Reports of Leaks or Breaks
1 Occasional Reports of Leaks or Breaks
Existing Water Main Year of Installation
3
2
1
Existing Water Main Material
1949
1969
after
Steel
Cast Iron
Packet Page 107 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-9 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Table 9-4
Water Main Improvements Priority Ranking – Sorted by CIP Number
Priority Ranking Points Priority Ranking Points
Leaks/Pipe Total
CIP No.Fire Flow Breaks Pipe Year Material Points
1 11 0 6 3 20
2 12 0 8 4 24
3 10 0 5 3 18
4 8 0 8 4 20
5 8 0 3 4 15
6 8 0 3 2 13
7 8 0 6 2 16
8 6 0 2 2 10
9*8 0 5 3 16
10 8 0 3 4 15
11 12 0 3 6 21
12 12 0 6 4 22
13 12 0 3 4 19
14 9 0 3 3 15
15 8 0 3 2 13
16 11 0 4 3 18
17 12 0 3 2 17
18 9 0 3 3 15
19 8 0 3 4 15
20 12 0 5 4 20
21 8 0 5 4 17
22 12 0 3 2 17
23 12 0 3 2 17
24 8 0 3 4 15
25 4 0 6 4 14
26 8 0 3 4 15
27 8 0 6 4 18
28 8 0 3 2 13
29 8 0 3 4 15
30 8 0 3 4 15
31 12 0 6 3 21
32 8 0 6 4 18
33 8 0 3 2 13
34 8 0 6 4 18
35 8 0 6 2 16
36 8 0 3 2 13
37 10 0 3 2 15
38 8 0 6 4 18
39 8 0 3 4 15
40 8 0 3 2 13
41 9 0 5 3 17
42 8 0 3 2 13
43 8 0 6 4 18
44 8 0 3 4 15
45*12 0 3 4 19
46 10 0 3 3 16
47 12 0 3 4 19
48 12 0 3 2 17
49 8 0 3 2 13
50 4 0 5 2 11
51 12 0 4 3 19
52 12 0 9 4 25
53 8 0 3 2 13
54 8 0 6 4 18
55 8 0 6 4 18
56 8 0 3 4 15
57 8 0 3 4 15
58 8 0 5 4 17
59 12 0 6 4 22
60 12 0 2 3 17
61 12 0 3 3 18
62 12 4 3 2 21
63 8 4 3 4 19
Packet Page 108 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-10 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Table 9-4
Water Main Improvements Priority Ranking – Sorted by CIP Number (continued)
Priority Ranking Points Priority Ranking Points
Leaks/Pipe Total
CIP No.Fire Flow Breaks Pipe Year Material Points
64 11 4 3 2 20
65 10 4 3 3 21
66 8 0 3 4 15
67 8 0 5 2 15
68 8 8 3 4 23
69 12 0 6 4 22
70 8 0 3 2 13
71 12 0 3 4 19
72 12 0 5 3 20
73 8 0 3 3 14
74 4 0 3 4 11
75 12 0 3 3 18
76 8 0 3 4 15
77 0 0 2 2 4
78 0 0 0 0 0
79 0 0 3 4 7
80 0 0 6 6 12
81 0 0 3 4 7
82 0 0 3 4 7
83 0 0 3 4 7
84 0 0 3 4 7
85 0 0 0 0 0
86 0 0 0 0 0
87 0 0 0 0 0
88*0 0 3 4 7
89*0 0 3 4 7
90*0 0 3 4 7
91*0 0 9 6 15
92*0 0 6 4 10
93*0 0 3 4 7
94*0 0 3 4 7
95*6 0 5 5 16
96*0 0 3 6 9
97*0 0 0 0 0
98*0 0 0 0 0
99*12 0 6 6 24
100*0 0 0 0 0
101*0 8 9 4 21
102*12 4 6 4 26
103*12 0 3 4 19
104*0 0 3 4 7
105*8 0 0 0 8
106 0 0 0 0 0
107 0 0 0 0 0
108 0 0 9 4 13
109 0 0 9 4 13
110 0 0 9 4 13
111 0 0 9 4 13
112 0 0 9 4 13
113 0 0 9 4 13
114 0 0 9 4 13
115 0 0 9 4 13
116 0 0 9 4 13
117 0 0 9 4 13
118 0 0 9 4 13
119 0 0 9 4 13
120 0 0 9 4 13
121 0 0 9 4 13
122 0 0 9 4 13
123 0 0 9 4 13
124 0 0 9 4 13
125 0 0 9 4 13
126 0 0 9 4 13
* 2006-2008 CIP projects carried forward
Packet Page 109 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-11 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Table 9-5
Water Main Improvements Priority Ranking – Sorted by Total Points
Priority Ranking Points
Leaks/Pipe Total
CIP No.Fire Flow Breaks Pipe Year Material Points
102*12 4 6 4 26
52 12 0 9 4 25
99*12 0 6 6 24
2 12 0 8 4 24
68 8 8 3 4 23
12 12 0 6 4 22
59 12 0 6 4 22
69 12 0 6 4 22
11 12 0 3 6 21
31 12 0 6 3 21
62 12 4 3 2 21
101*0 8 9 4 21
65 10 4 3 3 21
20 12 0 5 4 20
64 11 4 3 2 20
1 11 0 6 3 20
4 8 0 8 4 20
72 12 0 5 3 20
13 12 0 3 4 19
45*12 0 3 4 19
47 12 0 3 4 19
63 8 4 3 4 19
71 12 0 3 4 19
103*12 0 3 4 19
51 12 0 4 3 19
3 10 0 5 3 18
16 11 0 4 3 18
27 8 0 6 4 18
32 8 0 6 4 18
34 8 0 6 4 18
38 8 0 6 4 18
43 8 0 6 4 18
54 8 0 6 4 18
55 8 0 6 4 18
61 12 0 3 3 18
75 12 0 3 3 18
60 12 0 2 3 17
17 12 0 3 2 17
22 12 0 3 2 17
23 12 0 3 2 17
41 9 0 5 3 17
48 12 0 3 2 17
21 8 0 5 4 17
58 8 0 5 4 17
7 8 0 6 2 16
9*8 0 5 3 16
35 8 0 6 2 16
46 10 0 3 3 16
95*6 0 5 5 16
5 8 0 3 4 15
10 8 0 3 4 15
18 9 0 3 3 15
19 8 0 3 4 15
26 8 0 3 4 15
29 8 0 3 4 15
30 8 0 3 4 15
37 10 0 3 2 15
39 8 0 3 4 15
44 8 0 3 4 15
56 8 0 3 4 15
57 8 0 3 4 15
66 8 0 3 4 15
76 8 0 3 4 15
Packet Page 110 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-12 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Table 9-5
Water Main Improvements Priority Ranking – Sorted by Total Points (continued)
Priority Ranking Points
Leaks/Pipe Total
CIP No.Fire Flow Breaks Pipe Year Material Points
91*0 0 9 6 15
14 9 0 3 3 15
24 8 0 3 4 15
67 8 0 5 2 15
25 4 0 6 4 14
73 8 0 3 3 14
70 8 0 3 2 13
6 8 0 3 2 13
15 8 0 3 2 13
28 8 0 3 2 13
33 8 0 3 2 13
36 8 0 3 2 13
40 8 0 3 2 13
42 8 0 3 2 13
49 8 0 3 2 13
53 8 0 3 2 13
108 0 0 9 4 13
109 0 0 9 4 13
110 0 0 9 4 13
111 0 0 9 4 13
112 0 0 9 4 13
113 0 0 9 4 13
114 0 0 9 4 13
115 0 0 9 4 13
116 0 0 9 4 13
117 0 0 9 4 13
118 0 0 9 4 13
119 0 0 9 4 13
120 0 0 9 4 13
121 0 0 9 4 13
122 0 0 9 4 13
123 0 0 9 4 13
124 0 0 9 4 13
125 0 0 9 4 13
126 0 0 9 4 13
80 0 0 6 6 12
74 4 0 3 4 11
50 4 0 5 2 11
92*0 0 6 4 10
8 6 0 2 2 10
96*0 0 3 6 9
105*8 0 0 0 8
79 0 0 3 4 7
81 0 0 3 4 7
82 0 0 3 4 7
83 0 0 3 4 7
84 0 0 3 4 7
88*0 0 3 4 7
89*0 0 3 4 7
90*0 0 3 4 7
93*0 0 3 4 7
94*0 0 3 4 7
104*0 0 3 4 7
77 0 0 2 2 4
78 0 0 0 0 0
85 0 0 0 0 0
86 0 0 0 0 0
87 0 0 0 0 0
97*0 0 0 0 0
98*0 0 0 0 0
100*0 0 0 0 0
106 0 0 0 0 0
107 0 0 0 0 0
* 2006-2008 CIP projects carried forward
Packet Page 111 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-13 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Prioritizing Other Improvements
All other improvements were prioritized based on project need, maintenance requirements,
existing deficiencies, capacity requirements, and reliability considerations. The results of the
priority ranking of the water main and all other improvements were used to schedule the
improvements, as presented in the section that follows.
SCHEDULE OF IMPROVEMENTS
All water main projects are shown in Table 9-6, which includes a breakdown of each project
along with the proposed pipe size, location, and estimated project cost. The estimated project
costs are based on 2009 dollars and include all costs (engineering, construction and other
costs).
The selection and implementation of the water main projects will be accomplished annually
by the City, utilizing both the priority ranking information presented earlier in this plan and
other information to ensure projects representing the greatest need are completed first. For
example, water main projects in an area with low fire flow are a high priority and will be
scheduled before projects in a low priority area. Examples of additional information that
would be used to establish the annual project list include but are not limited to; upcoming
City and private sector utility projects and City or State transportation projects to be
constructed in the same rights-of-way as water main projects. The process would also
consider the affect that water main improvements installed as part of private property
development projects would have on fire flows, which may change the priorities of projects
on the annual list of water main replacements. This approach provides the City with the
flexibility to coordinate water main projects with other projects planned for the same area to
capture efficiencies and reduce project costs.
The water main projects will be implemented under the Annual Water Main Replacement
Program, which is identified as project WM1 in Table 9-7. An annual budget allowance has
been established for this ongoing program, as shown in the table.
The implementation schedule shown in Table 9-7 includes the previously described water
main improvements and all other improvements described earlier in this chapter that are
planned in the next 20 years. The implementation schedule will be used by the City to assist
in the planning and budgeting of capital improvement projects for the Water Utility.
The project cost estimates shown in the table are based on 2009 dollars for all years shown.
These cost estimates will be adjusted by the City at the time of project implementation to
include an escalation factor that represents inflation and the construction market conditions
anticipated at the actual time of construction. The financial program in Chapter 10 describes
in more detail the escalation factor to be used for future project cost adjustments.
Packet Page 112 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-14 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Table 9-6
Water Main Improvement Projects
CIP Size Description Estimated
No.Length Dia In From To Project Cost
340 8 Pine St B Ave 8th Ave $106,000
350 8 Fir St C Ave 9th Ave $109,000
300 8 Pine St C Ave 8th Ave $93,000
330 8 Fir St B Ave 8th Ave $102,000
300 8 Fir St 7th Ave B Ave $93,000
670 8 B Ave Fir St Pine St $208,000
315 8 Pine St 8th Ave C Ave $98,000
535 8 Sea Vista Pl C Ave 9th Ave $166,000
260 8 C Ave Fir St Sea Vista Pl $81,000
650 8 C Ave Pine St Fir St $202,000
510 8 C Ave 8th Ave C Ave $158,000
330 8 172nd St 67th Ave 68th Ave $102,000
420 8 172nd St Olympic View Drive 67th Ave $130,000
570 8 68th Ave 172nd St Dead-end $177,000
510 8 67th Ave 172nd St Dead-end $158,000
305 8 Aloha Way Daley St Glen St $95,000
810 8 Aloha Way Glen St Dead-end $252,000
5 510 8 81st Ave 206th St Dead-end $158,000
6 570 8 Sea Lawn Dr 171st St Dead-end $177,000
7 1980 8 Lake Ballinger Way 76th Ave Dead-end $615,000
1010 8 Walnut St 9th Ave 8th Ave $314,000
300 8 Walnut St 8th Ave 7th Ave $93,000
390 8 217th St 96th Ave 95th Ave $121,000
940 8 217th St 95th Ave 92nd Ave $292,000
400 8 95th Ave 217th St 218th Pl $124,000
410 8 218th Pl 95th Ave 93rd Pl $127,000
620 8 95th Ave 218th Pl 220th St $193,000
60 8 Spruce St 9th Ave -$19,000
1240 8 Spruce St 9th Ave 96th Ave $385,000
11 760 8 Hillcrest Pl Main St Dead-end $236,000
12 420 8 192nd St 93rd Pl 94th Ave $130,000
490 8 Sierra Dr 80th Ave 81st St Pl $152,000
590 8 81st St Pl Sierra Dr Dead-end $183,000
560 12 82nd Ave 208th Pl Dead-end $212,000
680 12 81st Pl 212th St Dead-end $257,000
720 8 208th Pl 82nd Ave 80th Ave $224,000
735 8 208th Pl 82nd Ave 80th Ave $228,000
1440 12 83rd Ave 84th Ave 82nd Ave $544,000
380 12 84th Ave 212th St 83rd Ave $144,000
465 12 SR 104 Hwy 99 -$176,000
195 12 -SR 104 242nd St $74,000
825 12 242nd St -McAleer Way $312,000
680 12 McAleer Way 242nd St Lake Ballinger Way $257,000
1210 8 Lake Ballinger Way Hwy 99 McAleer Way $376,000
460 12 242nd St Mathat Ballinger Park 78th Pl $174,000
330 12 242nd St 78th Pl 77th Pl $125,000
455 12 77th Pl 242nd St Dead-end $172,000
970 8 Braemar Dr 76th Ave Dead-end $301,000
870 8 175th St 76th Ave Dead-end $270,000
375 8 176th St 76th Ave Sound View Way $116,000
270 8 Sound View Way 176th St Sound View Dr $84,000
470 8 76th Ave 175th St Braemar Dr $146,000
240 8 76th Ave 175th St 176th St $75,000
105 8 76th Ave 176th St 175th St $33,000
850 12 215th St 76th Ave 73rd Pl $321,000
495 12 73rd Pl 216th St 215th St $187,000
270 12 216th St Stevens Hospital 73rd Pl $102,000
680 12 Stevens Hospital --$257,000
690 12 Stevens Hospital --$261,000
50 12 220th St --$19,000
830 12 76th Ave 215th St 212th St $314,000
300 12 76th Ave -216th St $113,000
275 12 76th Ave 216th St -$104,000
200 12 76th Ave 215th St -$76,000
400 12 76th Ave 218th St -$151,000
325 12 76th Ave 218th St 219th St $123,000
325 12 76th Ave 219th St 220th St $123,000
17
18
19
1
2
3
4
8
9*
10
13
14
20
21
15
16
Packet Page 113 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-15 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Table 9-6
Water Main Improvement Projects (continued)
CIP Size Description Estimated
No.Length Dia In From To Project Cost
22 570 12 Seaview Elementary 188th St Dead-end $215,000
140 12 Maplewood School 200th St -$53,000
310 12 Maplewood School --$117,000
550 12 Maplewood School --$208,000
320 12 Maplewood School --$121,000
120 12 Maplewood School -200th St $45,000
340 8 72nd Ave 174th St 173rd St $106,000
330 8 72nd Ave 173rd St 172nd St $102,000
710 8 172nd St 72nd Ave 74th Ave $220,000
290 8 173rd St 72nd Ave 73rd Pl $90,000
490 8 176th St 72nd Ave Dead-end $152,000
230 8 176th St -Dead-end $71,000
26 510 8 179th St 72nd Ave Dead-end $158,000
27 750 12 80th Pl 212th St Dead-end $284,000
28 1010 8 80th Pl 200th St Dead-end $314,000
29 480 8 86th Pl Maplewood Ln Dead-end $149,000
30 505 8 198th Pl Maplewood Ln Dead-end $157,000
390 8 217th St -Dead-end $121,000
390 8 217th St 88th Ave -$121,000
32 450 8 12th Pl N 12th Ave -$140,000
33 335 8 185th Pl 92nd Ave Dead-end $104,000
34 535 8 186th Pl 92nd Ave Dead-end $166,000
35 425 8 -184th St Dead-end $132,000
36 560 8 182nd Pl 88th Ave Dead-end $174,000
700 8 74th Pl Meadowdale Beach Road Dead-end $217,000
570 8 74th Pl Meadowdale Beach Road -$177,000
38 465 8 164th Pl 72nd Ave Dead-end $144,000
39 850 8 192nd Pl 80th Ave Dead-end $264,000
40 620 8 Main St Olympic Ave -$193,000
330 8 9th Ave N Glen St Daley St $102,000
1250 8 Daley St Olympic Ave 9th Ave $388,000
640 8 Glen St Olympic Ave 10th Ave $199,000
1235 8 Sprague St Olympic Ave 9th Ave $383,000
1280 8 Edmonds St Olympic Ave 9th Ave $397,000
43 370 8 179th Pl Talbot Rd Dead-end $115,000
350 8 Wharf St Sound View Pl Olympic View Dr $109,000
515 8 Sound View Pl Wharf St Dead-end $160,000
45*510 8 72nd Ave 164th St 162nd St $158,000
480 8 Water St Sound View Dr Ocean Ave $149,000
580 8 Ocean Ave Water St Dead-end $180,000
47 770 8 Northstream Ln 9th Ave Dead-end $239,000
48 680 8 Puget Ln 8th Ave Dead-end $211,000
49 320 8 Brookmere Dr 8th Ave Dead-end $99,000
580 8 -3rd Ave Daley St $180,000
1045 8 3rd Ave Caspers St -$324,000
670 8 Daley St Brookmere Dr 8th Ave $208,000
635 8 Daley St 9th Ave 8th Ave $197,000
570 8 8th Ave Edmonds St Daley St $177,000
665 8 Aloha St Brookmere Dr -$206,000
1200 8 Aloha Pl Daley St Aloha St $373,000
53 490 8 High St 183rd Pl Dead-end $152,000
54 950 8 79th Ave 186th St 185th Pl $295,000
55 700 8 79th Ave 186th St 185th St $217,000
56 500 8 86th Pl 188th St Dead-end $155,000
57 520 8 170th Pl Olympic View Dr Dead-end $161,000
200 8 177th St 72nd Ave Sound View Ln $62,000
650 8 Sound View Dr Sound View Ln Dead-end $202,000
59 340 8 182nd Pl 72nd Ave Dead-end $106,000
910 12 192nd St 80th Ave 83rd Ave $344,000
450 12 196th St 80th Ave 81st Pl $170,000
270 12 196th St 81st Pl 82nd Pl $102,000
570 12 196th St 82nd Pl 84th Ave $215,000
670 12 196th St 84th Ave 86th Ave $253,000
665 12 196th St 86th Ave 88th Ave $251,000
670 12 88th Ave 196th St 194th St $253,000
600 12 194th St 88th Ave 89th Pl $227,000
465 8 Homeland Dr 5th Ave S Dead-end $144,000
665 8 Holly Dr 5th Ave S Dead-end $206,000
58
60
61
62
25
42
44
46
50
51
23
24
31
37
41
52
Packet Page 114 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-16 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Table 9-6
Water Main Improvement Projects (continued)
CIP Size Description Estimated
No.Length Dia In From To Project Cost
345 12 5th Ave S Pine St Forsyth Ln $130,000
610 12 5th Ave S Forsyth Ln Elm Way $231,000
230 12 5th Ave S Holly Dr Howell Way $87,000
250 12 5th Ave S Holly Dr Walnut St $95,000
180 12 6th Ave S Homeland Dr Howell Way $68,000
280 12 5th Ave S Homeland Dr Hemlock Way $106,000
540 12 5th Ave S Hemlock Way Pine St $204,000
660 8 4th Ave S Howell Way Erben Dr $205,000
350 8 4th Ave S Erben Dr Pine St $109,000
270 12 Howell Way -4th Ave S $102,000
290 12 Pine St 4th Ave S 5th Ave S $110,000
890 12 4th Ave S Dead-end Pine St $336,000
70 12 Howell Way 5th Ave S -$26,000
70 12 Pine St 5th Ave S -$26,000
66 695 8 69th Pl 174th St 176th St $216,000
1510 8 Sunset Ave Edmonds St Caspers St $469,000
580 8 Sunset Ave Edmonds St -$180,000
68 650 8 Cedar St 9th Ave 8th Ave $202,000
69 400 8 Sierra Pl 12th Ave Dead-end $124,000
340 8 200th St 89th Pl 88th Ave $106,000
420 8 200th St Maplewood Dr 89th Pl $130,000
560 8 Maplewood Dr Casecade Dr 200th St $174,000
390 8 Cascade Dr Maplewood Dr 12th Pl $121,000
610 8 92nd Ave Sierra St Cascade Dr $189,000
71 520 8 87th Ave 202nd St 204th St $161,000
70 12 186th St 80th Ave 81st Ave $26,000
330 12 186th St 80th Ave 81st Ave $125,000
510 12 76th Ave -228th St $193,000
110 12 -Hwy 99 76th Ave $42,000
840 12 76th Ave Hwy 99 224th St $318,000
325 8 Fir St 6th Ave S A Ave $101,000
325 8 Fir St A Ave 7th Ave S $101,000
205 8 216th St 73rd Pl -$64,000
310 8 217th St 0 0 $96,000
380 8 Private Property 212th St 213th Pl $118,000
315 8 213th Pl 72nd Ave Private Property $98,000
915 8 72nd Ave 213th Pl 216th St $284,000
76 650 12 12th Ave N Main St Maple St $246,000
310 8 Skyline Dr Dead-end Dead-end $96,000
210 8 Skyline Dr Dead-end Dead-end $65,000
600 8 205th Pl Skyline Dr Maplewood Dr $186,000
400 8 Main St Skyline Dr Park Rd $124,000
40 12 Maple St 10th Ave -$15,000
300 12 9th Ave Dayton St Main St $113,000
300 12 9th Ave Maple St Dayton St $113,000
580 12 9th Ave Main St Edmonds St $219,000
735 12 Maple St 12th Ave N 10th Ave $278,000
620 12 Maple St 10th Ave 9th Ave $234,000
80 640 12 184th St 80th Ave Sound View Dr $242,000
81 630 8 Puget Way 8th Ave 9th Ave $196,000
460 8 10th Ave Carol Way Mountain Ln $143,000
660 8 10th Ave Brookmere St Mountain Ln $205,000
620 8 Puget Way 9th Ave 10th Ave $193,000
320 8 10th Ave Viewland Way Brookmere St $99,000
360 8 10th Ave Puget Way Viewland Way $112,000
83 300 8 12th Ave N Emerald Hills Dr Main St $93,000
84 240 8 77th Pl 195th St 196th St $75,000
85 680 8 72nd Ave 162nd St North Meadowdale Rd $211,000
86 1150 8 72nd Ave North Meadowdale Rd 157th St $357,000
87 950 8 172nd St 72nd Ave 69th Pl $295,000
88*1200 8 Highland Dr 12th Ave N Main St $373,000
89*500 8 Cascade Ln Olympic Ave 10th Ave $155,000
90*400 8 Cary Road Caspers St Dead-end $124,000
91*340 8 Carol Way 6th Ave N Dead-end $106,000
92*1400 8 81st Pl 200th St 196th St $435,000
93*640 8 ForsythLn 5th Ave S 6th Ave S $199,000
94*200 8 Fir Pl 4th Ave S Dead-end $62,000
75
77
79
82
74
63
64
65
67
70
72
73
78
Packet Page 115 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-17 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Table 9-6
Water Main Improvement Projects (continued)
CIP Size Description Estimated
No.Length Dia In From To Project Cost
1700 8 Dellwood Dr 76th Ave 80th Ave $528,000
400 8 78th Ave Dellwood Dr Dead-end $124,000
96*325 8 92nd Pl Bowdoin Way Dead-end $101,000
97*150 8 Spruce Pl 96th Ave Dead-end $47,000
98*250 8 Spruce Pl 8th Ave Dead-end $78,000
99*220 8 215th St 96th Ave Dead-end $68,000
100*220 8 215th St 98th Ave Dead-end $68,000
101*1300 8 Maple St 5th Ave N 7th Ave N $404,000
330 8 Erben Dr 4th Ave S 3rd Ave S $102,000
450 8 Erben Dr 3rd Ave S City Park $140,000
45 8 Erben Dr 3rd Ave -$14,000
1150 8 2nd Ave S Elm St Pine St $357,000
350 8 Elm St 2nd Ave S 3rd Ave S $109,000
104*260 8 10th Pl S Spruce St Dead-end $81,000
105*250 8 Private Property 81st Pl 80th Pl $78,000
106 1130 8 76th Ave Olympic View Dr 188th St $351,000
107 460 8 Puget Way 3rd Ave N Brookmere Dr $143,000
300 8 8th Ave N Edmonds St Bell St $93,000
300 8 8th Ave N Bell St Main St $93,000
660 8 Bell St 8th Ave N 9th Ave N $205,000
610 12 Main St 9th Ave N 8th Ave N $231,000
660 12 Main St 8th Ave N 7th Ave N $249,000
110 1300 12 Main St 7th Ave N 5th Ave S $491,000
111 1330 12 Dayton St 7th Ave N 5th Ave S $503,000
310 12 7th Ave S Bell St Main St $117,000
300 12 7th Ave S Main St Dayton St $113,000
280 12 7th Ave S Dayton St Maple St $106,000
290 12 7th Ave S Maple St Alder St $110,000
290 12 7th Ave S Alder St Walnut St $110,000
300 12 7th Ave S Walnut St Cedar St $113,000
80 12 7th Ave S Cedar St Howell Way $30,000
230 12 7th Ave S Howell Way Spruce St $87,000
580 12 7th Ave S Spruce St Laurel St $219,000
300 12 5th Ave S Holly Dr Alder St $113,000
290 12 5th Ave S Alder St Maple St $110,000
290 12 5th Ave S Maple St Dayton St $110,000
330 12 5th Ave S Dayton St Main St $125,000
290 8 6th Ave N Daley St Sprague St $90,000
230 8 6th Ave N Sprague St Edmonds St $71,000
350 8 6th Ave N Edmonds St Bell St $109,000
500 8 Sprague St 6th Ave N 4th Ave N $155,000
670 8 Bell St 7th Ave N 6th Ave N $208,000
450 8 Bell St 6th Ave N 5th Ave N $140,000
420 8 5th Ave S Edmonds St Bell St $130,000
420 8 5th Ave S Bell St Main St $130,000
320 8 4th Ave N Edmonds St Bell St $99,000
820 8 4th Ave N Bell St Main St $255,000
830 8 3rd Ave N Edmonds St Main St $258,000
140 8 3rd Ave N Edmonds St Daley St $43,000
640 8 3rd Ave N Daley St Glen St $199,000
120 820 8 2nd Ave N Edmonds St Main St $255,000
121 840 8 Sunset Ave Edmonds St Main St $261,000
310 8 Edmonds St Sunset Ave 2nd Ave N $96,000
320 8 Edmonds St 2nd Ave N 3rd Ave N $99,000
320 8 Edmonds St 3rd Ave N 4th Ave N $99,000
320 8 Edmonds St 4th Ave N 5th Ave N $99,000
123 1640 8 2nd Ave N Edmonds St Caspers St $509,000
250 12 Main St Railroad Ave Sunset Ave $95,000
330 12 Main St Sunset Ave 2nd Ave N $125,000
310 12 Main St 2nd Ave N 3rd Ave N $117,000
330 12 Main St 3rd Ave N 4th Ave N $125,000
310 12 Main St 4th Ave N 5th Ave N $117,000
125 1020 8 Sunset Ave Dayton St Main St $317,000
126 1360 8 Railroad Ave Dayton St Main St $422,000
$46,265,000
* 2006-2008 CIP projects carried forward
Total - Water Main Improvements
114
119
122
124
115
116
117
118
108
109
112
113
103*
95*
102*
Packet Page 116 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-18 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.29.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Table 9-7
Planned Improvements Implementation Schedule
Estimated 20-Year Schedule of Improvements
CIP Cost Planned Year of Project and Estimated Cost in 2009 $$ (x 1000)
No.Description (2009 $$)2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017-22 2023-29
Water Main Improvements Check
WM1 Annual Water Main Replacement Program $44,501,000 $1,800 $2,260 $2,260 $2,260 $2,260 $2,260 $2,260 $13,560 $15,581
WM2 24-inch Transmission Main Isolation Valves $100,000 $100
WM3 BNSF Crossings Water Main $620,000 $620
WM4 Shell Valley Access Road Water Main $25,000 $25
Total - Water Main Improvements $45,246,000 $2,420 $2,285 $2,360 $2,260 $2,260 $2,260 $2,260 $13,560 $15,581
PRV Station & Pressure Relief Improvements
PRV1 New 596/420 Zone PRV Station $125,000 $125
PRV2 PRV Station 11 Abandonment $8,000 $8
PRV3 PRV Station 12 Abandonment $8,000 $8
PRV4 System-wide Pressure Relief Improvements $500,000 $25 $225 $250
PRV5 Annual PRV Station Improvements Program $1,500,000 $125 $125 $125 $125 $125 $125 $750
Total - PRV Station & Relief Improvements $2,141,000 $0 $266 $150 $350 $375 $125 $125 $750 $0
Facility Improvements
F1 Alderwood Supply Station Improvements $215,000 $215
F2 Seaview Reservoir Improvements $56,000 $56
F3 Yost Reservoir Improvements $131,000 $131
F4 Five Corners Pump Station Improvements $223,000 $223
F5 Five Corners 3.0 MG Reservoir Recoating $630,000 $630
F6 Five Corners 1.5 MG Reservoir Recoating $400,000 $400
Total - Facility Improvements $1,655,000 $625 $0 $0 $0 $0 $630 $400 $0 $0
Other Improvements
M1 Fire Hydrant Improvements*$1,764,000 $51 $96 $96 $96 $96 $96 $96 $549 $588
M2 AMR Meter Evaluation Study $50,000 $50
M3 Telemetry System Improvements $430,000 $10 $10 $10 $10 $10 $10 $300 $70
M4 Comprehensive Water System Plan Update $515,000 $65 $75 $75 $150 $150
Total - Other Improvements $2,759,000 $116 $156 $106 $106 $106 $181 $181 $999 $808
TOTAL - ALL IMPROVEMENTS $51,801,000 $3,161 $2,707 $2,616 $2,716 $2,741 $3,196 $2,966 $15,309 $16,389
* M1 Includes 12 fire hydrant replacements first six years of CIP and fire hydrant portion of Annual Water Main Replacement Program.
Packet Page 117 of 562
DRAFT
Page 10-1 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
10
Financial Plan
INTRODUCTION
The objective of the water system financial plan is to identify the total cost of providing
water service, and to provide a financial program that allows the water utility to remain
financially viable during execution of its short-term (6-year) and long-term (20-year) Capital
Improvement Programs (CIPs). This viability analysis considers the historical financial
condition of the utility, the sufficiency of utility revenues to meet current and future financial
and policy obligations, and the financial impact of executing the CIP. Furthermore, the plan
provides a review of the utility’s current rate structure with respect to rate adequacy, equity,
promotion of water conservation and customer affordability.
PAST FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE
The City of Edmonds legally owns and operates a combined utility fund that includes water,
sewer, and stormwater utilities. Therefore, standard financial statements are not readily
available for the water utility alone. Financial information regarding an individual utility is
available in the form of utility accounting reports at a sub-account level of detail. Using these
reports and detailed utility financial data provided by City staff, we tried to construct a simple
financial report mimicking an income and cash flow statements.
Table 10-1 summarizes the water utility’s historical revenues, operating expenses, and
transfer and debt service payments.
Packet Page 118 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-2 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Table 10-1
Historical Financial Performance; 2004 - 2009
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Meter Water Sales 3,723,583$ 3,556,909$ 3,699,146$ 3,626,368$ 3,778,231$ 3,917,613$
Hyrdant Revenue - - - - - 256,650
Subtotal: Rate Revenues 3,723,583$ 3,556,909$ 3,699,146$ 3,626,368$ 3,778,231$ 4,174,263$
Water Utility Tax Collections 214,103 204,546 212,712 217,656 226,690 518,778
Miscellaneous Revenues 193,350 205,819 237,376 164,904 205,597 162,893
TOTAL REVENUES 4,131,035$ 3,967,274$ 4,149,235$ 4,008,927$ 4,210,518$ 4,855,934$
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
Salaries and Wages 564,631$ 589,581$ 626,742$ 681,746$ 645,806$ 596,155$
Benefits 150,105 164,170 182,881 212,077 231,916 229,884
Water Purchased for Resale 1,329,114 1,221,154 1,340,265 1,256,697 1,218,234 1,470,888
Supplies 146,468 81,135 109,514 178,041 248,868 182,298
Services 408,492 406,082 453,977 412,210 425,955 424,424
Intergovernmental Services 233,234 211,817 239,963 250,893 251,221 544,717
Building, Machinery, & Equipment 12,633 26,725 - 1,470 - -
Interfund Services & Rentals 444,788 372,358 415,569 433,300 403,409 375,010
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES 3,289,465$ 3,073,021$ 3,368,911$ 3,426,434$ 3,425,409$ 3,823,376$
OPERATING SURPLUS / (DEFICIT)841,571$ 894,253$ 780,323$ 582,494$ 785,109$ 1,032,558$
Debt Service Interest 276,417$ 95,821$ 91,098$ 88,178$ 83,285$ 78,583$
Total Operating Expenses and Debt Interest 3,565,882$ 3,168,842$ 3,460,010$ 3,514,612$ 3,508,694$ 3,901,959$
Surplus / (Deficit)565,153$ 798,433$ 689,225$ 494,316$ 701,824$ 953,975$
Interfund Transfer Out for Capital 744,416$ 700,000$ 700,000$ 400,000$ 700,000$ 500,000$
Operating Expenses, Debt Interest, & Interfund Transfers 4,310,298$ 3,868,842$ 4,160,010$ 3,914,612$ 4,208,694$ 4,401,959$
Surplus / (Deficit)(179,263)$ 98,433$ (10,775)$ 94,316$ 1,824$ 453,975$
Debt Service Principal 1,125,000$ 157,862$ 165,047$ 167,778$ 151,795$ 128,294$
TOTAL CASH OUTLAY 5,435,298$ 4,026,704$ 4,325,057$ 4,082,390$ 4,360,489$ 4,530,252$
Surplus / (Deficit)(1,304,263)$ (59,430)$ (175,822)$ (73,462)$ (149,971)$ 325,682$
The water utility’s rate revenues from metered water sales fluctuated between $3.5 million
and $3.9 million in last six years. The main determining factor in the amount of water sold,
and hence revenues collected, has been the weather patterns. Historically, the City’s growth
ratesrate has been low, and the only rate adjustments in the last six years hashave been
inflationary; one in January 2007 (3%), and another one in January 2008 (3%).
In 2009, to comply with the State Supreme Court’s ruling on Lane v. Seattle, the City started
charging its General Fund for fire protection costs, and increased the City utility tax rate for
the water utility from 10% to 18.7% to generate the necessary revenues for itsthe General
Fund. The revenue generated from the incremental tax increase (8.7%) has been paid by the
City’s General Fund to the water utility for fire protection services. The hydrant revenue
shown in 2009 ($256,650) represents this transfer from the General Fund. Parallel to this
change, water utility tax collections and corresponding payments to the General Fund
(Intergovernmental Services line under operating expenditures) increased significantly in
2009.
Packet Page 119 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-3 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Miscellaneous revenues have also been steady ranging from $165,000 to $206,000. On
average, the utility earned approximately $195,000 miscellaneous revenues in the last six
years.
Total operating expenditures increased from $3.1 million in 2005 to $3.8 million in 2009.
The large increase in 2009 (almost $400,000 compared to 2008) mostly stemmed from the
increase in City utility taxes (as explained earlier) and water purchase costs.
Water purchase costs constitute the largest portion of the utility’s operating costs. Similar to
revenues from metered water sales, water purchases for resale (from the Alderwood Water
and Wastewater District) hashave been steady. It fluctuated, fluctuating between $1.2 million
and $1.5 million. This expenditure line item represents approximately 42% of the total
operating costs (excluding City utility taxes), and around 35% of the rate revenues arehave
been spent to purchase the water.
Salary and benefits costs represent approximately 24% of the total operating expenditures.
Salaries and wages increased steadily from 2004 to 2007. The average annual increase was
6%. In the last two years, this expenditure line item dropped considerably (5% in 2008, and
8% in 2009). Due to the recent economic downturn and associated budgetary problems in
local governments, the City implemented a series of furlough days. The decreases in salary
and benefits expenses seen in 2009 are a result of this policy.
As a result of the steep increases in health care costs observed in recent years, the utility’s
labor benefits costs increased considerably; from $150,000 in 2004 to $230,000 in 2009
(despite furloughs). The average rate of increase in the last five years is 9%, and the total
percentage increase between 2004 and 2009 is 53%.
The otherOther operating and maintenance expenditure line items have been steady over the
last 6 years, and they did not change significantly.
Over the last six years, the utility posted operating surpluses ($820,000 on average). These
surpluses have been used to make debt service payments (principal and interest), and
transferred to the capital construction fund for funding the utility’s capital projects.
In 2004, the City refinanced its outstanding revenue bonds. Ignoring 2004, the utility’s
interest payments on its existing debt and debt principle payments have been around $87,000
and $154,000, respectively. Hence the utility’s annual debt service payments have been
around $241,000.
Over the last six years, the City transferred approximately $3.7 million from the water
utility’s operating fund to the capital construction fund to pay for the utility’s capital needs.
On average, this amount corresponds to approximately $624,000 a year.
In the years 2005 and 2008, the utility operated withat a cash deficiency after paying for its
operating expenditures, servicing its debt, and transferring monies for capital needs (2004 is
Packet Page 120 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-4 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
not considered because of the cash flow impact of bond refinancing). During these four years,
the utility used its available cash balances. In 2009, this trend reversed due to high water
sales and corresponding increase in revenues, and savings due to furloughs and other cost
cutting measures. However, 2009 might be an anomaly and might not represent a breaking
point in the utility’s financial performance trends. It remains to be seen. On the other hand,
the utility needs substantial capital investments to rehabilitate its aging infrastructure and
meet regulatory requirements, as identified in this comprehensive plan. To be able to finance
these capital projects and maintain a financially prudent and solid utility, the City would need
a series of rate increases. The analysis of the utility’s capital funding needs and other
financial requirements, and hence projected rate adjustments are provided later in this
chapter.
CAPITAL FUNDING RESOURCES
The City may fund the water CIP from variety of sources. In general, these sources can be
summarized as: 1) governmental grant and loan programs; 2) publicly issued debt (tax
exempt or taxable); and 3) cash resources and revenues. These sources are described below.
Government Programs
Historically, federal and state grant programs were available to local utilities for capital
funding assistance. However due to budgetary constraints, these assistance programs have
been mostly eliminated, substantially reduced in scope and amount, or replaced by loan
programs. Remaining miscellaneous grant programs are generally lightly funded and heavily
subscribed. Nonetheless, the benefit of even the very low-interest loans makes the effort of
applying worthwhile. Grants and low cost loans for Washington State utilities are available
from the Department of Commerce and the Department of Health. They are primarily
targeted at low-income and/or rural communities.
The Department of Commerce administers three grant and loan programs (one administered
jointly by the Public Works Board and the Department of Health) that the City might be
eligible for:
Community Economic Revitalization Board (CERB) Grant and Loan Program
Public Works Trust Fund Loan Program (PWTF)
Drinking Water State Revolving Loan (DWSRF) Program
While the CERB and DWSRF programs are currently funded and accepting applications, the
PWTF is providing no funding in the 2009-2011 biennium and may or may not be restored in
the near future. Regardless, each of these programs is described in greater detail below.
Community Economic Revitalization Board - CERB primarily offers low-cost loans; grants
are made available only to the extent that a loan is not reasonably possible. The CERB
Packet Page 121 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-5 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
targets public facility funding for economically disadvantaged communities, specifically
targeting job creation and retention. Priority criteria include the unemployment rates,
number of jobs created and/or retained, wage rates, projected private investment and
estimated state and local revenues generated by the project. Traditional construction projects
are offered at a maximum dollar limit per project of $1 million. Local match of 25% is
targeted. Eligible applicants include cities, towns, port districts, special purpose districts,
federally recognized Indian tribes, and municipal corporations.
The Board’s policy is that all loans made by the CERB will be secured by a general
obligation pledge of the taxing power of the borrowing entity. Terms do not exceed 20 years
including available payment deferral of interest and principal for up to five years. Interest
rates match the most current rate of Washington State bonds (not to exceed 10%).
Further detail is available at
http://www.choosewashington.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/CERB/CERB%20Fact%20She
et.pdf
Public Works Trust Fund – Cities, towns, counties and special purpose districts are eligible to
receive loans. Water, sewer, storm, roads, bridges and solid waste/recycling are eligible and
funds may be used for repair, replacement, rehabilitation, reconstruction and improvements
including reasonable growth (generally the 20-year growth projection in the comprehensive
plan).
PWTF loans are available at interest rates of 0.5%, 1% and 2% with the lower interest rates
given to applicants who pay a larger share of the total project costs. The loan applicant must
provide a minimum local match of funds of 5% towards the project cost to qualify for a 2%
loan, 10% for a 1% loan, and 15% for a 0.5% loan. The useful life of the project determines
the loan term up to a maximum of 20 years.
Further detail is available at http://www.commerce.wa.gov/site/361/default.aspx.
Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Program – Funding historically targets protection of
public health, compliance with drinking water regulations and assistance for small and
disadvantaged communities. Recent legislation requires $7 million be provided for “green”
or environmentally beneficial infrastructure. $58 million was available in the 2010 loan
cycle. Loans range from $50,000 to $8 million.
Further detail is available at http://www.doh.wa.gov/ehp/dw/Publications/331-233.pdf
Public Debt
General Obligation Bonds – General obligation (G.O.) bonds are bonds secured by the full
faith and credit of the issuing agency, committing all available tax and revenue resources to
debt repayment. With this high level of commitment, G.O. bonds have relatively low interest
Packet Page 122 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-6 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
rates and few financial restrictions. However, the authority to issue councilmanic G.O. bonds
is restricted in terms of the amount and use of the funds, as defined by Washington
constitution and statute. Specifically, the amount of debt that can be issued without a public
vote is linked to assessed valuation.
RCW 39.36.020 states:
“(ii) Counties, cities, and towns are limited to an indebtedness amount not exceeding
one and one-half percent of the value of the taxable property in such counties, cities,
or towns without the assent of three-fifths of the voters therein voting at an election
held for that purpose.
(b) In cases requiring such assent counties, cities, towns, and public hospital districts
are limited to a total indebtedness of two and one-half percent of the value of the
taxable property therein.”
While bonding capacity can limit availability of councilmanic G.O. bonds for utility
purposes, these can sometimes play a valuable role in project financing. A rate savings may
be realized through two avenues: the lower interest rate and related bond costs; and the
extension of repayment obligation to all tax-paying properties (not just developed properties)
through the authorization of an ad valorem property tax levy.
Revenue Bonds – Revenue bonds are commonly used to fund utility capital improvements.
The debt is secured by the rate revenues of the issuing utility and the debt obligation does not
extend to the City’s other revenue sources. With this limited commitment, revenue bonds
typically bear higher interest rates than G.O. bonds and also require security conditions
related to the maintenance of dedicated reserves (a bond reserve) and financial performance
(added bond debt service coverage). The City agrees to satisfy these requirements by
ordinance as a condition of bond sale.
Revenue bonds can be issued in Washington without a public vote. There is no bonding
limit, except perhaps the practical limit of the utility’s ability to generate sufficient revenue to
repay the debt and provide coverage. In some cases, poor credit might make issuing bonds
problematic.
Build America Bonds – (from munibondadvisor.com) The Economic Recovery and
Reinvestment Act (the "Act") created a new form of bonds known as Build America Bonds
("BABs"). Build America Bonds are taxable and, through Federal subsidies or tax credits,
are intended to reduce municipal borrowing costs.
The Act created two types of BABs. The first type of BAB provides a Federal subsidy to
investors equal to 35% of the interest payable by the issuer ("Tax Credit BAB"). The second
type of BAB provides a direct Federal subsidy that will be paid to state and local
Packet Page 123 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-7 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
governments in an amount equal to 35% of the interest ("Direct Payment BAB"). Both types
of BABs must be issued before January 1, 2011.
Tax Credit BABs provide a 35% interest subsidy (net of the tax credit) to investors that
results in a Federal subsidy to the issuer equal to approximately 25% of the total return to the
investor (interest and the tax credit). Tax Credit BABs may be issued to finance any
governmental purpose for which tax-exempt government bonds (excluding private activity
bonds) could be issued including current refundings and one advance refunding. The bonds
must comply with all requirements applicable to the issuance of tax-exempt governmental
bonds.
Direct Payment BABs offer a larger Federal subsidy than Tax Credit BABs; however, they
are subject to more restrictions. In general, Direct Payment BABs may be issued to finance
capital expenditures for any governmental purpose for which tax-exempt government bonds
may be issued, excluding private activity bonds and excluding refunding bonds. Costs of
issuance paid from Direct Payment BAB proceeds are limited to 2%. In order to receive a
Federal subsidy, issuers will be required to submit a payment request form no earlier than 90
days, and no later than 45 days, before each interest payment date. Issuers will receive the
requested payment within 45 days of the date the form is filed with the Internal Revenue
Service. In the future, the payment procedures may be changed to an electronic platform.
Financing for a project may be subdivided into two issues; one comprised of traditional tax-
exempt municipal bonds and one comprised of BABs.
Further detail is available at http://www.munibondadvisor.com/BuildAmericaBonds.htm.
Cash Resources
Capital Facilities Charges – A capital facilities charge (CFC) as provided for by RCW
35.92.025, refers to a one-time charge imposed on new customers as a condition of
connection to the utility system. The purpose of the CFC is two-fold: (1) to promote equity
between new and existing customers; and (2) to provide a source of revenue to fund capital
projects. Equity is served by providing a vehicle for new customers to share in the capital
costs incurred to support their addition to the system. CFC revenues provide a source of cash
flow used to support utility capital needs; revenue can only be used to fund utility capital
projects or to pay debt service incurred to finance those projects.
In the absence of a CFC, growth-related capital costs must be borne in large part by existing
customers. In addition, the net investment in the utility already collected from existing
customers, whether through rates, charges and/or assessments, would be diluted by the
addition of new customers, effectively subsidizing new customers with prior customers’
payments. To establish equity, a CFC should recover a proportionate share of the existing
and future infrastructure costs from a new customer. From a financial perspective, a new
customer should become financially equivalent to an existing customer by paying the CFC.
Packet Page 124 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-8 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
The City currently imposes a charge of $908 per meter capacity equivalent and intends to
maintain the current charge.
Utility Funds and Cash Reserves – User charges (rates) paid by the utility’s customers are the
main funding source for all water utility activities. The rates cover total annual costs
associated with operation and maintenance of the water system, and other ongoing costs of
providing water services. Rates can pay for capital improvement projects in two ways: either
paying for debt service or directly paying for capital projects. Although funding the capital
costs directly through rates does not result in the additional interest expense associated with
issuing debt, this approach can cause large and/or volatile rate increases.
Summary
An ideal funding strategy would include the use of grants and low-cost loans when debt
issuance is required. However, these resources are very limited and competitive in nature
and do not provide a reliable source of funding for planning purposes. It is recommended
that the City pursue these funding avenues but assume for planning purposes that bond
financing will be utilized to meet needs above the utility’s available cash resources. G.O.
bonds may be useful for special circumstances, but due to the bonding capacity limits, this
vehicle is most often reserved for other City (non-utility) purposes. Revenue bonds are a
more secure financing mechanism for utility needs. This analysis conservatively assumes no
tax credits or subsidies from BABs, though the City should consider BABs when it is ready
to begin the process of debt issuance. The Capital Financing Strategy developed to fund the
updated CIP assumes the following funding priority:
a) Available grant funds,
b) Accumulated capital cash reserves,
c) Annual revenue collections from capital facilities charges (CFCs),
d) Annual use of excess cash (above minimum balance targets) from operating reserves,
e) Interest earnings on capital reserves and other miscellaneous capital resources,
including government program loans to the extent that they are accessible,
f) Revenue bond financing, and
g) Direct rate funding.
FINANCIAL PLAN
The City of Edmonds’ water utility operates as an enterprise fund and as such it is
responsible to fully fund all of its related costs. It is not dependent on general tax revenues or
general fund resources. The primary source of funding for the utility is collections from
water service charges. The City controls the level of service charges by ordinance, and
subject to statutory authority, can adjust user charges as needed to meet financial objectives.
Packet Page 125 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-9 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
The financial plan can only provide a qualified assurance of financial feasibility if it
considers the total system costs of providing water service – both operating and capital. To
meet these objectives, the following elements are completed:
Capital Funding Plan – This plan identifies the total CIP obligations for the planning
period 2010 – 2016. The plan defines a strategy for funding the CIP, including an
analysis of available resources from rate revenues, existing reserves, capital facilities
charges, debt financing and any special resources that may be readily available (e.g.
grants, developer contributions, etc). The capital funding plan impacts the financial
plan through use of debt financing (resulting in annual debt service) and the assumed
rate revenue resources available for capital funding.
Financial Plan – This forecast identifies annual non-capital costs associated with the
operation, maintenance, and administration of the water system. Included in the
financial plan is a reserve analysis that forecasts cash flow and fund balance activity
along with testing for satisfaction of actual or recommended minimum fund balance
policies. The financial plan ultimately evaluates the sufficiency of utility revenues in
meeting all obligations, including cash uses such as operating expenses, debt service,
and reserve contributions, as well as any coverage requirements associated with long-
term debt.
Financial Policies
A brief summary of the key financial policies employed by the City, as well as those
recommended in the financial program are discussed below:
Reserve Policies
Utility reserves serve multiple functions. They can be used to address variability and timing
of expenditures and receipts, occasional disruptions in activities, costs or revenues, utility
debt obligations; and many other functions. The collective use of individual reserves helps to
limit the City’s exposure to revenue shortfalls and meet long-term capital obligations.
Common reserves among municipal utilities are operating reserves, capital contingency
reserves, and bond reserves.
Operating Reserve – An operating reserve, or working capital reserve, provides a
minimum unrestricted fund balance needed to accommodate the short-term cycles of
revenues and expenses. These reserves are intended to address both anticipated and
unanticipated changes in revenues and expenses. Anticipated changes may include
billing and receipt cycles, payroll cycles, and other payables. Operating reserves can
be used to meet short-term cash deficiencies due to the timing of actual revenues and
expenditures.
Packet Page 126 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-10 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Generally, utilities target a certain number of days of working capital as a beginning
cash balance to provide the liquidity needed to allow regular management of payable
and payment cycles. Consistent with industry practice, a working capital reserve of
between 45 to 60 days of operating and maintenance (O&M) expenses is targeted.
Based upon the City’s 2010 budget, this target range is equivalent to approximately
between $470,000 and $625,000.
Capital Contingency Reserve – A capital contingency reserve is an amount of cash set
aside in case of an emergency should a piece of equipment or a portion of the utility’s
infrastructure fail unexpectedly. Additionally, the reserve could be used for other
unanticipated capital needs including capital project cost overruns. There are various
approaches to identifying an appropriate level for this reserve, such as 1) identifying a
percentage of a utility system fixed asset costs and, 2) determining the cost of
replacing highly critical assets or facilities. For purposes of this analysis, no minimum
target fund balance is set, per City staff’s direction, to reduce the utility’s rate
adjustment needs.
Bond Reserve – Bond covenants often establish reserve requirements as a means of
protecting an agency against the risk of nonpayment. This bond reserve can be funded
with cash on hand, but is more often funded at the time of borrowing as part of the
bond principal. This reserve requirement can also be met by using a surety bond. The
City maintains a restricted bond reserve in compliance with its bond covenants.
System Reinvestment Policies
The purpose of system reinvestment funding is to provide for the replacement of aging
system facilities to ensure sustainability of the system for ongoing operation. Each year, the
utility’s assets lose value, and as they lose value they are moving toward eventual
replacement. That accumulating loss in value and future liability is typically measured for
reporting purposes through annual depreciation expense, which is based on the original cost
of the asset over its anticipated useful life. While this expense reflects the consumption of
the existing asset and its original investment, the replacement of that asset will likely cost
much more, factoring in inflation and construction conditions. Therefore, the added annual
replacement liability is even greater than the annual depreciation expense.
On the spectrum of policy options related to system reinvestment funding, basing a system
reinvestment policy on the projected replacement cost of assets would result in the largest
immediate rate impact and the lowest future debt obligation. A policy based on annual
depreciation expense has the next greatest immediate rate impact. This policy does not target
a replacement reserve level sufficient to cash fund 100% of future replacement costs and
therefore assumes some replacement costs will be debt-financed.
One approach aimed at mitigating the accumulating asset replacement liability, as well as
current rate impacts, is to fund an amount from rates equal to annual depreciation expense,
Packet Page 127 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-11 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
net of annual debt principal repayment. Annual debt principal payments are one source of
annual equity contribution to the system. Using annual depreciation expense as the measure
of annual equity loss, and basis for a system reinvestment policy, it is appropriate then, to
reduce the annual depreciation expense by the annual equity contribution, as measured by
debt principal repayment. This approach tends to balance reducing near-term rate impacts
with mitigating accumulating asset replacement liability.
The analysis provided herein does not incorporate any system reinvestment funding, per City
staff’s direction, to reduce immediate rate impacts.
Debt Policies
Bond covenants often establish a minimum debt coverage ratio as a means of protecting an
agency against the risk of nonpayment. The City’s current bond covenants require a ratio of
1.25 times annual revenue bond debt service on a combined basis for the City’s all three
utilities (i.e. water, wastewater, and stormwater). This means that annual rate revenue must
be set sufficient to support annual operating expenses, annual revenue bond debt repayment,
and a cushion of 25% of the annual revenue bond debt repayment. For the purposes of this
analysis, it is assumed that the water utility would meet 1.25 revenue bond coverage ratio
independently, without relying on the other two utilities’ financial performance.
As stated previously, The City maintains a restricted bond reserve in compliance with its
bond covenants.
Capital Funding Plan
The CIP developed for this Plan totals $20.1 million ($21.6 million inflated) over the 2010 -
2016 planning horizon, and $51.8 million for the 20-year total ($71.7 million inflated). Costs
are stated in 2009 dollars and escalated to the year of planned spending for financing
projections at an annual inflation rate of 2% for 2012 and 4% thereafter. It is assumed that
construction costs will stay the same in 2010 and 2011 due to current economic conditions.
Table 10-2 summarizes the annual CIP expenditures in 2009 and inflated costs.
Packet Page 128 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-12 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Table 10-2
Water Utility Capital Improvement Program
Year 2009 Dollars Inflated Dollars
2010 3,161,000$ 3,161,000$
2011 2,707,000 2,707,000
2012 2,616,000 2,668,320
2013 2,716,000 2,881,133
2014 2,741,000 3,023,959
2015 3,196,000 3,666,967
2016 2,966,000 3,539,196
Total: 2010 - 2016 20,103,000$ 21,647,575$
Total: 2017 - 2022 [a]15,309,000 21,002,492
Total: 2023 - 2029 [a]16,389,000 29,037,194
GRAND TOTAL 51,801,000$ 71,687,261$
[a] Inflated project costs are calculated using average annual spending in related periods.
A capital funding plan is developed to determine the total resources available to meet CIP
costs and determine if new debt financing will be required. 2010 beginning operating and
capital fund balances were $1,877,099 and ($133,802), respectively. After evaluating the
utility’s working capital needs, $1.4 million of the beginning operating fund balance was
deemed excess fund balance and assumed to be available for capital. With the assumed
transfer of $1.4 million from the operating fund, the total available capital fund balance at the
beginning of the analysis period reached $1,266,197. The capital funding plan is summarized
in Table 10-3 below.
Table 10-3
2010 – 2016 Annual Capital Fund Cash Flow
Capital Fund 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Beginning Balance 1,266,197$ 43,993$ 2,196,210$ 79,905$ 2,468,905$ 106,133$ 2,802,547$
plus: Capital Facilities Charges 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000
plus: Net Debt Proceeds Available for Projects 1,550,000 4,750,000 - 4,950,000 - 6,000,000 -
plus: Interest Earnings 18,993 880 54,905 1,998 61,723 2,653 70,064
plus: Transfer of Surplus from Operating Fund - 83,337 - 293,135 19,411 335,727 -
plus: Direct Rate Funding 344,803 - 472,110 - 555,054 - 736,649
less: Capital Expenditures (3,161,000) (2,707,000) (2,668,320) (2,881,133) (3,023,959) (3,666,967) (3,539,196)
Ending Balance 43,993$ 2,196,210$ 79,905$ 2,468,905$ 106,133$ 2,802,547$ 95,064$
The costs shown in the table are inflated to the year of spending. A majority (80%) of the 7-
year CIP is projected to be financed with new debt issues. The remaining 20% of the 7-year
CIP is financed from utility resources such as existing cash balances, rates, capital facility
charge revenues, and capital fund interest earnings.
Packet Page 129 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-13 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Industry best practice suggests maintaining a debt to equity ratio of no greater than 60% debt
to 40% equity. By comparison, the City is currently leveraged at 15% debt to 85% equity in
the system, leaving significant capacity to debt-finance future CIP costs. At the end of the
analysis period, debt to equity ratio is projected to be 39% debt to 61% equity.
FINANCIAL FORECAST
The Financial Forecast, or revenue requirement analysis, projects the amount of annual
revenue that needs to be generated by rates. The analysis incorporates operating revenues,
operating and maintenance (O&M) expenses, debt service payments, rate funded capital
needs, and any other identified revenues or expenses related to utility operations, and
determines the sufficiency of the current level of rates. Revenue needs are also impacted by
debt covenants (typically applicable to revenue bonds) and specific fiscal policies and
financial goals of the utility (as described above).
For this analysis, two revenue sufficiency criteria have been developed to reflect the financial
goals and constraints of the utility: (1) cash needs must be met and (2) debt coverage
requirements must be realized. In order to operate successfully with respect to these goals,
both tests of revenue sufficiency must be met.
Cash Test
The cash flow test identifies all known cash requirements for the utility in each year of the
planning period. Capital needs are identified and a capital funding strategy is established.
This may include the use of debt, cash reserves, outside assistance, and rate funding. Cash
requirements to be funded from rates are determined. Typically, these include O&M
expenses, debt service payments, system reinvestment funding or directly funded capital
outlays, and any additions to specified reserve balances. The total annual cash needs of the
utility are then compared to total operating revenues (under current rates) to forecast annual
revenue surpluses or shortfalls.
Coverage Test
The coverage test is based on a commitment made by the City when issuing revenue bonds.
For purposes of this analysis, revenue bond debt is assumed for any needed debt issuance.
As a security condition of issuance, the City is required per covenant to agree that the
revenue bond debt would have a higher priority for payment (a senior lien) compared to most
other utility expenditures; the only outlays with a higher lien are O&M expenses. Debt
service coverage is expressed as a multiplier of the annual revenue bond debt service
payment. For example, a 1.0 coverage factor would imply no additional cushion is required.
A 1.25 coverage factor means revenues must be sufficient to pay O&M expenses, annual
revenue bond debt service payments, plus an additional 25% of annual revenue bond debt
service payments. The excess cash flow derived from the added coverage, if any, can be used
Packet Page 130 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-14 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
for any utility purpose, including funding capital projects. The existing coverage
requirement on the City’s outstanding revenue bonds is 1.25 times bond debt.
In determining the annual revenue requirement, both the cash and coverage sufficiency tests
must be met – the test with the greatest deficiency drives the level of needed rate increase in
any given year. The analysis uses this rate revenue requirement to indicate annual rate
adjustments.
Fire Protection Costs
Fire protection costs have historically been recovered through water rates, and assigned to
customer classes in proportion to fire protection requirements. Through legal action, fire
protection costs have been defined as general purpose government service. InHowever, in the
Lane v. Seattle decision of the Washington Supreme Court, fire protection costs of Seattle
Public Utilities were found to be outside the valid basis for recovery through retail water
rates. Instead, fire protection “customers” should be charged for the services provided. This
would typically include general governments requiring fire protection through their land use
regulation and thus receiving the benefit of public fire protection, along with customers
receiving direct private fire protection service, such as through sprinklers or onsite fire
distribution systems. Cities are now specifically required to identify and separate these costs
from water rate revenue requirements (and therefore rate structures) and recover fire
protection costs from general purpose government agenciesfunds.
The court upheld “a solution” that an increase to the utility tax on the water utility to recover
identified fire protection costs is valid and within statutory authority.
In 2009, to comply with the Supreme Court’s ruling, the City started charging its General
Fund for fire protection costs, and increased the City utility tax rate for the water utility from
10% to 18.7% to generate the necessary revenues for its General Fund. The revenue
generated from the incremental tax increase (8.7%) has been paid by the City’s General Fund
to the water utility for the fire protection services.
The analysis results presented here reflect this change, and total rate revenues include the
projected transfer amounts (8.7% of the rate revenues from retail rates) from the General
Fund for fire protection costs. It is assumed that any projected rate increase would also
automatically increase the related transfer amount from the General Fund.
Projected Financial Performance
The revenue requirement analysis is based on the following data, assumptions, and
adjustments:
The 2010 budget is used as the basis of analysis.
Packet Page 131 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-15 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Rate revenues under the existing rates are calculated to increase with customer
growth, which is projected to be approximately 0.5% per year.
Salary and benefits costs are escalated annually at 5% for assumed labor cost
inflation.
Other operating and maintenance expenses are escalated annually at 2% in 2011, and
3% thereafter.
Per City staff’s direction, Alderwood Water and Wastewater District water rates are
assumed to increase by 106.8% in 2011 through 2013, 5.9% in 2012, and 5% annually
thereafter.
Per City staff’s direction, one-third of a full-time employee (FTE) for GIS is added in
mid-year 2010. The annual cost of this position is assumed to be $30,000 per year.
Inflated capital expenses reflect 2% construction cost inflation in 2012, and 4%
annual inflation thereafter. It is assumed that the construction costs would not increase
in 2010 and 2011 given the current economic conditions.
In addition to maintenance and operating costs, revenue requirements include capital
costs for new debt service incurred to fund the CIP.
CFC revenues are assumed to stay the same throughout the projection period at the
2010 budget level of $25,000.
The City’s annual fund interest earnings rate is assumed to be 1.5% in 2010, 2% in
2011, and 2.5% thereafter.
The 2010 beginning operating fund (Fund 411) balance was $1,877,099. Of this
amount, $1.4 million is assumed to be transferred to the capital fund (Fund 412).
The forecast assumes a revenue bond interest rate of 5%, and a repayment term of 20
years.
Table 10-4 summarizes the projected financial performance and rate revenue requirements of
the water utility for 2010 through 2016 based upon the above assumptions.
Packet Page 132 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-16 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Table 10-4
Summary of Projected Cash BalancesFinancial Performance & Revenue Requirements
Revenue Requirements 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Revenues
Rate Revenues Under Existing Rates 4,258,446$ 4,279,738$ 4,301,137$ 4,322,642$ 4,344,256$ 4,365,977$ 4,387,807$
Non-Rate Revenues 109,003 115,254 134,278 134,677 145,089 145,846 159,723
Total Revenues 4,367,448$ 4,394,992$ 4,435,415$ 4,457,319$ 4,489,345$ 4,511,823$ 4,547,530$
Expenses
Cash O&M Expenses [a]3,813,110$ 4,030,547$ 4,231,448$ 4,427,934$ 4,634,231$ 4,850,860$ 5,078,377$
Existing Debt Service 205,923 219,022 208,412 161,999 161,394 160,685 139,833
New Debt Service 135,227 549,632 549,632 981,486 981,486 1,504,945 1,504,945
Rate Funded System Reinvestment - - - - - - -
Rate Funded CIP 344,803 - 472,110 - 555,054 - 736,649
Total Expenses 4,499,063$ 4,799,201$ 5,461,603$ 5,571,419$ 6,332,165$ 6,516,491$ 7,459,805$
Annual Rate Adjustment 7.50%7.50%7.50%7.50%7.50%7.50%7.50%
Rate Increases Dictated by:Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy
Rate Revenues After Rate Increase 4,391,522$ 4,945,772$ 5,343,289$ 5,772,755$ 6,236,741$ 6,738,019$ 7,279,587$
Net Cash Flow After Rate Increase 1,462 261,826 15,964 336,013 49,665 367,373 (20,494)
Coverage After Rate Increases 2.30 1.43 1.84 1.29 1.65 1.26 1.50
[a] Includes additional State Excise and B&O Taxes due to the proposed rate increases.
As shown in the table, planned and forecasted water utility service charges under the existing
rates are not sufficient to fund projected rate needs. The projected revenue deficiency is
primarily due to new debt repayment obligations and funding of the proposed capital
improvement program.
It is projected that the City will need to increase its water rates by approximately 87.5%
annually in 2010 through 2012, 8.0% in 2013 and 2014, and 7.5% in 2015 and 2016. The
analysis assumes that the rate adjustment in 2010 would be implemented in July, and the new
rates will be in effect in the last 5-months of the year (i.e. August through December). The
subsequent rate increases are assumed to be effective as of January 1st of each year.
Table 10-5 below demonstrates the projected cash balances (operating, capital, and debt
reserve funds) for the water utility, assuming that the rate increases proposed in Table 10-3
above are implemented.
Table 10-5
Projected Cash Balances
Fund Balances 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Operating Fund 478,561$ 657,050$ 673,013$ 715,892$ 746,146$ 777,792$ 757,298$
Capital Fund 43,993 2,196,210 79,905 2,468,905 106,133 2,802,547 95,064
Debt Reserve Fund 361,710 776,115 776,115 1,149,729 1,149,729 1,673,188 1,673,188
Total 884,264$ 3,629,374$ 1,529,034$ 4,334,525$ 2,002,008$ 5,253,528$ 2,525,549$
Combined Minimum Target Balance 775,805$ 1,213,515$ 1,235,952$ 1,631,124$ 1,653,815$ 2,201,008$ 2,225,836$
Packet Page 133 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-17 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
If the City is able to obtain available low cost loan and/or grant alternatives to fund its capital
needs, required rate increases would be significantly less than the projected rate increases
presented above.
It is important to note that these projections are based upon current assumptions and the
capital program identified herein. Circumstances might change over time, causing actual rate
adjustments to be higher or lower once actual costs are known. It is imperative that the City
track its costs as they become available and compare them to assumptions used in the study.
If significant changes occur, the City should revisit the analysis and make appropriate
changes.
CURRENT AND PROJECTED RATES
Existing Rates
The City’s existing water rate structure has two components; a bimonthly base charge and a
uniform volume charge. Residential customers pay the base charge on a per unit basis,
whereas other customers’ base charges vary by meter size. All customers pay the same
volume rate per hundred cubic feet (ccf) of water consumption. The City’s current rate
structure is presented in Table 10-5 below.
In order to enhance conservation signals to water customers, the City might consider
transitioning to increasing block rate structure for single family residential customers, and
differentiate volume rates among the customer classes. Other potential options for enhancing
conservation signals would be designating irrigation customers (if there are any) as a separate
customer class, and considering implementing seasonal rates for customer classes with
seasonal usage patterns. It should be noted that such changes in the rate structure require a
more comprehensive and detailed rate and cost of service analyses, which the City is
considering in the future.
Projected Rates
Table 10-6 presents the City’s existing and projected water rate schedule incorporating the
rate adjustments shown in the financial forecast. The projected rates are calculated on an
across-the-board basis; the percentage increase is applied to all classes and to each rate
component (fixed rates and volume rates) on an equal basis.
Packet Page 134 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-18 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Table 10-6
Existing and Projected Rates
Current 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Rates 7.5%7.5%7.5%7.5%7.5%7.5%7.5%
Bimonthly Base Rate
Single Family Residential (per unit)16.58$ 17.82$ 19.16$ 20.60$ 22.14$ 23.80$ 25.59$ 27.51$
Multi Family Residential (per unit)14.60 15.70 16.87 18.14 19.50 20.96 22.53 24.22
All Other Customers:
3/4" meter 20.05$ 21.55$ 23.17$ 24.91$ 26.78$ 28.78$ 30.94$ 33.26$
1" meter 40.82 43.88 47.17 50.71 54.51 58.60 63.00 67.72
1.5" meter 75.49 81.15 87.24 93.78 100.81 108.38 116.50 125.24
2" meter 115.09 123.72 133.00 142.98 153.70 165.23 177.62 190.94
3" meter 248.27 266.89 286.91 308.43 331.56 356.42 383.16 411.89
4" meter 351.68 378.06 406.41 436.89 469.66 504.88 542.75 583.45
6" meter 697.15 749.44 805.64 866.07 931.02 1,000.85 1,075.91 1,156.61
Volume Rate
All Customers (per ccf)1.72$ 1.85$ 1.99$ 2.14$ 2.30$ 2.47$ 2.65$ 2.85$
AFFORDABILITY
Affordability or hardship can be defined as the charge for service that a consumer can pay
without jeopardizing their ability to pay for other necessities (food, shelter, etc.). In 2002, the
American Water Works Association published a briefing paper that cited the Environmental
Protection Agency’s (EPA) affordability study. The EPA study concluded that households
could afford to pay water bills ranging from 1.5% to 3.0% of the household’s income.
Although the study referred to water, it also referenced other public services such as
wastewater, storm, and solid waste. EPA settled on 2.5% of median household income after
comparing water service to the cost of other household services such as telephone and cable
service. In the state of Washington, the Department of Ecology has defined financial hardship
as 2% or greater of the median household income. The Department of Ecology uses financial
hardship and affordability criteria to evaluate applications for the Centennial Clean Water
Fund and State Revolving Fund grants and loans for water pollution control facilities
construction projects.
The median household income for the City of Edmonds in the 2000 census was $53,522. The
2000 census figure was escalated based onto 2010 using the U.S. Department of Labor,
Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index (CPI) forcalculator. Future years 2001
through 2009; the subsequent years assumed aare escalated 3% inflation rate.per year. Table
10-7 presents the City’s rates with the projected rate increases annually for the forecast
period (using single family residential rates and 8 ccf/month water consumption assumption),
tested against the 1.52% threshold.
Applying the 1.52% test, the City’s rates are forecasted to remain well within the indicated
affordability threshold throughout the projection period.
Packet Page 135 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-19 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7.30.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Table 10-7
Affordability Test
Year Annual
Inflation
Median
Household
Income
2%
Monthly
Threshold
SFR
Monthly
Bill (8 ccf)
2000 53,522$ 89.20$
2001 2.85%55,047 91.75
2002 1.58%55,917 93.20
2003 2.28%57,192 95.32
2004 2.66%58,713 97.86
2005 3.39%60,704 101.17
2006 3.23%62,664 104.44
2007 2.85%64,450 107.42
2008 3.84%66,925 111.54
2009 -0.40%66,658 111.10 22.05$
2010 3.00%68,657 114.43 23.70
2011 3.00%70,717 117.86 25.48
2012 3.00%72,839 121.40 27.39
2013 3.00%75,024 125.04 29.45
2014 3.00%77,274 128.79 31.66
2015 3.00%79,593 132.65 34.03
2016 3.00%81,980 136.63 36.58
CONCLUSION
Starting in 2010, the City’s current rates are projected to be insufficient to fully fund the
forecasted financial obligations of the utility. New financial obligations for which the utility
will require additional rate revenues are mostly driven by the capital financing impacts (i.e.
debt service payments for the new bond issues, and rate funding) of the proposed $20.1
million CIP (2009 dollars; $21.6 inflated dollars).
To generate adequate working capital to fund utility obligations and meet annual cash flow
and debt service coverage requirements, a series of rate increases will be needed in years
2010 through 2016.
Packet Page 136 of 562
Comprehensive
Water System Plan
June 2010 DRAFT
City Review
Packet Page 137 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 138 of 562
CITY OF EDMONDS
COMPREHENSIVE WATER SYSTEM PLAN
JUNE 2010 DRAFT
CITY REVIEW
Prepared by:
MURRAY, SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC.
Engineers/Planners
2707 Colby Avenue, Suite 1110
Everett, Washington 98201-3566
In association with:
FCS Group, Inc.
09-1030
Packet Page 139 of 562
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 140 of 562
i
City of Edmonds
Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table of Contents
Chapters Page
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................ES-1
Chapter 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 1-1
Chapter 2 Water System Description ......................................................................................... 2-1
Chapter 3 Land Use and Population ........................................................................................... 3-1
Chapter 4 Water Demands .......................................................................................................... 4-1
Chapter 5 Policies and Design Criteria ....................................................................................... 5-1
Chapter 6 Water Source and Quality .......................................................................................... 6-1
Chapter 7 Water System Analyses .............................................................................................. 7-1
Chapter 8 Operations and Maintenance ...................................................................................... 8-1
Chapter 9 Water System Improvements ..................................................................................... 9-1
Chapter 10 Financial Program ................................................................................................... 10-1
Tables Page
Table 1-1 Water System Ownership and Management .............................................................. 1-1
Table 2-1 Water Main Summary ................................................................................................ 2-8
Table 3-1 Historical Population and Future Projections ............................................................ 3-4
Table 4-1 Average Annual Metered Consumption and Service Connections ............................ 4-2
Table 4-2 2008 Largest Water Users .......................................................................................... 4-3
Table 4-3 Historical Supply and Per Capita Demands ............................................................... 4-4
Table 4-4 2008 Demands by Pressure Zone ............................................................................... 4-5
Table 4-5 Metered Supply and Consumption Comparison ........................................................ 4-6
Table 4-6 2008 Estimated Distribution System Leakage ........................................................... 4-6
Table 4-7 Equivalent Residential Units (ERU’s) ....................................................................... 4-7
Table 4-8 Peak Day Demands and Peaking Factors ................................................................... 4-9
Table 4-9 General Fire Flow Requirements ............................................................................. 4-10
Table 4-10 Future Water Demand Projections ........................................................................... 4-11
Table 4-11 Future ERU Projections ........................................................................................... 4-12
Table 7-1 Minimum and Maximum Distribution System Pressures .......................................... 7-1
Table 7-2 Alderwood Supply Station Evaluation ....................................................................... 7-3
Table 7-3 Five Corners Pump Station Evaluation ...................................................................... 7-4
Table 7-4 Existing Storage Capacity Evaluation ........................................................................ 7-6
Table 7-5 Future Storage Capacity Evaluation ........................................................................... 7-7
Table 7-6 Fire Flow Analysis Summary ................................................................................... 7-10
Table 7-7 Existing System Capacity Analysis.......................................................................... 7-11
Table 7-8 20-Year Projected System Capacity Analysis .......................................................... 7-12
Table 8-1 Water System Operations & Maintenance Organization Chart ................................. 8-2
Table 8-2 Personnel Certification ............................................................................................... 8-3
Table 9-1 Water System Improvements Completed Since 2002 ................................................ 9-2
Packet Page 141 of 562
ii
Table 9-2 Water Main Unit Costs for Construction ................................................................... 9-7
Table 9-3 Water Main Improvements Priority Ranking Criteria ............................................... 9-8
Table 9-4 Water Main Improvements Priority Ranking – Sorted by CIP Number .................... 9-9
Table 9-5 Water Main Improvements Priority Ranking – Sorted by Total Points ................... 9-11
Table 9-6 Water Main Improvement Projects .......................................................................... 9-14
Table 9-7 Planned Improvements Implementation Schedule – Sorted by Priority Ranking .... 9-18
Table 10-1 Historical Financial Performance 2004 – 2009 ....................................................... 10-2
Table 10-2 Water Utility Capital Improvement Program ........................................................ 10-12
Table 10-3 2010 – 2016 Annual Capital Fund Cash Flow ....................................................... 10-12
Table 10-4 Projected Cash Balances ........................................................................................ 10-16
Table 10-5 Projected Cash Balances ........................................................................................ 10-16
Table 10-6 Existing and Projected Rates ................................................................................. 10-18
Table 10-7 Affordability Test ................................................................................................... 10-19
Figures Page
Figure 2-1 Existing Water System ............................................................................................. 2-13
Figure 2-2 Existing System Hydraulic Profile ........................................................................... 2-14
Figure 2-3 Service Area and Adjacent Systems ........................................................................ 2-15
Figure 3-1 Official Comprehensive Plan Map ............................................................................. 3-5
Figure 9-1 Proposed Water System Improvements ................................................................... 9-19
Appendices
Appendix A Agreements
Appendix B Water Facilities Inventory (WFI) Form
Appendix C Water System Facility Data
Appendix D Consistency Statement Checklist
Appendix E SEPA Checklist
Appendix F Water Use Efficiency Program
Appendix G Water System Construction Standards
Appendix H Cross Connection Control Program
Appendix I Fire Code
Appendix J Annual Water Quality Report
Appendix K Coliform Monitoring Plan
Appendix L Water Ordinances
Appendix M Agency Review Comments
Packet Page 142 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Page ES-1 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.25.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Executive Summary
OVERVIEW AND PURPOSE
This water system plan is an update to the City of Edmonds June 2002 Water Comprehensive
Plan, which received Washington State Department of Health (DOH) approval in November
2002. The City is required to update and submit a water system plan to DOH for review and
approval every six years in accordance with current drinking water regulations. The purpose
of this updated plan is to meet these regulatory requirements and to provide the City with a
useful working document to guide the planning, scheduling, and budgeting of water system
improvements. This updated plan will also be used by City staff to help maintain the water
system to ensure both existing and future customers are provided with a safe and reliable
supply of drinking water and fire protection. The planning period for this water system plan
is 20 years.
REGULATORY CHANGES SINCE THE LAST WATER SYSTEM PLAN UPDATE
Several regulatory changes affecting water system plans have occurred since 2002. These
include updated drinking water regulations that were published by DOH and codified under
WAC 246-290 in 2004 and 2009, updated water system design guidelines that were
published by DOH in 2009 under the “Water System Design Manual” title, emergency
planning requirements that came out of the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism
Preparedness and Response Act of 2002, and requirements from the 2003 Municipal Water
Law, which include the Water Use Efficiency Rule that was implemented in January 2007.
WATER SYSTEM OVERVIEW
The City’s municipal water system started in 1928 and has grown over the years as the City
expanded and annexed more areas. The City’s water system provides service to
approximately 80 percent of the population within the city limits or more than 10,050
customer accounts. The other 20 percent of the City’s population receive water service from
the Olympic View Water & Sewer District, which is located within the southwest portion of
the city limits.
All water supplied to City customers is currently purchased from Alderwood Water and
Wastewater District (AWWD) and is conveyed through a single metered connection near the
northeast corner of the water system. The City also has the capability to serve a portion of its
system with water purchased from Seattle Public Utilities (SPU), but currently maintains this
source of supply and the single metered connection on standby. Water purchased from
Packet Page 143 of 562
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
09-1030.103 Page ES-2 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.25.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
AWWD originates from the City of Everett Sultan River source. Water supplied by SPU
originates from SPUs Tolt River source.
The City’s water system has seven pressure zones with two supply stations, 17 pressure
reducing valve (PRV) stations, two pressure relief stations, one pump station, more than 139
miles of water main, and nine emergency interties with adjacent water systems. Water
storage is provided by four reservoirs that have a combined capacity of 7.5 million gallons
(MG).
WATER SUPPLY AND WATER QUALITY
The City’s purchase of water from AWWD is on a wholesale basis and subject to the terms
and conditions of the water supply agreement that has been in place since 1978. Negotiations
for a new agreement are underway at the time of this writing and a final agreement is
expected by the end of 2010. The City is also currently negotiating a new agreement with
SPU for long-term standby supply through the year 2060.
The City’s primary supply of water is produced at the source by the City of Everett, then
supplied to the AWWD, and finally supplied to the City of Edmonds. The City of Everett is
also the regional supplier of water to a majority of water systems in Snohomish County.
Everett’s source of water originates from the Sultan River and fills Lake Chaplain, where it is
drawn and treated at the Everett Water Filtration Plant. The water also receives chlorine
disinfection within the AWWD system prior to being supplied to Edmonds. Water quality is
routinely monitored within the City’s system and has been good in the past with no water
quality concerns.
PAST WATER USAGE AND FUTURE WATER DEMANDS
Total annual water usage within the City’s service area peaked in 2003, at a time the City
was supplying an average of 3.65 million gallons per day (MGD). Since 2003, total annual
water usage has decreased at the same time that the number of water customers has
moderately increased. Total water supply to the system averaged 3.07 MGD in 2008. The
average per capita water demand within the City’s service area from 2003 through 2008 was
104 gallons per day per person. This represents a reduction of more than 6 percent when
compared to the average water demand of 111 gallons per day per person that was presented
in the City’s 2002 Comprehensive Water System Plan for the years 1995 through 2000. The
reduction in water usage in terms of both total annual water supply and average day demand
per person over the last several years is due to the success of the City’s past conservation
efforts, replacement of old water mains, and the detection and repair of water main leaks.
Additional reductions in per capita water demand are expected in future years, but not likely
at the same rate seen in recent years. Future reductions from water use are expected from
ongoing replacements of old water main and the continued implementation of water use
efficiency measures (previously referred to as conservation measures), both at the local and
Packet Page 144 of 562
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
09-1030.103 Page ES-3 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.25.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
regional levels. Growth of customers within the City’s existing service area will have the
largest impact on overall water demand during the next 20 years. At the end of the 20-year
planning period, the estimated amount of additional water demand from planned growth will
represent an increase between approximately 12 and 21 percent, depending on the amount of
future water use reductions from the continued water use efficiency program efforts.
OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
The City’s Water Division is staffed by several well-qualified personnel that are certified to
operate and maintain the water system, as required by law. The City provides ongoing
training opportunities for staff to comply with the State’s certification requirements and to
develop the skills necessary to ensure a dependable supply of high-quality drinking water is
available to customers at all times.
The Water Division is currently staffed with eight full-time personnel consisting of five field
technicians, one water quality technician, one meter reader and one lead supervisor. The
Water and Sewer Manager and Public Works Director both allocate a portion of their time to
the Water Division as well. The City’s current staffing level is adequate to operate the water
system and meet the current regulatory requirements. The City will routinely evaluate
staffing needs and add staff in the future, as allowed by the budget, to ensure compliance
with regulatory requirements and the increasing operation and maintenance needs of the
system. The City plans to add one new staff position in the second half of 2010 to maintain
the City’s GIS system with one-third of the position being funded by the Water Utility.
WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS COMPLETED SINCE 2002
The City has completed several water system improvement projects since the last water
system plan was completed in 2002. These include an upgrade to the Five Corners Pump
Station, seismic and control valve improvements at the reservoir sites, pressure reducing
station improvements, and several projects that replaced old and undersized water main.
WATER SYSTEM ANALYSIS AND PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS
The existing water system was analyzed to determine its ability to meet current water system
regulations and the City’s own policies and design criteria. Several analyses were performed
to evaluate all components of the water system under both existing and future water demand
conditions. The results of the analyses were used to identify and size improvements for the
water system. A summary of the planned improvements follows.
• Improvements to the Alderwood Supply Station are planned to expand its capacity
and improve its operation in conjunction with the Five Corners Pump Station.
• Improvements to the Five Corners Pump Station that were underway in 2009 and
planned for completion in 2010 will replace old equipment, expand the capacity of the
Packet Page 145 of 562
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
09-1030.103 Page ES-4 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.25.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
station, and improve the operation of the station in conjunction with the Alderwood
Supply Station.
• The Seaview Reservoir needs ventilation system improvements and new water quality
sampling equipment.
• The Yost Reservoir needs ventilation system improvements, access hatch
improvements, and new water quality sampling equipment.
• Both the Five Corners 3.0 MG Reservoir and 1.5 MG Reservoir will need to be
recoated in the near future.
• A new PRV station is needed near Viewland Way and 12th Avenue to increase fire
flow and provide supply redundancy in the 420 Zone.
• Pressure relief improvements are needed to protect the water system from potentially
high pressures that could occur during certain events.
• Several of the PRV stations are old and need to be replaced. Other PRV stations need
minor improvements to ensure long-term operation and reliability.
• The 24-inch transmission main needs additional isolation valves to minimize impacts
to the system during maintenance and repairs.
• A significant portion of the water mains need to be replaced with larger water mains
to increase fire flows. A number of water mains are also in need of replacement due
to their age and undesirable pipe material. Improvements to resolve these
deficiencies are planned under the City’s annual water main replacement program,
which represents approximately 87 percent of the estimated cost of the total capital
improvement program.
• A number of other water system improvements have been identified and scheduled
within the 20-year planning horizon, as shown in Chapter 9.
FINANCING FOR PLANNED WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
The need for improvements to the water system is almost entirely due to infrastructure that
has reached the end of its useful service life, is undersized and unable to meet current
requirements, or has some other existing system deficiency. The improvements identified in
this plan have been sized to meet both current needs and future growth within the system.
Improvements identified for the first seven years (2010 through 2016) are estimated to cost
approximately $20.1 million, which results in an average expenditure of approximately $2.87
million per year (in 2009 dollars).
A financing plan has been developed for funding the planned improvements and ongoing
operations and maintenance, while providing for debt service payments through 2016. The
improvements will be funded from capital fund reserves, rate revenues, capital facilities
charges, and revenue bonds. Most of the future capital project costs will be funded from the
proceeds of new revenue bonds. Water rate adjustments are necessary to provide sufficient
revenue to support the ongoing operation and maintenance of the water system.
Packet Page 146 of 562
DRAFT
1
Introduction
AUTHORIZATION AND PURPOSE
Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. (MSA) was authorized by the City of Edmonds (City) in
April 2009 to prepare this Comprehensive Water System Plan. This plan must be updated
and submitted to the Washington State Department of Health (DOH) every six years in
accordance with the regulatory requirements contained in WAC 246-290-100. The purpose
of this updated plan is to meet the current regulatory requirements for water system planning
and provide useful planning information that will guide the City in operating, maintaining,
and improving its water system.
BACKGROUND
The City’s existing Comprehensive Water System Plan, dated June 2002, was approved by
DOH in November 2002. Several regulatory changes affecting water system plans have
occurred since 2002. These include updated drinking water regulations codified under WAC
246-290 that were published by DOH in 2004 and 2008, requirements from the 2003
Municipal Water Law and the subsequent Water Use Efficiency Rule that was implemented
on January 22, 2007.
WATER SYSTEM OWNERSHIP AND MANAGEMENT
The City of Edmonds is a municipal corporation that owns and operates a public water
system within its corporate boundaries. Water system data on file at the DOH for the City is
shown in Table 1-1.
Table 1-1
Water System Ownership and Management
09-1030.103 Page 1-1 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.12.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Information Type Description
System Name City of Edmonds
System Type Group A-Community-Public Water System
County Snohomish County
System ID Number 22500
Owner Number 1683
Address 7110 210th Street SW, Edmonds, WA 98026-7219
Primary Contact 425-771-0235
Owner Contact Jim Waite, Water and Sewer Manager
Packet Page 147 of 562
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
09-1030.103 Page 1-2 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.12.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
EXISTING WATER SYSTEM OVERVIEW
The City’s municipal water system started in 1928 with the construction of new water
facilities and the acquisition of a private water company that was serving central Edmonds
for many years. The City’s water service area has grown over the years as the City expanded
and annexed more areas. In 2008, the City provided water service to more than 10,050
customer accounts within an area of approximately 7.7 square miles.
At the time of this writing, all water supplied by the City is purchased from Alderwood
Water and Wastewater District (AWWD) and is conveyed through a single metered
connection near the northeast corner of the City’s system. The City also has the capability to
serve a portion of its system with water purchased from Seattle Public Utilities (SPU) and
conveyed through a single metered connection near the southeast corner of the City’s system,
but currently maintains this source of supply on standby. Water purchased from AWWD
originates from the City of Everett Sultan River source and is sold to AWWD on a wholesale
basis. Water supplied by SPU originates from SPUs Tolt River source.
The City’s water system has seven pressure zones with two supply stations, 17 pressure
reducing stations, two pressure relief stations, one pump station, more than 139 miles of
water main, and nine emergency interties with adjacent water systems. Water storage is
provided by four reservoirs that have a combined capacity of approximately 7.5 million
gallons (MG).
SUMMARY OF PLAN CONTENTS
A brief summary of the plan and organization of content is provided below:
• Executive Summary: Summarizes the key elements of this plan.
• Chapter 1 - Introduction: Provides an overview of the City’s water system, the
objectives of the plan, and the plan organization.
• Chapter 2 - Water System Description: Presents the water service area, describes the
existing water system, and identifies the adjacent water purveyors.
• Chapter 3 - Land Use and Population: Presents related plans, land use, and population
characteristics.
• Chapter 4 - Water Demands: Presents historical water use patterns, existing water
demands, and projected future demands.
• Chapter 5 - Policies and Design Criteria: Presents the City’s water service policies,
water system operation policies, and water system design criteria.
• Chapter 6 - Water Source and Quality: Describes the City’s water source and the
results of past water quality monitoring.
• Chapter 7 - Operations and Maintenance: Describes the City’s water system
operations and maintenance program.
Packet Page 148 of 562
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
09-1030.103 Page 1-3 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.12.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
• Chapter 8 - Water System Analyses: Presents the results of the water system analyses
and summarizes existing system deficiencies.
• Chapter 9 - Water System Improvements: Describes the water system improvements
that resolve existing system deficiencies, estimated costs of improvements, and a
schedule for implementation of the improvements.
• Chapter 10 - Financial Program: Summarizes the financial status of the City’s water
utility and presents a program for funding the water system improvements.
• Appendices: Additional information and plans that supplement the chapters listed
above.
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Definitions for terms used in this plan are provided below.
Consumption: The volume of water used by the water system’s customers, based on
customer meter records. The volume is measured at each customer's connection to the
distribution system.
Cross-Connection: A physical arrangement that connects a drinking water system with
anything other than another drinking water system with the potential for a contamination of
the drinking water.
Demand: The quantity of water required from a water supply source over a period of time
necessary to meet the needs of domestic, commercial, industrial, and public uses, and to
provide enough water to supply fire fighting, system losses, and miscellaneous water uses.
Demands are normally discussed in terms of flow rate, such as million gallons per day (mgd)
or gallons per minute (gpm), and are described in terms of a volume of water delivered
during a certain time period. Types of demands discussed in this plan include:
• Average Day Demand (ADD): The total amount of water delivered to the system in
a year divided by the number of days in the year.
• Peak Day Demand (PDD): The maximum amount of water delivered to the system
during a 24-hour time period of a given year.
• Peak Hour Demand (PHD): The maximum amount of water delivered to the
system, excluding fire flow, during a one hour time period of a given year. Peak hour
demand usually occurs during the same day as the peak day demand.
Distribution System Leakage (DSL): The annual amount of water calculated from the
difference between the measured amount of water supplied into the system and the measured
amount of water taken out of the system for consumption and other authorized uses.
Authorized uses include both metered and unmetered water uses. Water use that is
unmetered must be estimated to be classified as an authorized use. Examples of common
Packet Page 149 of 562
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
09-1030.103 Page 1-4 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.12.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
unmetered water uses include the use of hydrants for flushing, fire fighting, and construction.
The calculated DSL volume consists primarily of water loss through leaks in the water
system, but may also include meter inaccuracies, meter reading errors, water theft, and
reservoir overflows.
Equivalent Residential Units (ERU’s): One ERU represents the amount of water used by
one single family residence for a specific water system. The demand of other customer
classes can be expressed in terms of ERU’s by dividing the demand of each of the other
customer classes by the demand represented by one ERU.
Fire Flow: The rate of flow of water required during fire fighting, which is usually
expressed in terms of gallons per minute (gpm).
Head: A measure of pressure or force by water. Head is measured in feet and can be
converted to pounds per square inch (psi) by dividing feet by 2.31.
Head Loss or Pressure Loss: A reduction in pressure caused by pipeline wall friction,
bends, physical restrictions, or obstructions as water moves through a pipeline.
Hydraulic Elevation: The height of a free water surface above a defined datum; the height
above the ground to which water in a pressure pipeline would rise in a vertical open-end pipe.
Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL): The maximum permissible level of contaminant in
the water that the purveyor delivers to any public water system user, measured at the
locations identified under WAC 246-290-310.
Potable: Water suitable for human consumption.
Pressure Zone: A portion of a water system that operates at a common hydraulic elevation.
Purveyor: An agency, subdivision of the State, municipal corporation, firm, company,
mutual or cooperative association, institution, partnership, persons, or other entity owning or
operating a public water system. Purveyor also means the authorized agents of such entities.
Supply: Water that is delivered to a water system by one or more supply facilities, which
may consist of supply stations, booster pump stations, and wells.
Storage: Water that is “stored” in a reservoir to supplement the supply facilities of a system
and provide water supply for emergency conditions. Storage is broken down into the
following five components that are defined and discussed in more detail in the plan:
operational storage, equalizing storage, standby storage, fire flow storage, and dead storage.
Packet Page 150 of 562
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
09-1030.103 Page 1-5 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.12.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Water Service Connection Fee: A one-time fee paid by a property owner when initially
connecting to the City’s water system. This fee pays for the new customer’s equitable share
of the cost of the existing system. This fee offsets the costs of providing water to new
customers and recognizes that the existing water system was largely built and paid for by the
existing customers.
ABBREVIATIONS
The following abbreviations are used in this plan:
ADD: Average Day Demand
AWWA: American Water Works Association
AWWD: Alderwood Water and Wastewater District
CCR: Consumer Confidence Report
CIP: Capital Improvement Program
City: City of Edmonds
DOH: Department of Health
DSL: Distribution System Leakage
EPA: Environmental Protection Agency
ERU: Equivalent Residential Unit
fps: feet per second
GMA: Growth Management Act
gpm: gallons per minute
MCL: Maximum Contaminant Level
MG: Million Gallons
MGD: Million Gallons per Day
mg/l: milligrams per liter
PDD: Peak Day Demand
PHD: Peak Hour Demand
psi: pounds per square inch
SDWA: Safe Drinking Water Act
SPU: Seattle Public Utilities
WAC: Washington Administrative Code
Packet Page 151 of 562
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
09-1030.103 Page 1-6 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.12.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 152 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Page 2-1 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
2
Water System Description
INTRODUCTION
This chapter describes the City of Edmond’s existing water system and provides a brief
discussion of the water systems that are adjacent to the City’s system. Included is a
discussion of the water service area, water service agreements, and all existing water system
facilities. The evaluation of the existing water system is presented in Chapter 8.
WATER SERVICE AREA
City History
The City of Edmonds was incorporated in 1890 with the original town site encompassing
approximately 550 acres. The original town site is now occupied primarily by the downtown
and adjacent residential areas. The City has expanded in area through annexations to
approximately 8.9 square miles. The City continued to grow during the 1940's and 50's,
resulting in a more active role of the municipality in providing water, sewer and streets for
the residential and commercial expansion. The Port District was formed in 1948 and began
waterfront improvements. Commercial and retail businesses within the downtown area
provided a wide range of services to the community. Completion of Interstate 5 and
increased growth in the Puget Sound region led to a gradual change in the character of
Edmonds with more emphasis on residential development and a decline in the retail
importance of the downtown. The City is now primarily a residential community.
The rate of population growth has been relatively stable over the years with a major increase
between 1950 and 1970 from 8,016 to 23,700 due to annexations. Between 1990 and 2000,
the population expanded to 39,515 due to annexations in the southern portion of the City.
Since then, the City’s population has grown to approximately 40,760 in 2008.
Approximately 80 percent of the City’s population receives water service from the City. The
remaining 20 percent receive water service from the Olympic View Water & Sewer District,
which is located within the southwest portion of the City limits.
Water System History
The original water system was established by the Edmonds Water Company in the late
1890’s. Water was supplied from local springs and wells. The Edmonds Spring Water
Company acquired the Edmonds Water Company shortly thereafter. The first large reservoir,
a 300,000 gallon concrete tank, was constructed in 1921 near Ninth Avenue and Main Street.
The City started acquiring and building their own municipal water system in 1928, beginning
with a 500,000 gallon steel water tank and two wells. The City struggled with water
Packet Page 153 of 562
CHAPTER 2 WATER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
09-1030.103 Page 2-2 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
shortages and poor water quality from their groundwater sources through the 1950’s and
1960’s. In 1966, the City contracted with the City of Seattle for a new water supply. A
transmission main was extended from a new supply meter at the King County – Snohomish
County boundary line through the Ballinger area north to the City storage tank near Five
Corners. The City also signed a water supply agreement with Alderwood Water &
Wastewater District (AWWD) in 1966 to supply water to the City through a metered
connection at the intersection of 168th Street SW and 62nd Avenue West. The City
abandoned the wells and springs after completion of the new supply sources. The City has
increasingly supplied the entire water system with water from AWWD, except during periods
of high water demand. This has also reduced the City’s water purchase costs, because
Seattle’s water is more expensive than AWWD water during the summer months.
Topography
The City’s water service area is located in a relatively hilly portion of southwest Snohomish
County. The highest elevation in the City is in the southeast corner at over 450 feet. The
topography of the City’s service area generally slopes downward from east to west towards
the Puget Sound with the exception of the southeast corner of the service area which also
slopes down towards Lake Ballinger.
Retail Water Service Area
The City’s retail water service area is within the City limits with the boundary defined by the
City limits, except for the southwest portion of the City that is served by Olympic View
Water & Sewer District, as shown in Figure 2-1, Existing Water System. These limits are
generally defined as the area that extends north to Meadowdale Beach Park, south to 244th
Street SW along the Snohomish/King County boundary, and west to Puget Sound. The
eastern boundary of the City limits generally follows Olympic View Drive, 76th Ave West,
and Highway 99 except for a small portion of the City bounded on the west by Highway 99
and Lake Ballinger to the east between 220th Street SW and 244th Street SW.
Satellite System Management
A Satellite Management Agency (SMA) is defined as a person or entity that is certified by
the Department of Health to own and/or operate more than one public water system without
the necessity for a physical connection between such systems. The City provides water
service to all customers in its water service area. Currently, no small water systems exist
within the City’s water service area. The areas adjacent to the City’s water service area
boundary are currently served by relatively large, public water systems that are unlikely to
become future satellite water systems.
WATER SERVICE AGREEMENTS
The City has entered into separate agreements with the AWWD and Seattle Public Utilities
(SPU) for the purchase of water on a wholesale basis. The City also has an agreement with
Packet Page 154 of 562
CHAPTER 2 WATER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
09-1030.103 Page 2-3 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Olympic View Water & Sewer District to supply water to customers within the City limits.
A summary of these agreements is presented below and copies are contained in the
appendices of this plan.
1978 Water Supply Agreement with Alderwood Water & Wastewater District
This agreement provides for the wholesale supply of water from AWWD to the City of
Edmonds. A copy of this agreement is contained in Appendix A. The agreement consists of
several sections that address future facility acquisitions, water supply, storage deficiency
demand charge, master metering, area of use, water quality, wholesale water rates, and a
number of other elements. The original agreement was to expire in 1988, but was extended
by mutual agreement to the year 2010. Discussions are currently underway between the City
and AWWD to ensure that a new water supply agreement is in place before the existing
agreement expires in September 2010. The new agreement is intended to provide for all of
the City’s long-term water supply needs up to the year 2055.
1981 Water Supply Agreement with City of Seattle
The 1981 Water Purveyor Contract between the City of Seattle and the City of Edmonds is
for the purchase of water from Seattle on a wholesale basis until January 1, 2012. A copy of
this agreement is contained in Appendix A. The City currently obtains supply from Seattle
on an as-needed basis during periods of unusually high water demand only. Negotiations are
underway to revise this agreement to provide supply on a standby basis with a projected
expiration in the year 2060.
1985 Agreement with Olympic View Water District
This agreement provides for water supply from the Olympic View Water & Sewer District
(OVWSD) to customers located within the Edmond’s city limits and the boundaries of
OVWSD, subject to the terms and conditions as outlined in the agreement. A copy of this
agreement is contained in Appendix A. Also included in Appendix A is a copy of the
OVWSD franchise agreement and an interlocal operating agreement between the City and
OVWSD.
EXISTING WATER SYSTEM FACILITIES
A description of the City’s existing water system facilities is provided in this section. The
analysis of these facilities is presented in Chapter 8. General water system facility data is
summarized on the Department of Health Water Facilities Inventory (WFI) form, which is
included in Appendix B. More detailed water system facility information is contained in
Appendix C.
Pressure Zones
The topography throughout the City’s water system varies from sea level along the west side
bordering Puget Sound to approximately 450 feet near the eastern portion of the City. The
Packet Page 155 of 562
CHAPTER 2 WATER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
09-1030.103 Page 2-4 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
terrain generally slopes from east to west toward Puget Sound. This wide range of elevation
requires the City to reduce or increase pressure in certain areas to provide sufficient water
pressure and fire flow throughout the system. This is has been accomplished by dividing the
water system into seven different pressure zones, as shown in Figure 2-1. The pressure in
each pressure zone is regulated by reservoir levels, pressure reducing station settings, pump
station settings, or a combination of these, as illustrated in the hydraulic profile, Figure 2-2.
Overview
The 596 Zone is the City’s highest and largest pressure zone and is supplied water directly
from the City’s primary supply facility, the Alderwood Supply Station. All water supply to
the system originates in the 596 Zone and is conveyed to lower pressure zones through
pressure reducing valve (PRV) stations. A more detailed description of the City’s seven
pressure zones follows.
596 Zone
The 596 Zone is the City’s largest zone with customers in the central and eastern portion of
the City. All water supply to the 596 Zone is from the Alderwood Supply Station. The 596
Zone is a closed zone, which is a pressure zone without gravity storage. Pumped water
storage is provided for the 596 Zone, utilizing the Five Corners 3.0 MG and 1.5 MG
Reservoirs and the Five Corners Pump Station. The 596 Zone can also receive water on an
emergency basis from four manually operated emergency interties with the City of
Lynnwood, which are located along the eastern boundary of the service area. Ground
elevations vary throughout the 596 Zone from approximately 275 to 452 feet.
505 Zone
The 505 Zone supplies water to customers in the central and northern portion of the City.
Water to this zone is supplied from the 596 Zone through four PRV stations, which reduce
the pressure of the water to maintain adequate pressures in the zone. Ground elevations vary
throughout the 505 Zone from approximately 194 to 376 feet.
500 Zone
The 500 Zone supplies water to customers near the northern portion of the City. Water to
this zone is supplied from the 596 Zone through two PRV stations. Ground elevations vary
throughout the 500 Zone from approximately 162 to 368 feet.
Packet Page 156 of 562
CHAPTER 2 WATER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
09-1030.103 Page 2-5 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
486 Zone
The 486 Zone supplies water to customers in the central and southern portion of the City.
The primary supply of water to this zone is from the Five Corners 1.5 MG Reservoir, which
floats on the zone and establishes pressures throughout the zone. This reservoir is supplied
with water from the 596 Zone through a control valve at the reservoir site. Supplemental
water supply to the 486 Zone is provided by two PRV stations, which are supplied by the 596
Zone. These PRV stations are normally not flowing, but are set to supply water during fire
flow events and other high demand situations when pressures drop in the 486 Zone. The 486
Zone can also receive water on an emergency basis through three manually operated
emergency interties with OVWSD. Ground elevations vary throughout the 486 Zone from
approximately 138 to 375 feet.
425 Zone
The 425 Zone is the smallest zone with customers near the north portion of the City. Water
to this zone is supplied from the 596 Zone through two PRV stations. Ground elevations
vary throughout the 425 Zone from approximately 185 to 300 feet.
420 Zone
The 420 Zone supplies water to customers in the central portion of the City. Water to this
zone is supplied from the 596 Zone through one PRV station. Ground elevations vary
throughout the 420 Zone from approximately 154 to 250 feet.
325 Zone
The 325 Zone is the second largest pressure zone, which supplies water to customers in the
western portion of the City. The primary supply of water to this zone is from the 1.5 MG
Seaview Reservoir and 1.5 MG Yost Reservoir. Both of these reservoirs float on the zone
and establish pressures throughout the zone. The Seaview Reservoir is supplied with water
from the 505 Zone through a control valve at the reservoir site. The Yost Reservoir is
supplied with water from the 486 Zone through a control valve at the reservoir site.
Supplemental water supply to the 325 Zone is provided by four PRV stations, which are
supplied by three different pressure zones, as shown in Figure 2-2. These PRV stations are
normally not flowing, but are set to supply water during fire flow events and other high
demand situations when pressures drop in the 325 Zone. The 325 Zone can also receive
water on an emergency basis through a single manually operated emergency intertie with
OVWSD. Ground elevations vary throughout the 325 Zone from approximately 15 to 220
feet.
Packet Page 157 of 562
CHAPTER 2 WATER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
09-1030.103 Page 2-6 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Supply Facilities
Alderwood Supply Station
The City currently supplies the entire system with water purchased from AWWD, which in
turn purchases the water from the City of Everett. The supply of wholesale water from the
AWWD to the City is provided under the terms of the 1978 Water Supply Agreement and its
subsequent amendments, as described earlier in this chapter.
The Alderwood Supply Station, located at the intersection of 168th Street SW and Olympic
View Drive, is a below-grade concrete vault with a single 24-inch inlet pipe from the
AWWD system and a single 24-inch outlet pipe to the City’s 596 Zone. Inside the vault, the
mainline piping includes a 10-inch flow meter and 12-inch control valve. The internal
bypass piping includes an 8-inch flow meter and 6-inch control valve. The 12-inch control
valve is configured to allow the City to operate the facility in either flow control or pressure
control mode. Modifications to the station are scheduled in 2010 to improve operation
during peak demand periods in conjunction with the Five Corners Pump Station.
Seattle Public Utilities Supply Station
The City has increasingly supplied the entire water system with water from AWWD, due to
SPU’s higher water rates. In recent years, the SPU Supply Station has been operated in a
standby mode for use as an emergency supply or to provide supplemental supply during high
demand periods. The supply of wholesale water from SPU to the City is provided under the
terms of the 1981 Water Purveyor Contract and its subsequent amendments, as described
earlier in this chapter.
The SPU Supply Station is a below-grade concrete vault with a single 20-inch inlet pipe, 20-
inch outlet piping, a 12-inch flow meter, and a 12-inch control valve. The control valve
enables the City to operate the facility in either flow control or pressure control modes.
Water Treatment
All water purchased by the City is treated before it enters the City’s distribution system. The
City does not provide additional water treatment. Water purchased from AWWD is treated
by the City of Everett at the City’s water filtration plant, which is located adjacent to Lake
Chaplain. In addition to filtration, Everett also provides chlorination and fluoridation at the
filtration plant. Additional chlorination is provided by AWWD at the AWWD reservoir
sites.
Water treatment of the Seattle supply is provided by the SPU Tolt Treatment Facility, located
near the South Fork Tolt River. Seattle provides filtration, ozonation, chlorination and
fluoridation at this facility.
Packet Page 158 of 562
CHAPTER 2 WATER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
09-1030.103 Page 2-7 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Pumping Facilities
Five Corners Pump Station
The Five Corners Pump Station is at the same site as the Five Corners 1.5 MG and 3.0 MG
Reservoirs, which are located on the north side of Bowdoin Way, west of the Five Corners
intersection at 212th Street SW and 84th Avenue West. The pump station was constructed in
1978 when the Five Corners 3.0 MG Reservoir was constructed on the same site. The
primary purpose of the pump station is to pump stored water from the Five Corners 3.0 MG
Reservoir to the 596 Zone to supplement supply from the Alderwood Supply Station during
peak demand periods, to supply fire flow, and to provide emergency supply if the Alderwood
Supply Station is out of service. Both reservoirs at the Five Corners site store water at
elevations too low to gravity flow into the 596 Zone, thereby requiring pumping.
Improvements to the pump station, consisting of pump replacements and control
modifications, were constructed in 2009 to allow better operation of the pump station in
conjunction with the Alderwood Supply Station. The pump station contains two end-suction
centrifugal pumps with 60 horsepower motors, each designed to pump 1,195 gpm at 130 feet
total head. A standby engine generator at the site provides backup power supply in the event
of a power failure to ensure that the pump station is operational at all times.
Storage Facilities
The City’s water system has four reservoirs with a total combined storage capacity of
approximately 7.5 million gallons. Two reservoirs provide storage to the 325 Zone and the
two other reservoirs at the Five Corners site provide storage to other pressure zones. A more
detailed description of each reservoir is provided below.
325 Zone 1.5 MG Seaview Reservoir
The 325 Zone 1.5 MG Seaview Reservoir is located south of 184th Street SW at
approximately 90th Ave West, which is the site of Seaview Park. The 119-foot square buried
concrete reservoir was constructed in 1975 and provides approximately 15 vertical feet of
water storage for the 325 Zone with an overflow elevation of 325 feet. The reservoir has 8-
inch inlet and 12-inch outlet piping.
325 Zone 1.5 MG Yost Reservoir
The 325 Zone 1.5 MG Yost Reservoir is located at 9537 Bowdoin Way, near the southern
end of the distribution system. Similar to the Seaview Reservoir, the Yost Reservoir is also a
119-foot square buried concrete reservoir. The reservoir is located under tennis courts at
Seaview Park. It was constructed in 1973 and provides approximately 15 vertical feet of
water storage for the 325 Zone with an overflow elevation of 325 feet. The reservoir has 8-
inch inlet and 18-inch outlet piping. A chlorination facility is located at this site in a separate
building, which was used in the past to boost chlorine residuals when water was supplied on
a regular basis by SPU. The chlorination facility is no longer used by the City as adequate
chlorine residual is provided from the AWWD supply source.
Packet Page 159 of 562
CHAPTER 2 WATER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
09-1030.103 Page 2-8 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Five Corners 1.5 MG Reservoir
The Five Corners 1.5 MG Reservoir is located just west of Five Corners at 8519 Bowdoin
Way. The reservoir is an 80-foot diameter welded steel standpipe that was constructed in
1960 and provides approximately 37 feet of water storage with an overflow elevation of 486
feet. The reservoir has separate 10-inch inlet and 10-inch outlet piping. The inlet piping is
elevated in order to promote mixing and higher water quality within the reservoir.
Five Corners 3.0 MG Reservoir
The Five Corners 3.0 MG Reservoir is located on the same site as the 1.5 MG Reservoir at
Five Corners. The reservoir is a 104-foot diameter welded steel standpipe that was
constructed in 1978 and provides approximately 47 feet of water storage with an overflow
elevation of 492.5 feet. The reservoir has separate 10-inch inlet and 10-inch outlet piping.
Distribution System
The City’s water distribution system consists of approximately 140 miles of water main
ranging in size from 4-inches to 24-inches in diameter. Table 2-1 summarizes the water
main in the City’s distribution system by diameter and total length of each size.
Table 2-1
Water Main Summary
4" & smaller 26.7 19.1%
6 44.0 31.5%
8 47.9 34.3%
10 2.5 1.8%
12 12.0 8.6%
14 0.2 0.1%
16 1.0 0.7%
18 0.3 0.2%
20 1.0 0.7%
24 4.0 2.9%
Totals 139.6 100%
Diameter
(inches)
Total Length
(miles) % of Total
The City has an ongoing comprehensive leak detection program, which was started in 2002,
to identify and eliminate water system leaks. The program involved retaining the services of
a specialty firm that checked all water distribution piping in the system with computer-
assisted leak detection equipment. All leaks discovered have been repaired. This system-
wide leak detection program will be repeated periodically to ensure that future leaks are
promptly repaired. The City’s annual water main replacement program has targeted
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 160 of 562
CHAPTER 2 WATER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
09-1030.103 Page 2-9 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
replacement of older water mains, which are typically responsible for most of the leaks.
Water main improvements planned by the City are identified in Chapter 9.
PRV Stations
Pressure reducing valve (PRV) stations are connections between adjacent pressure zones that
allow water to flow from the higher pressure zone to the lower pressure zone by reducing the
pressure of the water as it flows through the station to maintain a desired range of pressures
in the lower zone. A PRV station is typically a below-grade concrete vault that normally
contains two pressure reducing control valves, piping, and other appurtenances. The control
valve hydraulically varies the flow of water through the station to maintain a constant
pressure on the downstream side of the valve as water flows into the lower pressure zone.
PRV stations are placed in water systems to function in one of two ways. They can function
as an active supply facility by maintaining a continuous supply of water into a lower zone
that has no other source of supply. The PRV stations that serve the 505 Zone, 500 Zone, 425
Zone, and 420 Zone are this type. The other function of PRV stations is to serve as a standby
supply facility, providing fire flow or emergency water supply, where the main supply to the
zone is from another facility, typically a supply facility or reservoir. For this type of PRV
station, they are normally not supplying water until the zone that they serve experiences a
drop in pressure that is significant enough to activate the PRV station. The PRV stations that
supply the City’s 486 Zone and 325 Zone are this type.
The City’s water system has a total of 15 active PRV stations, as shown in plan view in
Figure 2-1 and in profile view in Figure 2-2. All of the City’s PRV stations are located in
below-grade concrete vaults. A listing of all PRV stations and related data is contained in
Appendix C.
Pressure Relief Facilities
Pressure relief stations are installed in pressure zones that are supplied with water from a higher
pressure zone or a high-pressure source. A pressure relief station typically consists of a below-
grade vault that houses a pressure relief valve, piping, and other appurtenances. Pressure relief
stations protect the zone that it is installed in by discharging water out of the system when
pressures in the zone increase beyond the set point of the pressure relief valve, thereby
maintaining safe pressures in the zone. The pressure relief valve is normally closed and opens
when the pressure in the zone increases beyond the set point of the valve. The valve opens and
hydraulically varies the flow rate through the valve to limit the maximum pressure on the
upstream side of the valve. A common application for a pressure relief station is to protect a
pressure zone from high pressures when a pressure reducing valve in a pressure reducing station
fails in the open position and allows high pressure water to enter the lower pressure zone. As an
alternative to installing pressure relief stations, pressure relief valves can be installed within PRV
stations on the lower pressure zone side of the pressure reducing valve.
Packet Page 161 of 562
CHAPTER 2 WATER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
09-1030.103 Page 2-10 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
The City has two pressure relief stations, each located in the 325 Zone. One is located in the
northern part of the zone, the second in the southern part of the zone. The pressure relief
facilities protect the 325 Zone from high pressures in the event of a “stuck open” valve failure of
any of the 325 Zone PRV stations, since the PRV stations are not equipped with pressure relief
valves. None of the City’s PRV stations have pressure relief valves. A pressure relief
improvement project has been identified in Chapter 9 to address this issue.
Water System Interties
Water system interties are physical connections between two adjacent water systems that are
normally separated by a closed isolation valve or control valve. Interties either function as a
normal supply facility or an emergency supply facility. The City’s Alderwood Supply Station
and SPU Supply Station are considered normal supply interties. Emergency supply interties
provide water from one system to another during emergencies situations only. The City’s four
interties with the City of Lynnwood and four interties with OVWSD are considered emergency
interties. These emergency interties are all manually operated, closed valve interties that provide
the City with a backup source of water supply in the event that the Alderwood Supply Station
or SPU Supply Station is out of service.
Telemetry and Supervisory Control System
The City’s telemetry and supervisory control system records water system data and provides
automatic control of all supply, storage, and pumping facilities. The City’s telemetry and
supervisory control system also provides instant alarm notification to operations personnel in the
event of equipment failure, operation problem, or other emergency event in the system.
A summary of the City’s telemetry and supervisory control system at each water system facility
is provided below. All facilities are linked to the City’s master telemetry unit at the operations
facility via leased telephone wires.
• Alderwood Supply Station: Monitors and records flow rate and pressure. Remote control of
the combination pressure reducing/flow control valve settings.
• Seattle Supply Station: Monitors and records flow rate and pressure. Remote control of the
combination pressure reducing/flow control valve settings.
• Reservoirs: Monitors and records water level, chlorine residual, and inflow rate.
• Five Corners Pump Station: Monitors and records suction pressure, discharge pressure
(596 Zone), and flow rate.
Packet Page 162 of 562
CHAPTER 2 WATER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
09-1030.103 Page 2-11 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
ADJACENT WATER SYSTEMS
The area outside and immediately adjacent to the City’s existing water service area is served
by several public water systems, as shown in Figure 2-3. The following provides a brief
description of each adjacent water system.
Alderwood Water & Wastewater District
The Alderwood Water & Wastewater District provides direct retail water service to cities of
Brier and Mill Creek, portions of the cities of Bothell and Mukilteo, and unincorporated areas
of southwest Snohomish County. Like the City of Edmonds, the AWWD also provides
wholesale water service to the cities of Mountlake Terrace and Lynnwood. The AWWD
purchases all of its water from the City of Everett. There are no current plans for changes in
water service area boundaries between the City and AWWD.
City of Seattle/Seattle Public Utilities
The City of Seattle direct water service area is located to the south of the City of Edmonds.
SPU receives its water supply from the Cedar River and Tolt River watersheds. There are no
current plans for changes in water service area boundaries between the City of Edmonds and
the City of Seattle direct service area.
Olympic View Water & Sewer District
The Olympic View Water & Sewer District is located to the south of the City of Edmonds
and provides water service to a population of approximately 12,900 people. The District’s
service area includes the Town of Woodway, part of the City of Edmonds, and a portion of
unincorporated Snohomish County. Most of the District’s water supply is purchased from
the Seattle Public Utilities. The District also maintains its own sources. The District has five
emergency interties with Edmonds. Two are located along 220th Street SW at approximately
7th Ave South and 9th Ave South. One is located near the intersection between Pine Street
and Chinook Road. One is located near the intersection of 224th Street SW and 76th Ave
South. One is located near the intersection of 216th Street SW and Chinook Place. No other
future interties were identified in the District’s most recent Comprehensive Water System
Plan. However, a potential future emergency intertie could be installed near the intersection
of 236th Street SW and Highway 99 where the City extended a 12-inch water main stub to the
west side of the highway approximately 10 years ago when the highway was re-paved. There
are no current plans for changes in water service area boundaries between the City and the
District.
City of Lynnwood
The City of Lynnwood is located to the east of the City of Edmonds and provides water
service to a population of more than 35,700 people. The City of Lynnwood purchases all of
its water from the AWWD. There are four manually operated emergency interties between
Lynnwood’s 573 Zone and Edmonds 596 Zone. Due to the similar hydraulic elevations of
Packet Page 163 of 562
CHAPTER 2 WATER SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
09-1030.103 Page 2-12 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
the two zones, these emergency interties could potentially benefit either system in an
emergency situation. The City of Lynnwood’s 2005 Water System Plan did not identify any
future interties with the City of Edmonds. There are no current plans for changes in water
service area boundaries between the two systems.
City of Mountlake Terrace
The City of Mountlake Terrace is located to the east of the City of Edmonds and provides
water service to a population of approximately 21,000 people. The City purchases all of its
water from the AWWD. The City of Mountlake Terrace 2009 Comprehensive Water System
Plan identified one future emergency intertie with the City of Edmonds. The emergency
intertie would be located near the intersection of 226th Place SW and 73rd Place West,
providing an emergency supply of water from Edmonds 596 Zone to Mountlake Terrace’s
494 Zone. There are no current plans for changes in water service area boundaries between
the two systems.
Packet Page 164 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Page 3-1 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
3
Land Use and Population
INTRODUCTION
This chapter demonstrates the compatibility of the City of Edmonds (City) Comprehensive
Water System Plan with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, identifies designated land uses
within the City limits, and presents population data. The City’s Comprehensive Plan was
completed in 1995, revised in 2004, and updated in December 2008. The Comprehensive
Plan was developed to meet the requirements of the State of Washington Growth
Management Act (GMA).
COMPATIBILITY WITH OTHER PLANS
The Growth Management Act and the City’s Comprehensive Plan were reviewed to ensure
that the Comprehensive Water System Plan is consistent with the City’s land use policies.
Growth Management Act
The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA), which was passed in 1990 and
amended in years to follow, defined four goals relevant to water system planning:
1. Focus growth in urban areas and reduce sprawl;
2. Consistency between land use and utility plans;
3. Ensure adequate public facilities and services, concurrent with growth;
4. Designate and protect critical areas.
Urban Growth Area
The City of Edmonds is considered an urban growth area in accordance with GMA, per
RCW 36.70A.110. The City has coordinated with Snohomish County in designating its
urban growth areas.
Packet Page 165 of 562
CHAPTER 3 LAND USE AND POPULATION
09-1030.103 Page 3-2 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Consistency
The plans and policies of the City of Edmonds and Snohomish County must be consistent in
accordance with GMA, per RCW 36.70A.100. The GMA also requires consistency with the
implementation of water system plans and comprehensive plans, per RCW 36.70A.120.
The Municipal Water Law, which became effective in 2003, also requires consistency of
water system plans with local plans and regulations. Confirmation of consistency under this
law is achieved by means of completing the Consistency Statement Checklist, which must be
included with all water system plans. A signed copy of this checklist is included in
Appendix D.
Concurrency
The GMA requires concurrency, so that adequate public facilities and services are available
when growth occurs to ensure health, safety, and a high quality of life. The GMA requires
that growth be located in areas already served or readily served by public facilities and
services, per RCW 36.70A.110.
Critical Areas
The GMA requires that critical areas be designated and protected. Critical areas include
wetlands, steep slopes, and aquifer recharge areas. Appendix E contains a SEPA checklist
that was prepared for this Comprehensive Water System Plan that addresses environmental
issues.
City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan
The City updated its Comprehensive Plan in December of 2009. The Comprehensive Plan
was originally prepared in 1995 to comply with the requirements of GMA and RCW
35.A.63. The Comprehensive Plan provides policy that is consistent with Snohomish County
on land use, housing, capital facilities, transportation, and parks and recreation issues for a
20-year period. The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan includes goals and
policies for planning growth and development over the 20-year planning period. The
Utilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan includes goals and policies to ensure that new
development will be adequately served without impacting existing levels of service.
The Community Sustainability Element is a new section that was adopted by the City as part
of the 2009 update to the Comprehensive Plan. The Community Sustainability Element
includes goals and policies that address climate change, community health, and
environmental quality. In 2010, the City developed the Climate Change Action Plan, which
Packet Page 166 of 562
CHAPTER 3 LAND USE AND POPULATION
09-1030.103 Page 3-3 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
addresses accomplishments to date and identifies additional efforts being planned by the City
to achieve a more sustainable community. Elements of this plan related to the City’s water
system, include water conservation to reduce per capita water consumption and
implementation of capital improvements utilizing energy efficient equipment to reduce power
consumption at water system facilities.
At the regional level, the City of Everett has conducted studies to evaluate the impacts of
global climate change on its water supply to ensure that the long-term planning of the
region’s future water supply accounts for the effects of climate change. Edmonds is a
member of the Everett Water Utility Committee, which is an advisor to the Water Supply
Forum that consists of representatives of public water systems and local governments in the
Central Puget Sound region of Washington State. The Water Supply Forum addresses current
and future water supply issues facing the region and has documented the projected effects of
climate change on the region’s water supply situation in the Regional Water Supply Outlook,
which was most recently published in 2009.
LAND USE
The land area within the limits of the City is approximately 8.9 square miles (5,700 acres)
and includes approximately five miles of marine shoreline along Puget Sound. The City is
mostly built-out (approximately 96 percent developed), based on current zoning, but limited
infill and redevelopment potential remains.
The City’s Comprehensive Plan Map, which is included as Figure 3-1, shows the different
types of land uses throughout the City. As shown on the map, most of the City is single
family residential and includes a smaller portion of multi-family residential, commercial, and
other land uses. Approximately 55 percent of the land area within the City is currently
designated for single-family residential use; 5 percent is designated for multi-family
residential use; 5 percent is designated for commercial use; and the remaining 35 percent is
designated for other uses such as public right of ways, parks, schools, and open space.
POPULATION
Household Size Trends
The average household size in Edmonds has declined over the past three decades, which is
consistent with the decreasing household size trend of the nation. The average household
size in Edmonds, including both single family and multi-family dwellings, declined from
2.41 persons per household in 1990 to 2.32 persons per household in 2000.
Packet Page 167 of 562
CHAPTER 3 LAND USE AND POPULATION
09-1030.103 Page 3-4 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Existing and Future Population
Population density in Edmonds increased from 6.4 persons per acre in 1990 to 7.0 persons
per acre in 2008, based on Washington State Office of Financial Management (OFM) data.
In comparison, Lynnwood had a density of 5.6 persons per acre in 2008 and Mountlake
Terrace had a density of 8.2 persons per acre in 2008.
From 2000 to 2008 the City’s water service area population increased almost three percent
from an estimated 31,461 people to 32,349 people, as shown in Table 3-1. The table also
shows past and future projected populations within the entire City limits, which is larger in
area than the City’s water service area. The City’s water service area population at the end of
the planning period for this Comprehensive Water System Plan is estimated at 35,743 in the
year 2028.
The population projections shown in Table 3-1 are based on the City’s projected population
within the City limits for the year 2025. The 6-year population projection for 2014 is based
on an interpolation of the City’s 2008 and 2025 population numbers. The 20-year population
projection for 2028 is based on an extrapolation of the City’s 2025 population number.
Table 3-1
Historical Population and Future Projections
Population Within Population Within
Year City Limits Water Service Area
Historical
2000 39,544 31,461
2001 39,590 31,467
2002 39,460 31,296
2003 39,580 31,375
2004 39,620 31,374
2005 39,860 31,573
2006 40,360 32,031
2007 40,560 32,190
2008 40,760 32,349
Projected
2014 (+6 years) 41,998 33,332
2025 44,880 35,212
2028 (+20 years) 45,557 35,743
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 168 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Page 4-1 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
4
Water Demands
INTRODUCTION
This chapter summarizes past water demands and future projected water demands of the
system, which are used in Chapter 7 to analyze the existing water system facilities and form
the basis for sizing future water system improvements described in Chapter 9. The different
types of demands that were analyzed include: average day demand, peak day demand, peak
hour demand, fire flow demand, and future projected demands, both with and without
estimated reductions from water conservation efforts. This chapter also summarizes the
City’s water demand data collection and reporting procedures.
CURRENT POPULATION AND SERVICE CONNECTIONS
The City provided water service to a population of approximately 32,349 in 2008, as shown
in Chapter 3. The City has categorized all water customers into four different classes for
billing purposes. Water was provided to an average of 10,057 metered water service
connections in 2008. Of these approximately 8,691 (86 percent) were single family
residential accounts, 620 (6 percent) were multi-family residential accounts, 520 (5 percent)
were commercial or industrial accounts, and 226 (2 percent) were government or education
accounts. The demand analysis in the following section summarizes the past water use of the
four water customer classes.
EXISTING WATER DEMANDS
Factors Affecting Water Demands
For any public water system, the total demand of all customers will vary throughout the day
and over the course of the year. The following factors have the greatest impact on water
demand levels in a public water system: 1) population, 2) weather, and 3) type of customer.
Population and weather have the largest impact on water system demands. As population
increases, overall demand will also increase for the year. Weather has more of a shorter term
impact on demands, which tends to increase as outdoor temperatures increase and outdoor
water use increases. Water demand varies among different types of water customers. Single
family residential customers typically use more water than multi-family residential
customers, primarily due to the outdoor lawn watering and irrigation practices of single
family residences. Water demands are also affected by conservation efforts that can reduce
demands.
Packet Page 169 of 562
CHAPTER 4 WATER DEMANDS
09-1030.103 Page 4-2 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Water Consumption
Water consumption is the amount of water that customers use as measured by their water
meters. Table 4-1 shows past water consumption data from 2003 through 2008. As shown
in the table, most of the City’s overall water consumption is from single family residential
customers. Although more than 86 percent of the City’s customers are single family
residential, they only use approximately 60 percent of the total water consumed. This is due
to the lower amount of usage per single family resident as compared to other types of
customers.
Table 4-1
Average Annual Metered Consumption and Service Connections
Customer Class
Year Single Family Multi-Family
Commercial/
Industrial
Government/
Education Totals
2003 8,502 568 491 196 9,757
2004 8,540 584 501 196 9,821
2005 8,621 601 509 210 9,941
2006 8,664 607 514 212 9,997
2007 8,673 621 517 219 10,030
2008 8,691 620 520 226 10,057
Average Annual Consumption (1000 gallons)
2003 727,684 204,357 171,072 22,165 1,125,279
2004 697,741 199,446 172,327 20,598 1,090,113
2005 616,642 191,982 176,158 29,458 1,014,242
2006 664,374 200,677 175,747 95,337 1,136,136
2007 632,981 187,749 163,911 87,432 1,072,074
2008 586,285 195,651 163,624 32,600 978,160
Average Daily Consumption Per Connection (gal/day/conn)
2003 234 986 955 310
2004 224 936 942 288
2005 196 875 948 384
2006 210 906 937 1,232
2007 200 828 869 1,094
2008 185 865 862 395
Average 208 899 919 617
Average Number of Connections
As shown in Table 4-1, single family residential customers used an average of approximately
208 gallons per day per connection, which is less than the average consumption of the other
customer types. The higher consumption of customers other than single family customers is
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 170 of 562
CHAPTER 4 WATER DEMANDS
09-1030.103 Page 4-3 Comprehensive Water System Plan
expected, since these customers include multi-family residential customers where one
connection typically serves several units, and commercial customers that include some of the
system’s largest water users.
Table 4-2 shows the top 20 water customers that used the most water in 2008. The total
water consumption of these customers represents approximately 12 percent of the total
consumption in 2008. The table consists mostly of multi-family complexes, municipal
facilities, and commercial properties.
Table 4-2
2008 Largest Water Users
Name Address Water Use Type Annual Consumption (gals)
City of Lynnwood 17000 76th Ave W Domestic 23,234,495
Stevens Hospital 21601 76th Ave W Domestic 17,204,448
PAQ Properties LLC 7714 196th St SW Domestic 8,463,460
99 Ranch Market 22511 Highway 99 #104 Domestic 8,140,302
Shop & Save Inc #1111 21558 Highway 99 Domestic 7,653,320
Horizon Park Apartments 7428 208th St SW Domestic 6,387,616
Top Foods 21900 Highway 99 Domestic 5,443,574
Edmonds School District #15 7600 212th Ave W Irrigation 3,571,948
Park Ballinger Apts 22924 76th Ave W Domestic 3,507,616
Highland Park Condominiums 500 Elm Way Domestic 3,438,795
Edmonds Rehab & Healthcare 21008 76th Ave W Domestic 3,423,086
Extendicare 21400 72nd Ave W Domestic 3,121,621
Tawney Jack Athletic Club 160 W Dayton St Domestic 2,731,886
Anthonys Home Port 456 Admiral Way Domestic 2,716,177
St Frances Motel 23905 Highway 99 Domestic 2,631,647
Scotts Bar & Grill 8115 Lake Ballinger Way Domestic 2,574,047
Ballinger Court Apartments 22707 76th Ave W Domestic 2,449,870
Edmonds Landing Retirement 180 2nd Ave S Domestic 2,431,169
T&T Seafood Restaurant 22511 Highway 99 Domestic 2,425,185
Port of Edmonds 500 Admiral Way Domestic 2,173,091
113,723,353
978,159,600
12%
Largest Water Users Total
Water System Total
Percent of Total
Water Supply
Water supply refers to water that is delivered to a water system. Water supply differs from
water consumption in that water supply is the amount of water delivered into a water system
and water consumption is the amount of water taken out of the system. For any given year,
the amount of water supply will be greater than the amount of water consumption, due to
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 171 of 562
CHAPTER 4 WATER DEMANDS
09-1030.103 Page 4-4 Comprehensive Water System Plan
water system leaks that exist in all water systems. For the City of Edmonds, water supply
represents water that is purchased from the Alderwood Water & Wastewater District
(AWWD) and delivered through the City’s Alderwood Supply Station. Table 4-3
summarizes the total amount of water that was supplied to the City’s system from 2001
through 2008, the average population within the City’s retail water service area, the average
day demand of the system, and the per capita demand for each year.
Table 4-3
Historical Supply and Per Capita Demands
2001 31,467 1,194,386 2,272 3.27 104
2002 31,296 1,297,744 2,469 3.56 114
2003 31,375 1,331,578 2,533 3.65 116
2004 31,374 1,312,077 2,496 3.59 115
2005 31,573 1,162,512 2,212 3.18 101
2006 32,031 1,193,406 2,271 3.27 102
2007 32,190 1,137,938 2,165 3.12 97
2008 32,349 1,121,477 2,134 3.07 95
104Average (2003-2008)
Year
Average
Population
Annual Supply
(1000 gallons)
Avera ge Day
Demand
(gpm)
Average Demand
Per Capita
(gal/day/capita)
Average Day
Demand
(MGD)
As shown in the table, per capita demand varied from year to year, but an overall trend of
decreasing per capita water demand has occurred since 2003, which is most likely the result
of water conservation efforts. The City’s average per capita demand of 104 gallons per day
is used later in this chapter to forecast water demands in future years, based on the population
projections presented in Chapter 3.
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 172 of 562
CHAPTER 4 WATER DEMANDS
09-1030.103 Page 4-5 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.17.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Table 4-4 shows the average demand of each of the City’s pressure zones, based on 2008
water demand data. Almost half of the overall water system demand is within the 596 Zone
and almost one-third of the demand is within the 325 Zone.
Table 4-4
2008 Demands by Pressure Zone
Average Day Percent of
Demand Total Demand
(MGD)(%)
596 549,454 1,046 1.51 49.0%
505 49,696 95 0.14 4.4%
500 21,940 42 0.06 2.0%
486 88,148 168 0.24 7.9%
425 17,619 34 0.05 1.6%
420 28,603 54 0.08 2.6%
325 366,018 696 1.00 32.6%
Total 1,121,477 2,134 3.07 100%
Pressure
Zone
2008 Annual
Supply
(1000 gallons)
Average Day
Demand
(gpm)
Authorized Consumption and Distribution System Leakage
Authorized consumption is the amount of water authorized for use, which includes water
customers usage and other authorized uses such as water main flushing, street cleaning, and
permitted hydrant use. All unauthorized uses and any water that cannot be accounted for is
considered distribution system leakage. In other words, distribution system leakage is an
unrecorded volume of water that may include water system leaks, inaccurate supply
metering, inaccurate customer metering, unknown fire hydrant usage, illegal water service
connections, and unknown reservoir overflows.
The Water Use Efficiency Rule, which became effective in January 2007, established a
distribution leakage standard that all public water systems must meet by July 1, 2010.
Starting with data collected in 2007, distribution leakage must not be more than 10 percent of
supply, based on a 3-year rolling average. If the City is not able to meet this requirement in
the future, a water loss control action plan must be prepared and implemented. This plan will
need to identify steps and timelines for reducing leakage.
The difference between the amount of water supplied to the City and the amount of metered
water consumption from 2003 through 2008 is shown in Table 4-5. The estimated amount of
distribution system leakage in the City’s system in 2008 is shown in Table 4-6. The
estimated amount of authorized uses shown in the table is from City maintenance records.
The City will continue to collect data, monitor all uses of water, and report annually the
amount of distribution system leakage.
Packet Page 173 of 562
CHAPTER 4 WATER DEMANDS
09-1030.103 Page 4-6 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.17.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Table 4-5
Metered Supply and Consumption Comparison
2003 1,331,578 1,125,279 206,298 15.5%
2004 1,312,077 1,090,113 221,964 16.9%
2005 1,162,512 1,014,242 148,271 12.8%
2006 1,193,406 1,136,136 57,270 4.8%
2007 1,137,938 1,072,074 65,864 5.8%
2008 1,121,477 978,160 143,318 12.8%
7.8%3-Year Rolling Average (2006-2008)
Total Supply
(1000 gallons)Year Total Consumption
(1000 gallons)
Net Difference
(1000 gallons)
Net Difference as
% of Total Supply
Table 4-6
2008 Estimated Distribution System Leakage
Total Amount
(1000 gallons)
A. Total Purchased Supply 1,121,477
B. Total Metered Consumption 978,160
C. Estimated Authorized Uses (flushing, street cleaning, permitted hydrant use)33,644
Distribution System Leakage (A-(B+C))1 109,673
Distribution System Leakage as % of Total Purchased Supply 9.8%
1. Amount shown for distribution system leakage may be from water main and water service leaks, meter inaccuracies,
meter reading & recording errors, illegal water use, and other uses not identified above.
Description
Equivalent Residential Units
The demand of each customer class can be expressed in terms of equivalent residential units
(ERU’s) for demand forecasting and planning purposes. One ERU is equivalent to the
amount of water used by a single family residence. The number of ERU’s represented by the
demand of the other customer classes is determined from the total demand of the customer
class and the demand per ERU from the single family residential demand data.
Table 4-7 shows the number of ERU’s calculated for each customer class from 2003 through
2008. The demands shown are based on supply data that was computed from the
consumption of each customer class and the difference between total metered supply and
consumption from each year.
Packet Page 174 of 562
CHAPTER 4 WATER DEMANDS
09-1030.103 Page 4-7 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table 4-7
Equivalent Residential Units (ERUs)
Single Family Residential
2003 8,502 861,091 277 8,502
2004 8,540 839,812 269 8,540
2005 8,621 706,788 225 8,621
2006 8,664 697,864 221 8,664
2007 8,673 671,869 212 8,673
2008 8,691 672,186 212 8,691
236
Multi-Family Residential
2003 568 241,822 277 2,388
2004 584 240,056 269 2,441
2005 601 220,048 225 2,684
2006 607 210,793 221 2,617
2007 621 199,284 212 2,573
2008 620 224,317 212 2,900
Commercial/Industrial
2003 491 202,435 277 1,999
2004 501 207,416 269 2,109
2005 509 201,911 225 2,463
2006 514 184,606 221 2,292
2007 517 173,982 212 2,246
2008 520 187,598 212 2,426
Government/Education
2003 196 26,229 277 259
2004 196 24,793 269 252
2005 210 33,765 225 412
2006 212 100,143 221 1,243
2007 219 92,804 212 1,198
2008 226 37,377 212 483
System-Wide Totals
2003 9,757 1,331,578 277 13,147
2004 9,821 1,312,077 269 13,342
2005 9,941 1,162,512 225 14,180
2006 9,997 1,193,406 221 14,816
2007 10,030 1,137,938 212 14,689
2008 10,057 1,121,477 212 14,500
Year
Average Annual
Demand
(1000 gallons)
Average
Number of
Connections
Average Day
Demand per ERU
(gal/day/ERU)Total
ERU's
Average (2003-2008)
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 175 of 562
CHAPTER 4 WATER DEMANDS
09-1030.103 Page 4-8 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
The average demand per ERU from 2003 through 2008 was 236 gallons per day. This is
below the average single family demand of around 250 gallons per day for water systems in
the Puget Sound area. The City’s average demand per ERU of 236 gallons per day is used
later in this chapter to forecast ERU’s in future years, based on estimated future demands.
Average Day Demand
Average Day Demand (ADD) is the total amount of water delivered to the system in a year
divided by the number of days in the year. Average day demand is determined from
historical water use of a system and is used to project future demands for the system.
Average day demand data is used to determine standby storage requirements for water
systems. Standby storage is the volume of a reservoir used to provide water supply under
emergency conditions when supply facilities are out of service. Water supply records were
used to determine the system’s average day demand, which is shown in Table 4-3.
Peak Day Demand
Peak Day Demand (PDD) is the maximum amount of water used throughout the system
during a 24-hour time period of a given year. Peak day demand typically occurs on a hot
summer day when outdoor water use for lawn watering and other purposes is occurring
throughout much of the system. In accordance with WAC 246-290-230 - Distribution
Systems, the distribution system shall provide fire flow at a minimum pressure of 20 psi
during maximum day demand (i.e., peak day demand) conditions. Supply facilities (i.e.,
supply stations, pump stations, interties) are typically designed to supply water at a rate that
is equal to or greater than the system’s peak day demand.
Water supply records and reservoir telemetry reports are typically used to determine a
system’s peak day demand. However, complete telemetry records of supply and reservoir
data were not available to compute the peak day demand of the system. Therefore, the peak
day demand was estimated by applying a typical peak day demand/average day demand ratio
of 2.00 to the system’s actual average day demand amount. This results in an estimated peak
day demand of 4,267 gpm for 2008, as shown in Table 4-8.
Packet Page 176 of 562
CHAPTER 4 WATER DEMANDS
09-1030.103 Page 4-9 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table 4-8
Peak Day Demands and Peaking Factors
Demand Type Date Demand (gpm)
Average Day Demand (ADD)2008 2,134
Peak Day Demand (PDD)Data unavailable
Assumed PDD/ADD = 2.0 4,267
Peak Hour Demand (PHD)Data unavailable
Assumed PHD/PDD = 1.8 7,681
Peaking Factor
Peak Day Demand/Average Day Demand (PDD/ADD)2.00
Peak Hour Demand/Peak Day Demand (PHD/PDD)1.80
Peak Hour Demand/Average Day Demand (PHD/ADD)3.60
Peak Day Demand Data
Peaking Factors
Description
Peak Hour Demand
Peak Hour Demand (PHD) is the maximum amount of water use, excluding fire flow, during a
one hour time period of a given year. In accordance with WAC 246-290-230 - Distribution
Systems, new public water systems or additions to existing systems shall be designed to provide
domestic water at a minimum pressure of 30 psi during peak hour demand conditions. Water
main sizing and analysis and equalizing storage are typically based on peak hour demand data.
The peak hour demand, like the peak day demand, is typically determined from the combined
flow of water into the system from all supply sources and reservoirs. Similar to the peak day
demand, sufficient information was not available to calculate the City’s peak hour demand based
on actual system data. Therefore, the peak hour demand was estimated based on a typical peak
hour demand/peak day demand ratio of 1.80, resulting in a peak hour demand of 7,681 gpm for
2008.
The peaking factors shown in Table 4-8 are based on the demand data shown in the table. These
peaking factors are used later in the chapter in conjunction with projected average day demands
to project future peak day and peak hour demands of the system.
Fire Flow Demand
Fire Flow Demand is the amount of water required during fire fighting as defined by
applicable codes. Fire flow requirements are established for individual buildings and
expressed in terms of flow rate (gpm) and flow duration (hours). Fighting fires imposes the
greatest demand on the water system because a high rate of water must be supplied over a
short period of time, requiring each component of the system to be properly sized and
configured to meet the most stringent demand placed on it.
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 177 of 562
CHAPTER 4 WATER DEMANDS
09-1030.103 Page 4-10 Comprehensive Water System Plan
General fire flow requirements were established for the different land use categories to
provide a target level of service for planning and sizing future water facilities. The general
fire flow requirement for each land use category within the City’s service area is shown in
Table 4-9. The water system analyses presented in Chapter 7 are based on an evaluation of
the water system providing sufficient fire flow in accordance with these general fire flow
requirements.
Table 4-9
General Fire Flow Requirements
Single Family Residential 1,000 2
Multi-Family Residential 3,000 3
Commercial/Business/Mixed Use 3,000 3
Schools 3,000 3
Hospital 5,000 4
Land Use Category
Fire Flow Requirement
(gpm)
Flow Duration
(hours)
FUTURE WATER DEMANDS
Method of Projecting Demands
Future demands were calculated from the projected population data from Chapter 3 and the
per capita demand data from Table 4-3. The demand projections were computed with and
without a further reduction in water use from conservation. The per capita demand of
existing customers (104 gallons per day) was used for all demand projections without water
conservation. The future water demand projections with conservation are based on a reduced
per capita demand that reflects the City’s water use reduction goals, as shown in the City’s
Water Use Efficiency Program in Appendix F.
Future Water Demand Projections
Table 4-10 presents the estimated water demands of the system each year for the next six
years and at the end of the 20-year planning period. The actual demand data from 2007 and
2008 is also shown in the table for comparison purposes. The future average day demands
were projected based on population estimates for the given years and the estimated per capita
demand values. The future peak day and peak hour demands were computed from the
projected average day demands and the existing system peaking factors shown in Table 4-8.
The future demand projections are also shown with and without estimated reductions in water
use from achieving the conservation goals described earlier.
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 178 of 562
CHAPTER 4 WATER DEMANDS
09-1030.103 Page 4-11 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
ented in Chapter 9 to ensure that the future
stem will be sized properly to meet all requirements, whether or not additional water use
reductions from conservation are achieve
Table 4-10
Future Water Demand Projections
The 20-year projected demand data without conservation reductions was used for the
evaluation of the planned improvements pres
sy
d.
Population Data
Population in Water Service Area 32,190 32,349 32,511 32,674 32,837 33,001 33,166 33,332 35,743
Demand Basis Data (gal/day/capita)
Avg Day Demand without Conservation 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104
Avg Day Demand with Conservation 100 99 99 98 98 97 96
Average Day Demand (gpm)
Demand without Conservation 2,165 2,134 2,348 2,360 2,372 2,383 2,395 2,407 2,581
Demand with Conservation 2,258 2,246 2,258 2,246 2,257 2,245 2,383
Average Day Demand (MGD)
Demand without Conservation 3.12 3.07 3.38 3.40 3.42 3.43 3.45 3.47 3.72
Demand with Conservation 3.25 3.23 3.25 3.23 3.25 3.23 3.43
Peak Day Demand (gpm)
Demand without Conservation 4,330 4,267 4,696 4,720 4,743 4,767 4,791 4,815 5,163
Demand with Conservation 4,515 4,493 4,515 4,492 4,514 4,491 4,766
Peak Day Demand (MGD)
Demand without Conservation 6.24 6.15 6.76 6.80 6.83 6.86 6.90 6.93 7.43
Demand with Conservation 6.50 6.47 6.50 6.47 6.50 6.47 6.86
Peak Hour Demand (gpm)
Demand without Conservation 7,794 7,681 8,453 8,495 8,538 8,580 8,623 8,666 9,293
2009 2010 2013
Description
2007 2008 2011 2012
2014
(+6 yrs)
2028
(+20 yrs)
ProjectedHistorical
Demand with Conservation 8,128 8,087 8,127 8,085 8,126 8,083 8,578
20
year and the City
07 and 2008 Peak Day Demand and Peak Hour Demand values are based on actual average day demand amounts for the given
’s peaking factors, and may not represent actual peak demands for these years.
0-year ERU forecasts are based on the projected
ater demands from Table 4-10 and the average demand per ERU that was computed from
recent demand data, as shown in Table 4-7.
Future ERU Projections
Table 4-11 presents the projected number of equivalent residential units (ERU’s) of the
system for 2014 and 2028. The 6-year and 2
w
Packet Page 179 of 562
CHAPTER 4 WATER DEMANDS
09-1030.103 Page 4-12 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table 4-11
Future ERU Projections
Avg Day Demand without Conservation 2,407 2,581
Demand per ERU without Conservation 236 236
Total System ERU's 14,700 15,700
Demand Data (gpm)
ERU Basis Data (gal/day/ERU)
Equivalent Residential Units (ERU's)
Description
2014
Projected
(+6 yrs)
2028
Projected
(+20 yrs)
WATER DEMAND DATA COLLECTION AND REPORTING
Demand Data Collection
The demand data presented in this chapter includes both the supply side and water use side of
water demands, which the City has collected and recorded for many years. The supply side
data is recorded by a water meter in the Alderwood Supply Station that is connected to the
City’s SCADA system to provide a continuous recording of the volume and rate of supply
into the City’s system. The City’s other supply station, which provides a standby source of
supply from Seattle Public Utilities regional system, is also metered and connected to the
City’s SCADA system. On the water use side, customer demand data is recorded by meters
at all water service connections and collected every other month. Permitted water use from
fire hydrants for construction, street cleaning, and water main flushing is estimated and
recorded.
Demand Data Reporting
A summary of past water use is reported each year in the City’s Annual Water Use Efficiency
Performance Report, which is one of the requirements of the Water Use Efficiency Rule that
became effective in January 2007. In addition to this annual report, the City will continue to
report demand data every six years when updating its water system plan.
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 180 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Page 5-1 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
5 Policies and Design Criteria
INTRODUCTION
The City of Edmonds (City) strives to provide high quality water service at a reasonable cost to
its customers. This is achieved through the guidance of the following laws, policies and design
criteria that are applied to operating, maintaining, and planning improvements for the water
system.
Federal Regulations
• U.S. Department of Health & Human Services
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
State Regulations
• Washington State Department of Health
• Washington State Department of Ecology
County Regulations
• Snohomish County Council
City Regulations and Policies
• Edmonds City Council
Design Criteria
• American Water Works Association
The Edmonds City Council must adopt policies that meet or exceed those established by
governments above them. The governmental entities above the City Council include the U.S.
Government, Washington State and the Snohomish County Council. The City's policies are
documented and implemented through ordinances, operation procedures, engineering and
construction standards, and design criteria.
The City’s water system policies and design criteria are organized and presented in this chapter
under the following sections: water service, water supply, and facility policies and design
criteria. The City’s financial policies are described in Chapter 10.
Packet Page 181 of 562
CHAPTER 5 POLICIES AND DESIGN CRITERIA
09-1030.103 Page 5-2 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
WATER SERVICE POLICIES
New Water Services
• The City will provide potable water service to all people within its water service area,
provided all policies related to service can be met.
• Requests for new water service will be processed by the City’s Building Division as part of a
Building Division permit. Applications are reviewed to ensure the proposed service is
located within the City’s retail water service area and will be evaluated to determine fire flow
availability, meter size, line size and improvements necessary for adequate water pressure,
fire flow, looping or extensions. New water service applications will be processed within the
following timeframes:
o New single family residence: approximately 35 days
o New commercial building: approximately 60 days
o New fire connection: approximately 20 days
• Water system improvements and extensions required to provide water service to proposed
developments will be reviewed and approved by the City, and must conform to the City’s
current design criteria, construction standards and specifications, as shown in the City’s
Water System Construction Standards contained in Appendix G. All costs of the
improvements and extensions will be paid by the applicant.
• Delays affecting the City’s ability to provide new water service are the responsibility of the
applicant. Delays resulting from non-technical conditions may include environmental
assessments, local ordinances, annexations, and various other issues.
• Disputes received by the City are routed to the appropriate department and resolved.
Disputes not resolved by City staff are resolved by the City Council with assistance from the
City’s legal counsel, as necessary.
• Water service requests for areas outside of the City limits without annexation will be
reviewed by the City Council after coordinating with the appropriate adjacent water system
and the Department of Health. Water service to areas outside of the City limits shall be in
compliance with Snohomish County’s adopted land use plan, zoning and development
regulations.
• Water system capacity is evaluated every six years as part of the City’s update of its water
system plan to confirm the system’s ability to provide adequate water service to both existing
and future water customers.
Annexations
• Areas annexed without existing municipal supply will be served by the City.
• Areas annexed with existing municipal supply must meet the City’s water system standards.
• The City will follow state guidelines in the assumption of facilities in annexation areas.
• The City will comply with the existing water supply agreement with Alderwood Water
District in assuming portions of adjacent water systems as a result of annexation.
Packet Page 182 of 562
CHAPTER 5 POLICIES AND DESIGN CRITERIA
09-1030.103 Page 5-3 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
WATER SUPPLY POLICIES
Water Quality
• The City will strive to provide high quality water while complying with all water quality
regulatory requirements.
• The City will promptly respond to situations that may adversely affect water quality.
Water Quantity
• The City will provide a sufficient quantity of supply to existing customers and plan for at
least 20 years into the future for meeting the needs of the water system.
• The City will size new water system facilities and improvements to existing facilities to have
sufficient capacity to meet all needs of the water system.
Water Use Efficiency
• The City will promote the efficient and responsible use of water and will participate in the
City of Everett’s regional conservation program.
• The City has a water use efficiency program. Documentation from the City’s water use
efficiency program is contained in Appendix F.
Cross-Connection Control
• The City strives to protect its water system from contamination due to cross-connections and
has developed a cross-connection control program for eliminating cross-connections.
Documentation from the City’s cross-connection control program is contained in Appendix
H.
• The City will comply with the backflow prevention assembly installation and testing
requirements as indicated in WAC 246-290-490 and as published in the manual titled Cross
Connection Control Manual Accepted Procedure and Practice, Pacific Northwest Section,
American Water Works Association (AWWA).
• The City has staff that is certified for backflow prevention and testing.
Packet Page 183 of 562
CHAPTER 5 POLICIES AND DESIGN CRITERIA
09-1030.103 Page 5-4 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
FACILITY POLICIES AND DESIGN CRITERIA
This section describes policies and design criteria used in planning for water system
replacements, extensions, and future improvements.
Water Pressure
• The City will supply water to all customers at a minimum pressure of 30 psi during all
demand conditions, except when providing fire flow or during emergency situations.
• During fire flow situations, the City will maintain a minimum pressure of at least 20 psi at all
customer meters and throughout the system.
• The City will provide pressure reducing stations to control pressures in the distribution
system and avoid high pressures. It is the customer’s responsibility to install a pressure
reducing valve on the customer side of the water meter to reduce pressures over 80 psi.
Flow Velocities
• All new distribution system water mains will be designed to deliver the required amount of
flow at a velocity of 10 feet per second or less. Velocities greater than 10 feet per second
are acceptable within short lengths of pipe and within water system facilities.
• All new transmission mains will be designed to deliver the required amount of flow at a
velocity of 5 to 10 feet per second or less and will be evaluated for hydraulic surges
(transient conditions) using a hydraulic model capable of surge analyses.
Storage Facilities
• A sufficient amount of storage will be provided within the distribution system to facilitate the
operation of the water system by maintaining sufficient distribution system pressure and to
provide supplemental supply during peak demand periods and emergency events.
• Storage facilities will be sized to provide stored water for the following purposes:
o Operational storage will be provided to aid in the operation of supply and pump
facilities.
o Equalizing storage will be provided to supply the water system under peak
demand conditions when the system demand exceeds the total rate of supply of
the supply facilities. Equalizing storage must be stored above an elevation that
provides a minimum pressure of 30 psi at all service connections under peak
hour demand conditions.
o Standby storage will be provided to supply the water system under emergency
conditions when supply facilities are out of service. Standby storage must be
stored above an elevation that provides a minimum pressure of 20 psi at all
service connections under peak hour demand conditions.
o Fire flow storage will be provided to supply water to the system at the maximum
Packet Page 184 of 562
CHAPTER 5 POLICIES AND DESIGN CRITERIA
09-1030.103 Page 5-5 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
rate and duration required to extinguish a fire at the building with the highest fire
flow requirement in the system. Fire flow storage must be stored above an
elevation that will provide a minimum pressure of 20 psi at all service
connections under peak day demand conditions.
Transmission and Distribution Mains
• All new transmission and distribution mains will be looped to increase reliability and fire
flow capacity, unless the City determines that looping is not practical.
• All new water mains will be designed under the direction of a professional engineer licensed
in the State of Washington and will comply with the water quality testing and construction
completion requirements of the Department of Health.
• All water system improvements and installation of new water mains shall be in accordance
with City standard specifications and details.
• The size of all new distribution water mains will be reviewed and verified by the City based
on an analysis using the City’s hydraulic model. Water mains less than 6-inch diameter are
not allowed.
• Dead-end water mains with fire hydrants shall be at least 8-inch diameter pipe. If approved
by the City, short dead-end water mains with fire hydrants, generally less than 50 feet long,
may be 6-inch diameter pipe.
• Distribution water mains providing fire flow shall be sized to provide the required fire flow
at a minimum residual pressure of 20 psi and maximum pipeline velocity of 10 feet per
second under peak day demand conditions.
• All new water mains will be ductile iron pipe with cement mortar lining.
• The following valves shall be installed with the water main:
o Isolation valves shall be installed at locations along the water main to allow sections to be
shut down for repair or installing services. On average, the maximum distance between
isolation valves shall be 350 feet. A minimum of three valves shall be provided per
cross, and two valves per tee.
o Zone valves shall be located at all pressure zone boundaries when a water main crosses a
pressure zone boundary and connects into each pressure zone.
o Combination air and vacuum release valves shall be placed at all high points of water
main installations.
• All residential water service lines shall be 3/4” or larger and the same size as the meter or
larger.
• All new customer service lines shall be installed with a pressure reducing valve on the
customer’s side of the water meter.
Supply Stations and Pump Stations
• All supply station and pump station improvements shall comply with the following
Packet Page 185 of 562
CHAPTER 5 POLICIES AND DESIGN CRITERIA
09-1030.103 Page 5-6 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
minimum standards:
o All structures shall be non-combustible, where practical.
o All buildings shall have adequate heating, cooling, ventilation, insulation, lighting, and
interior work space.
o All sites shall be fenced and locked to prevent unauthorized personnel from entering the
water system facilities. Below-grade facilities located in areas that cannot be fenced shall
be secured and locked.
o Each station shall be equipped with a flow meter, pressure gauges, pressure transmitters
and all necessary instrumentation to assist personnel in operating and troubleshooting the
facility.
o Backup power capability shall be provided at all pump stations.
• Pumps shall be operated automatically with the ability to operate manually.
• The monitoring of stations and adjustment of control settings shall be capable locally and
remotely.
• Stations shall be monitored with alarms for the following conditions:
o Pump started automatically or manually.
o Low suction pressure.
o High discharge pressure.
o Flooding and fire.
o Power phase failure.
o Communication link failure.
o Intrusion by unauthorized personnel.
• Stations shall have the following data recorded:
o Flow rate and flow totalizing.
o Incoming and outgoing pressures.
o All alarm conditions.
Pressure Reducing Stations
• All pressure reducing stations shall be constructed according to the City’s standard plans.
• Below-grade concrete vaults shall drain to daylight or be equipped with a sump pump.
• A pressure relief valve shall be installed on the low-pressure side of the pressure reducing
valve to prevent system overpressurizing in case of a pressure reducing valve failure. It may
be necessary to place the pressure relief valve in a separate vault.
Fire Hydrants
• The City has established policies for the installation, maintenance and ownership of fire
hydrants within the City limits, which includes the water service areas of both the City and
Olympic View Water and Sewer District. A copy of these policies is in Appendix I.
Packet Page 186 of 562
CHAPTER 5 POLICIES AND DESIGN CRITERIA
09-1030.103 Page 5-7 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
• Fire hydrants serving detached single family dwellings or duplex dwellings on individual lots
shall be located not more than 600 feet on center such that all single family lots are within
300 feet from a fire hydrant, as measured along the path of vehicular access.
• Fire hydrants serving any use other than detached single family dwellings or duplex
dwellings on individual lots shall be spaced an average of 300 feet apart on center and shall
be located so that all structures are located within 150 feet of a hydrant. If dead-end streets,
or driveways, singly or in combination, are over 150 feet long, additional fire hydrants shall
be installed so that the hydrant spacing is not over 300 feet.
• All fire hydrants shall be installed at street intersections where possible. Fire hydrant spacing
shall be measured along vehicle access routes.
• The Edmonds Fire Marshal will review all proposed fire hydrant installations to ensure the
correct number and spacing of fire hydrants for each project.
Packet Page 187 of 562
CHAPTER 5 POLICIES AND DESIGN CRITERIA
09-1030.103 Page 5-8 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 188 of 562
DRAFT
09-1013.103 Page 6-1 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
6
Water Source and Quality
OVERVIEW
This chapter describes the City’s existing water source and current water quality regulations.
Also discussed is the City’s water quality monitoring program, monitoring requirements and
results of past water quality monitoring.
WATER SOURCE
Alderwood Water & Wastewater District Supply
The City currently supplies its entire system through the Alderwood Supply Station with
water purchased from Alderwood Water & Wastewater District (AWWD), which in turn
purchases the water from the City of Everett. The supply of wholesale water from the
AWWD to the City is provided under the terms of the 1978 Water Supply Agreement and its
subsequent amendments (see Appendix A). The agreement states “The District only
warrants the quality in the water delivered to the City to be at least equal to the quality of
water delivered to the District by the City of Everett…”. Therefore, the quality of water
entering the Edmonds system is dependent upon the treatment of the source water and the
ability to maintain high quality water through the Everett and AWWD conveyance systems.
The Everett raw water supply originates in the Spada Reservoir created by the Culmback
Dam on the Sultan River, approximately 25 miles east of Everett. The basin is protected and
patrolled. The raw water passes through the Snohomish County PUD No. 1 Power House
prior to entering the Chaplain Reservoir. The water from this reservoir is delivered to the
Everett Water Filtration Plant prior to delivery to the City of Everett, AWWD, the City of
Edmonds, and several other water systems in Snohomish County.
Until 1983, the supply of water from the City of Everett was limited to treatment consisting
of sedimentation, screening, and chlorination due to the good quality of its source. A higher
level of treatment eventually became necessary due to more stringent water quality
regulations, so a filtration plant was constructed in 1983. In addition to the chlorination and
fluoridation of the water at the Everett Water Filtration Plant, the water is also chlorinated by
the AWWD at its reservoir sites. This ensures sufficient chlorine residual throughout the
distribution system. Source water quality has been good in the past and should continue to
meet all of the mandated water quality requirements with the Everett Water Filtration Plant
and the disinfection program from the AWWD.
Packet Page 189 of 562
CHAPTER 6 WATER SOURCE AND QUALITY
09-1030.103 Page 6-2 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Seattle Public Utilities Supply
The SPU Supply Station is operated in a standby mode for use as an emergency supply or to
provide supplemental supply during high demand periods, since all water is now purchased
from AWWD. The supply of wholesale water from SPU to the City is provided under the
terms of the 1981 Water Purveyor Contract and its subsequent amendments (see Appendix
A).
The primary source of water that the City receives from SPU is from the Tolt River source at
the South Fork Tolt Reservoir, about 15 miles east of Duvall. Water is diverted from the
reservoir into the Tolt Regulating Basin, then to the Tolt Treatment Facility, and finally into
the Tolt Pipeline No. 1, which transports the water to purveyors that are primarily located
north and south of Seattle. SPU’s water is delivered to Edmonds from SPU’s Richmond
Highlands Tank which is supplied by direct pumping either from the Tolt transmission line,
the Lake Forest Park Reservoir or the Bitter Lake Pump Station. A 20-inch water main along
Fremont Avenue to NE 205th Street at the King County/Snohomish County border transmits
SPU water from the Richmond Highlands Tank to the City’s SPU Supply Station.
DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS
Overview
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulates the quality of drinking water in the
United States. The EPA is allowed to delegate primary enforcement responsibility for water
quality control to each state under provisions of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). The
Department of Health (DOH) is the agency responsible for implementing and enforcing the
drinking water regulations in the State of Washington. For the State of Washington to
maintain primacy (delegated authority to implement requirements) under the SDWA, the
State must adopt drinking water regulations that are at least as stringent as the federal
regulations. To meet these requirements the State, in cooperation with DOH, has published
drinking water regulations that are contained in Chapter 246-290 of the Washington
Administrative Code (WAC).
Safe Drinking Water Act
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) was enacted in 1974 as a result of public concern
about water quality. The SDWA sets standards for quality of drinking water and requires
water treatment, if these standards are not met. The SDWA also sets water testing schedules
and methods that water systems must follow. In 1986, the SDWA was amended as a result of
additional public concern and frequent contamination of groundwater from industrial
solvents and pesticides. The 1986 Amendments require water systems to monitor and treat
for a continuously increasing number of water contaminants identified in the new federal
regulations. Implementation of the new regulations was marginally successful and slow, so
the SDWA was amended again and re-authorized in August of 1996.
Packet Page 190 of 562
CHAPTER 6 WATER SOURCE AND QUALITY
09-1030.103 Page 6-3 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
WATER QUALITY MONITORING
Monitoring Requirements
Water quality monitoring requirements are contained in WAC 246-290-300. The City of
Everett provides source water quality monitoring for its surface water source. The City of
Edmonds provides the required water quality monitoring of its distribution system. In
accordance with section (2)(b) of WAC 246-290-300, Edmonds must comply with the
following monitoring requirements because it receives completely treated water from another
public water system:
1. Collect coliform samples in accordance with section (3) of WAC 246-290-300. In
summary, this consists of:
a) Collecting a minimum of 30 coliform samples per month based on the
population served and submitting the samples to a certified laboratory for
analysis. Collect and submit additional samples as required when a coliform
sample is determined invalid.
b) Preparing a Coliform Monitoring Plan and update it as necessary.
2. Perform distribution system residual disinfectant concentration monitoring in
accordance with section (6) of WAC 246-290-300. As a minimum, the residual
disinfectant concentration within the distribution system shall be measured at the
same time and location that a routine or repeat coliform sample is collected or daily,
whichever is greater.
3. Collect disinfectant byproduct samples in accordance with section (6) of WAC 246-
290-300.
4. Collect samples for lead and copper monitoring in accordance with section (5) of
WAC 246-290-300 and as required under 40 CFR 141.86, 141.87, and 141.88.
If unsatisfactory samples from the above monitoring are detected, the City must follow the
procedures in WAC 246-290-320 for repeat sampling, DOH notification, and customer
notification.
The City documents the results of water quality testing and summarizes the results in an
annual report to customers to comply with the Consumer Confidence Report requirements
that have been in effect since 1998. A copy of the City’s latest annual water quality report is
included in Appendix J.
Monitoring Status
The City has been in compliance with all water quality monitoring requirements for the past
several years. A summary of the City’s compliance status for the monitoring requirements
identified above is presented below.
Packet Page 191 of 562
CHAPTER 6 WATER SOURCE AND QUALITY
09-1030.103 Page 6-4 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Coliform Monitoring
The City collects 36 samples each month from different locations throughout the distribution
system and submits the samples to a certified laboratory for coliform testing, as shown in the
Coliform Monitoring Plan in Appendix K.
All coliform monitoring results for the years 2001 through 2008 were satisfactory for the
presence of coliforms except for seven samples collected on February 2001. Subsequent
repeat sampling had satisfactory results.
Residual Disinfectant Concentration Monitoring
In accordance with WAC 246-290-662, the minimum residual disinfectant concentration
entering the distribution system shall be at least 0.2 mg/L. Samples taken within the
distribution system are required to have a residual disinfectant concentration that is
detectable in at least 95 percent of the samples taken each calendar month. The results of the
residual disinfectant concentration monitoring must be reported to DOH using DOH
approved forms within ten days after the end of each month, unless otherwise directed by
DOH.
The samples collected from the City’s distribution system for coliform monitoring are also
analyzed for residual disinfectant concentration. Samples collected from 2001 through 2008
had a chlorine residual that was typically between 0.5 and 1.04 mg/L. The highest level
during the eight-year period was 2.16 mg/L on August 2002 at a location within the 596
Zone, which is the zone that receives the water from the Alderwood Supply Station. The
lowest level during the same period was 0.18 mg/L on October 2005, which was detected in
325 Zone.
Disinfectant Byproduct Monitoring
In the past, the City has collected a minimum of one sample every three months for analysis
of total trihalomethanes (TTHM). The results of past samples collected from 2001 to 2008
indicate total trihalomethane levels ranging from 0.020 mg/L to 0.060 mg/L. Therefore, the
City did not exceed the maximum contaminant level (MCL) of TTHM, which is 0.08 mg/L.
Since the implementation of the Stage 2 Disinfection Byproducts Rule (DBPR) in 2006, the
City has been required to perform additional monitoring and reporting of disinfectant
byproducts in the distribution system. The Stage 2 DBPR focuses on monitoring and
reducing concentrations of two classes of disinfection byproducts, consisting of total
trihalomethanes (TTHM) and five haloacetic acids (HAA5). The Stage 2 DBPR requires
water systems to determine locations within the distribution system with the highest averages
of TTHM and HAA5.
The City prepared a Standard Monitoring Plan as part of the Initial Distribution System
Evaluation (IDSE) that outlined the City’s approach for collecting one year of TTHM and
HAA5 data at a specified frequency and at locations to characterize these contaminants levels
in the system. The City has completed sampling under this plan and submitted its IDSE
Packet Page 192 of 562
CHAPTER 6 WATER SOURCE AND QUALITY
09-1030.103 Page 6-5 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Report for Standard Monitoring on December 23, 2008. Future monitoring under the Stage 2
DBPR will be conducted quarterly in accordance with the City’s Standard Monitoring Plan.
Compliance with the Stage 2 DBPR will be achieved if the locational running annual average
(LRAA) at each monitoring location for the four most recent quarters is less than or equal to
0.080 mg/L for TTHM and less than or equal to 0.060 mg/L for HAA5.
Lead and Copper Monitoring
The Lead and Copper Rule identifies “action levels” for both lead and copper. The action
level for lead is greater than 0.015 mg/L. The action level for copper is greater than 1.3
mg/L. If the 90th percentile concentration of either lead or copper from the group of samples
exceeds these action levels, a corrosion control study must be undertaken to evaluate
strategies and make recommendations for reducing the lead or copper concentration below
the action levels.
The City of Edmonds participates in the City of Everett regional lead and copper monitoring
program, which involves the collection of samples by the City of Everett for all water
systems that use Everett water. The City of Everett obtained samples from locations
throughout the Edmonds water service area in October 2000, October 2003, and November
2006. The results of lead and copper monitoring within the City’s water system during the
2000 monitoring period indicated that lead concentration levels ranging from less than 0.001
mg/L to 0.006 mg/L and copper concentration levels ranging from 0.005 mg/L to 0.107
mg/L, all below the action levels. The subsequent round of lead and copper monitoring
within the City’s water system during the 2003 monitoring period indicated lead
concentration levels ranging from less 0.001 mg/L to 0.044 mg/L and copper concentration
levels ranging from less than 0.004 mg/L to 0.152 mg/L. One of City’s samples in 2003
exceeded the action level of lead. The 2006 monitoring period indicated all of lead
concentration levels were less than or equal to 0.002 mg/L and copper concentration levels
ranging from 0.020 mg/L to 0.076 mg/L, all below the action levels.
Packet Page 193 of 562
CHAPTER 6 WATER SOURCE AND QUALITY
09-1030.103 Page 6-6 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 194 of 562
DRAFT
7
Water System Analyses
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents the analysis of the City of Edmonds (City) existing water system.
Individual water system components were analyzed under both existing and future water
demand conditions to determine their ability to meet policies and design criteria. The City’s
policies and design criteria are presented in Chapter 5 and the water demands are presented
in Chapter 4. A description of the water system facilities and their current operation is
presented in Chapter 2. Planned water system capital improvements that resolve the
deficiencies identified in this chapter are presented in Chapter 9. The last section of this
chapter presents the existing system capacity analysis that was performed to determine the
maximum number of equivalent residential units (ERUs) that can be served by the City’s
water system.
PRESSURE ZONES
Table 7-1 lists each of the City’s seven pressure zones, the highest and lowest elevation
served in each zone, and the minimum and maximum distribution system pressures within
each zone, based on maximum static water conditions (full reservoirs and no system
demands). The City is currently providing water at sufficient pressures throughout the water
system, as shown in the table. The highest pressures in the system occur at the lowest
elevations of each pressure zone. All new water services with pressures greater than 80 psi
must have individual pressure reducing valves to reduce the pressure to 80 psi or less, in
accordance with the plumbing code.
Table 7-1
Minimum and Maximum Distribution System Pressures
596 452 ft 62 psi 275 ft 139 psi
505 376 ft 56 psi 194 ft 135 psi
500 368 ft 57 psi 162 ft 146 psi
486 375 ft 48 psi 127 ft 156 psi
425 300 ft 54 psi 185 ft 104 psi
420 250 ft 74 psi 154 ft 115 psi
325 220 ft 45 psi 15 ft 134 psi
Static Pressure
at Lowest
Elevation
(psi)
Pressure
Zone
Highest
Elevation
Served
(feet)
Static Pressure
at Highest
Elevation
(psi)
Lowest
Elevation
Served
(feet)
09-1030.103 Page 7-1 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 195 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-2 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
It is the City’s policy to provide water service at a pressure of at least 40 psi, which has been
accomplished with the design of the system and location of pressure zone boundaries. Due
to the challenging topography throughout the system, high pressures do occur in several
areas of the service area.
ALDERWOOD SUPPLY STATION
This section evaluates the City’s Alderwood Supply Station to determine if it has sufficient
capacity to provide water supply to the system at a rate that meets the existing and future
demands of the system. In the past, the City operated its water system as two independent
operating areas, based on the north operating area being supplied with water from the
Alderwood Water & Wastewater District (AWWD) and the south operating area being
supplied with water from the Seattle Public Utilities (SPU). The City now operates the
system as one operating area with all water supply from AWWD, due to the rising cost of
water purchased from SPU. The City’s SPU Supply Station remains in service, but operates
in a standby mode to provide supplemental supply to the system when needed.
Analysis Criteria
Supply facilities must provide a sufficient quantity of water at pressures that meet the
requirements of WAC 246-290-230 and must be reliable. The capacity of supply facilities in
a pressure zone that has adequate storage must be sufficient to provide water at a rate that is
equal to or greater than the peak day demand of the zone being served. This approach
assumes that demands in excess of the peak day demand will be supplied from the equalizing
storage portion of reservoirs. Since the City’s Alderwood Supply Station provides supply to
pressure zones that can also be supplied from storage for intraday peak demands, the supply
requirement for the supply station is equal to the peak day demand of the system.
Analysis Results
The Alderwood Supply Station delivers water to the entire water system. Water is supplied
directly into the 596 Zone, meeting customer demands and filling the two reservoirs at the
Five Corners site. Water to the remaining lower pressure zones are supplied from the 596
Zone through multiple pressure reducing valve (PRV) stations.
Table 7-2 summarizes the evaluation of the City’s Alderwood Supply Station to determine if
it has sufficient capacity to meet the existing and future demands of the system. The existing
system evaluation is based on the current state of the existing facility, which has a maximum
supply capacity of approximately 5,500 gpm. The capacity of the existing facility is limited
to flow through the larger mainline portion of the station only, which includes a 10-inch
turbine meter and 12-inch control valve. The existing facility also contains 8-inch bypass
piping with an 8-inch turbine meter and 6-inch control valve, but is not setup to operate
automatically in conjunction with the larger mainline when needed during high demand
periods. The evaluation of the supply station with future year 2028 demands is based on
improvements to the facility that enables flow through both the mainline and bypass portions
of the station, thereby enabling the station to supply at a higher flow rate up to approximately
Packet Page 196 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-3 Comprehensive Water System Plan
7,000 gpm, as shown in the table. These improvements were initiated in 2010 and are
discussed further in Chapter 9.
The results of the evaluation, as shown in Table 7-2, indicate the City’s Alderwood Supply
Station has sufficient capacity to meet the existing and future supply requirements of the
system through the year 2028. While the existing supply station has sufficient capacity for
the existing and future demands of the system, the City is proceeding with improvements to
expand the capacity of the station to improve system operation during peak demand periods
when the Five Corners Pump Station is operating in conjunction with the supply station.
Table 7-2
Alderwood Supply Station Capacity Evaluation
Peak Day Demand (PDD)4,267 5,163
Alderwood Supply Station 5,500 7,000
Surplus Capacity 1,233 1,837
Surplus Supply Capacity (gpm)
Description
Existing System
Year 2008 (gpm)
Future System
Year 2028 (gpm)
Required Supply Capacity (gpm)
Available Supply Capacity (gpm)
FIVE CORNERS PUMP STATION
This section evaluates the Five Corners Pump Station to determine if it has sufficient
capacity to meet the existing and future demands of the system.
Analysis Criteria
The primary purpose of the pump station is to pump stored water from the Five Corners 3.0
MG Reservoir to the 596 Zone to supplement supply from the Alderwood Supply Station
during peak demand periods, to provide supplemental fire flow, and to provide emergency
supply if the Alderwood Supply Station is out of service by utilizing standby storage from
the Five Corners 3.0 MG Reservoir.
The criteria for evaluating the capacity of the Five Corners Pump Station is based on the
most stringent condition where the system is experiencing peak hour demands and a
simultaneous fire flow in the 596 Zone, based on the largest fire flow requirement of 5,000
gpm. Supply to the system during this condition is provided by the Alderwood Supply
Station, Five Corners Pump Station, and SPU Supply Station, which is configured to
automatically activate during this type of an event. The analysis is based on the pump station
with improvements that were underway in 2009 and completed in 2010, as described in
Chapter 9.
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 197 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-4 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Analysis Results
The results of the evaluation, as shown in Table 7-3, indicate the Five Corners Pump Station
has sufficient capacity to serve its purpose in providing supplemental supply to the system,
based on both the existing and future supply requirements of the system.
Table 7-3
Five Corners Pump Station Capacity Evaluation
System Peak Hour Demand (PHD)7,681 9,293
Maximum Fire Flow Requirement 5,000 5,000
Total Required Supply 12,681 14,293
Alderwood Supply Station Capacity 5,500 7,000
SPU Supply Station Capacity 5,500 5,500
Total Supply Capacity 11,000 12,500
Required Supply from Pump Station 1,681 1,793
Five Corners Pump Station Capacity 2,400 2,400
Surplus Pump Station Capacity 719 607
Surplus Pump Station Capacity (gpm)
Description
Existing System
Year 2008
(gpm)
Future System
Year 2028
(gpm)
Required Supply (gpm)
Available Supply (gpm)
Available Supply from Five Corners Pump Station (gpm)
Required Supply from Five Corners Pump Station (gpm)
STORAGE FACILITIES
This section evaluates the City’s four existing water storage facilities to determine if they
have sufficient capacity to meet the existing and future storage requirements of the system.
Analysis Criteria
Water storage is provided in a public water system for different purposes and can be
represented by the following components: operational storage, equalizing storage, standby
storage, fire flow storage, and dead storage. A description of each storage component and
the criteria used to evaluate the capacity of the City’s reservoirs is provided below.
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 198 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-5 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Operational Storage
Operational storage is the upper portion of the reservoir that is used to supply the water
system under normal demand conditions. Operational storage is the average amount of draw
down in the reservoir during normal operating conditions, which represents a volume of
storage that will most likely not be available for other purposes. The operational storage in
all four of the City’s reservoirs is the volume of storage between the average water level of
the reservoirs and the maximum water level (i.e., overflow elevation) of the reservoirs.
Equalizing Storage
Equalizing storage is the portion of the reservoir below operational storage that is used to
supply the water system under peak demand conditions when the system demand exceeds the
total rate of supply of the sources. The criteria for determining the equalizing storage
requirements for the City’s system, which is supplied continuously from the Alderwood
Supply Station, is based on the Department of Health (DOH) formula that considers the
difference between peak hour demand and supply capacity.
Standby Storage
Standby storage is the portion of the reservoir used to supply the water system under
emergency conditions when supply facilities are out of service. Considering the City’s
historically reliable supply from AWWD, standby supply from SPU, and eight emergency
interties with two adjacent water systems, the need for a large amount of standby storage is
not warranted. Therefore, the standby storage requirement is based on a sufficient volume to
provide all water supply to the system for one day during an average day demand condition
when the Alderwood Supply Station is out of service and no other supply is provided by
other facilities.
Fire Flow Storage
Fire flow storage is the portion of the reservoir with sufficient volume to supply water to the
system at the maximum rate and duration required to extinguish a fire at the building with the
highest fire flow requirement. The magnitude of the fire flow storage is the product of the
fire flow rate and duration of the system’s maximum fire flow requirement. The required
volume of fire flow storage for the 325 Zone is based on a 3,000 gpm fire flow for a 3-hour
duration. The required volume of fire flow storage for the remaining pressure zones is based
on a 5,000 gpm fire flow for a 4-hour duration.
Both standby storage and fire flow storage are considered emergency storage components.
The City has elected to nest these two storage components, which results in the larger of the
two individual components being used for both standby and fire flow purposes.
Dead Storage
Dead storage is the bottom portion of the reservoir that cannot be used because water is
stored at an elevation that is too low to pump or flow by gravity to provide sufficient
Packet Page 199 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-6 Comprehensive Water System Plan
pressure. This unusable storage occupies the lower portion of most ground-level standpipe
style reservoirs.
Analysis Approach
The storage analysis is based on an evaluation of the existing reservoirs providing water to
the two operating areas that they serve. The Five Corners 3.0 MG Reservoir and 1.5 MG
Reservoir provide storage to an operating area that includes all pressure zones, except for the
325 Zone. The 1.5 MG Yost Reservoir and 1.5 MG Seaview Reservoir provide storage for
the 325 Zone.
Existing Storage Analysis Results
The results of the storage analysis for the existing system indicate that the existing storage
facilities have sufficient capacity to meet existing demands, as shown in Table 7-4. The two
Five Corners reservoirs have approximately 0.81 MG of excess storage for the pressure zones
that they serve. The Yost Reservoir and Seaview Reservoir have approximately 0.58 MG of
excess storage for the 325 Zone.
Table 7-4
Existing Storage Capacity Evaluation
Maximum Storage Capacity 4.50 3.00 7.50
Dead (Non-usable) Storage -0.38 0.00 -0.38
Total Usable Storage 4.12 3.00 7.12
Operational Storage 1.02 1.31 2.33
Equalizing Storage 0.22 0.11 0.33
Standby & Fire Flow Storage 2.07 1.00 3.07
Total Required Storage 3.31 2.42 5.73
Surplus Storage 0.81 0.58 1.39
Description
All Zones except 325 Zone
(MG)
325 Zone
(MG)
Total System
(MG)
Usable Storage (MG)
Required Storage (MG)
Future Storage Analysis Results
The future storage analysis was performed to determine the adequacy of the City’s existing
reservoirs to meet the future storage requirements, based on projected demands for the year
2028. The demands used in this analysis are projected demands without reductions from
conservation efforts. The results of the future storage analysis indicate that the existing storage
facilities have sufficient capacity to meet the future demands of the system in 2028, as shown in
Table 7-5. Therefore, additional storage capacity is not required within the 20-year planning
period. A number of improvements to the existing reservoirs, not related to capacity, are
planned by the City and identified in Chapter 9.
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 200 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-7 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table 7-5
Future Storage Capacity Evaluation
Maximum Storage Capacity 4.50 3.00 7.50
Dead (Non-usable) Storage -0.38 0.00 -0.38
Total Usable Storage 4.12 3.00 7.12
Operational Storage 1.02 1.31 2.33
Equalizing Storage 0.23 0.11 0.34
Standby & Fire Flow Storage 2.50 1.21 3.72
Total Required Storage 3.75 2.64 6.39
Surplus Storage 0.37 0.36 0.73
Description
All Zones except 325 Zone
(MG)
325 Zone
(MG)
Total System
(MG)
Usable Storage (MG)
Required Storage (MG)
DISTRIBUTION AND TRANSMISSION SYSTEM
This section evaluates the City’s existing distribution and transmission water mains to
determine if they are sized and looped adequately to provide the necessary flow rates and
pressures to meet the existing and future requirements of the system.
Analysis Criteria
The criteria used to evaluate the City’s distribution and transmission system is contained in
WAC 246-290-230 Distribution Systems. The pressure analysis criteria states that the
distribution system “…shall be designed with the capacity to deliver the design peak hour
demand quantity of water at 30 psi under peak hour demand flow conditions measured at all
existing and proposed service water meters”. It also states that if fire flow is to be provided,
“… the distribution system shall also provide maximum day demand (MDD) plus the
required fire flow at a pressure of at least 20 psi at all points throughout the distribution
system”.
Hydraulic Model
A hydraulic computer model of the City’s water system was used to evaluate the existing
system and identify proposed improvements to resolve deficiencies. The hydraulic model
was also used to evaluate the system to demonstrate that the proposed improvements will
eliminate the identified deficiencies and meet the future demand requirements. A description
of the hydraulic model and settings used for the analyses follows.
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 201 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-8 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Description
The City’s existing water system was modeled with InfoWater version 7.0, a GIS based
modeling program developed by MWH Soft. All existing facilities and water mains in the
City’s water system were modeled, including recent improvements.
Demand Data
The hydraulic model contains average day demands of the existing system, based on 2008
demand data. A global demand factor was used to adjust the demands to reflect future 2028
demand levels. Demand peaking factors from Chapter 4 were used to adjust demand levels
to peak day demand for the fire flow analyses and peak hour demand for the pressure
analysis.
Facility Data
The hydraulic model of the existing system for the pressure analysis contains all active
existing system facilities with settings that correspond to peak hour demand events. The
Alderwood Supply Station was operating in pressure control mode to maintain pressures in
the 596 Zone. The Five Corners Pump Station was modeled to reflect the recent pump
replacement improvements. The reservoirs were modeled with water levels that reflect full
utilization of operational and equalizing storage. All active pressure reducing stations were
modeled as being in service and at their normal set points.
The hydraulic model of the existing system for the fire flow analyses contains all active
existing system facilities with settings that correspond to peak day demand events. The
Alderwood Supply Station was operating in pressure control mode to maintain pressures in
the 596 Zone. The Five Corners Pump Station was modeled to operate according to recent
pump replacement improvements. The reservoirs were modeled with water levels that reflect
full utilization of operational, equalizing and fire flow storage. The depletion of fire flow
storage for the analyses in all pressure zones, except the 325 Zone, was based on a maximum
fire flow requirement of 5,000 gpm for a 4-hour duration. The depletion of fire flow storage
for the analyses in the 325 Zone was based on a maximum fire flow requirement of 3,000
gpm for a 3-hour duration. All active pressure reducing stations were modeled as being in
service and at their normal set points.
The hydraulic model of the proposed system in the year 2028 contains all active existing
system facilities and planned system improvements that are identified in Chapter 9. The
settings for all active existing and proposed facilities were set to correspond to the future
peak day demand events for the fire flow analysis of the proposed water system. Otherwise,
facility settings were the same as in the existing system analyses.
Calibration
Hydraulic model calibration is the process of using field pressure and flow data to improve
the accuracy of the hydraulic model so that it can be used to accurately simulate operation of
the actual water system. Initial calibration was accomplished by adjusting water main
roughness coefficients based on a compilation of pipe material and year data. Additional
Packet Page 202 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-9 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
calibration of the model was achieved using field flow and pressure data, which was
collected from flow tests that the City performed throughout the system for this task.
Hydraulic Analyses Results
Several hydraulic analyses were performed to determine the capability of the system to meet
the pressure and flow requirements identified in Chapter 5 and contained in WAC 246-290-
230. The first analysis was performed to evaluate pressures throughout the system under
existing (i.e., 2008) peak hour demand conditions. The results of this analysis were used to
identify locations of low and high pressures. To satisfy the minimum pressure requirements,
the pressure at all water service locations must be at least 30 psi during these demand
conditions. The results of this analysis indicated that all areas of the system have pressures
greater than 30 psi.
Fire flow analyses were performed throughout the system to determine the capability of the
existing water system to provide adequate fire flow under peak day demand conditions. A
separate fire flow analysis was performed for each node in the model to determine the
available fire flow at a minimum residual pressure of 20 psi. For each node analyzed, the
resulting fire flow was compared to its general fire flow requirement, which was assigned
according to the land use classification that it is located within. A summary of the results of
the analyses for representative locations in the system is shown in Table 7-6.
The results of the fire flow analyses were used to identify improvements for water mains that
are undersized or not looped adequately to provide sufficient fire flow. Upon completion of
the existing system fire flow analyses, proposed water main improvements were included in the
model and fire flow analyses were performed throughout the system to demonstrate that the
improvements eliminate the existing system deficiencies and meet the future requirements of
the system. These analyses were modeled under future year 2028 demand conditions without
planned reductions from conservation to ensure that the improvements are sized sufficiently to
meet the most stringent requirements anticipated in the future.
The results of the fire flow analyses with planned improvements are summarized in Table 7-6.
These results show that fire flows are significantly increased with the proposed water main
improvements. A description of the planned improvements and a figure that shows their
location is presented in Chapter 9.
Packet Page 203 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-10 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table 7-6
Fire Flow Analysis Summary
Single Family Residential Area 172nd St & 67th Ave 596 390 1,570 1,000
Seaview Elementary School 188th St & 86th Pl 596 390 3,530 3,000
Single Family Residential Area Sierra Dr & 81st Pl 596 390 1,570 1,000
Multi Family Residential Area 212th St & 81st Pl 596 1,180 3,700 3,000
Stevens Hospital 212th St & 76th Ave 596 4,300 6,000 5,000
Stevens Hospital 212th St & 76th Ave 596 4,520 5,870 5,000
Commercial Area 212th St & 72nd Ave 596 2,630 5,490 3,000
Single Family Residential Area Lake Ballinger Way 596 820 1,570 1,000
Maplewood School 200th St & 84th Ave 596 1,600 4,370 3,000
Commercial Area 244th St SW 596 1,500 2,440 3,000
Commercial Area Edmonds Way & Hwy 99 596 2,250 4,140 3,000
Single Family Residential Area 192nd St & 93rd Pl 505 390 1,570 1,000
Single Family Residential Area 164th St & 72nd Ave 500 390 1,570 1,000
Single Family Residential Area 9th Ave & Sea Vista Pl 486 480 1,740 1,000
Single Family Residential Area 76th Ave & Braemar Dr 425 870 1,560 1,000
Single Family Residential Area 176th St & Sound View Dr 425 880 1,570 1,000
Single Family Residential Area Viewland Way & 12th Ave N 420 400 3,860 1,000
Single Family Residential Area Olympic Ave & Glen St 420 800 1,590 1,000
Single Family Residential Area Sea Lawn Dr 325 880 1,570 1,000
Single Family Residential Area Northern Ocean Ave 325 390 1,570 1,000
Commercial Area Daley St & 3rd Ave N 325 2,760 3,100 3,000
Multi Family Residential Area Glen St & 6th Ave N 325 2,320 4,730 3,000
Holy Rosary School Daley St & 8th Ave N 325 1,400 4,960 3,000
Commercial Area Main St & Railroad Ave 325 880 2,440 1,000
Commercial Area Erben Dr & 4th Ave S 325 1,000 4,110 3,000
Available Fire Flow (gpm) at 20 psi
Description Approximate Location
Pressure
Zone
Existing
System
Future System with
Improvements
Target
Fire Flow
(gpm)
SYSTEM CAPACITY
System capacity analyses were performed to determine the maximum number of equivalent
residential units (ERUs) that the system can serve, based on an independent evaluation of
each component of the City’s water system. A separate analysis was performed for the
existing system with 2008 demand levels and the future system with year 2028 projected
demand levels. The results of these analyses provide the City with information to ensure
sufficient capacity is available when reviewing applications for new connections to the water
system.
Determining Adequate Water Supply for New Buildings
By law, governments cannot issue a building permit until water is available for the
applicant’s property. The requirement for providing evidence of an adequate water supply
was codified in 1990 under Title 19.27.097 of the Revised Code of Washington (RCW) in
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 204 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-11 Comprehensive Water System Plan
the Building Code Section. To assist governments with implementing these requirements,
the Department of Health has developed a handbook titled Guidelines for Determining Water
Availability for New Buildings. A public water system will issue a "Certificate of Water
Availability" or similar document during the building permit review process when there is
sufficient water supply to meet the domestic water service and fire flow requirements of the
applicant’s proposed project.
Analysis Criteria
The capacity of the City’s water system and ability to serve additional customers is based on
the limiting capacity of either supply or storage, whichever facility has the least capacity.
The capacity analysis for supply was computed from the Alderwood Supply Station capacity
and the system’s peak day demand per ERU. The capacity analysis for storage was
computed from the total usable capacity of the storage facilities and the storage requirement
per ERU. The storage requirement per ERU was determined from the existing storage
requirement presented in this chapter and existing ERUs presented in Chapter 4.
Existing System Capacity Analysis Results
The results of the existing system capacity analysis, as shown in Table 7-7, indicate that the
existing system has sufficient capacity to serve an additional 2,276 ERUs. The Alderwood
Supply Station is the limiting facility of the system, as shown in the table.
Table 7-7
Existing System Capacity Analysis
Average Day Demand Per ERU (gal/day)236
Peak Day Demand Per ERU (gal/day)472
Peak Hour Demand Per ERU (gal/day)850
Limiting Supply Rate - AWWD Supply Station (gal/day) 7,920,000
Peak Day Demand Per ERU (gal/day)472
Maximum Supply Capacity (ERUs)16,776
Maximum Storage Capacity (gal)7,118,725
Storage Requirement Per ERU (gal)395
Maximum Storage Capacity (ERUs)18,011
Based on Limiting Facility - Supply 16,776
Maximum System Capacity (ERUs)16,776
Existing (2008) ERUs 14,500
Available System Capacity (ERUs)2,276
Demands Per ERU Basis
Supply Capacity
Storage Capacity
Maximum System Capacity
Available System Capacity
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 205 of 562
CHAPTER 7 WATER SYSTEM ANALYSES
09-1030.103 Page 7-12 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Future System Capacity Analysis Results
The results of the 20-year projected system capacity analysis, as shown in Table 7-8,
indicate that the water system in the year 2028 will have sufficient capacity to serve an
additional 1,783 ERUs. Whereas supply was the limiting facility for the existing system
capacity analysis, storage is the limiting facility for this analysis. This is due to the increased
capacity of the City’s Alderwood Supply Station upon completion of planned improvements
for this facility, which is discussed in Chapter 9.
Table 7-8
20-Year Projected System Capacity Analysis
Average Day Demand Per ERU (gal/day)236
Peak Day Demand Per ERU (gal/day)472
Peak Hour Demand Per ERU (gal/day)850
Limiting Supply Rate - AWWD Supply Station (gal/day) 10,080,000
Peak Day Demand Per ERU (gal/day)472
Maximum Supply Capacity (ERUs)21,351
Maximum Storage Capacity (gal)7,118,725
Storage Requirement Per ERU (gal)407
Maximum Storage Capacity (ERUs)17,483
Based on Limiting Facility - Storage 17,483
Maximum System Capacity (ERUs)17,483
Projected (2028) ERUs 15,700
Available System Capacity (ERUs)1,783
Demands Per ERU Basis
Supply Capacity
Storage Capacity
Maximum System Capacity
Available System Capacity
5.11.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 206 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Page 8-1 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.26.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
8
Operations and Maintenance
INTRODUCTION
This chapter summarizes the operations and maintenance activities of the City’s Water Division,
including a brief description of the personnel and their duties for operating and maintaining the
water system.
WATER SYSTEM MANAGEMENT AND PERSONNEL
Management Structure
The City of Edmonds Water Division functions under the direction of the Public Works
Director. The Water and Sewer Manager is responsible for management of the water system and
reports to the Public Works Director. The daily operation of the water system functions under
the direction of the Water Division Lead. The Water Division Lead, Water Quality Technician
and Meter Reader report to the Water and Sewer Manager, as shown in Table 8-1.
The Water Maintenance Technicians are responsible for the daily operation and maintenance
of the water system. Their tasks include routine operation and preventive maintenance,
record keeping, inspection, testing, installation, and repair of system facilities, and
maintenance required in response to emergencies.
The City’s water system must be operated by one or more certified operators in accordance with
Washington State Law (WAC 246-292). In addition, specialty certification is required for
backflow device testing. Table 8-2 shows the current certifications of the City’s water
operations and maintenance staff. Five certified crew members in the Sewer Division also assist
the Water Division staff on an as-needed basis. The City maintains well qualified, technically
trained staff and provides opportunities for ongoing training, certification, and membership in
professional organizations.
Personnel Responsibilities
The key responsibilities of the water operations and maintenance staff are summarized
below:
Public Works Director: Manages administration, budget formulation and utility rates.
Water & Sewer Manager: Responsible for the day-to-day operation of the water and sewer
utility systems. Supervises the implementation of programs, and oversees the budgeting
process for water system operations and maintenance.
Packet Page 207 of 562
CHAPTER 8 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
09-1030.103 Page 8-2 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Water Division Lead: Supervises all maintenance personnel in the Water Division. Supports
the Water and Sewer Manager in the day-to-day operation of the water system. Participates
in the decision making process during system troubleshooting, emergency response situations
and implementation of system upgrades. Coordinates preventative maintenance, water
quality monitoring, and cross-connection control activities. The Water Division Lead is the
field foreman during system troubleshooting and emergency response situations.
Water Quality Technician: Responsible for all tasks related to maintaining and testing water
quality throughout the distribution system and responds to water quality complaints.
Water Maintenance: Directly involved in maintenance of the water system, monitoring of
facilities, daily operations, inspection and repair, testing, response to complaints, emergency
response, and cross connection control.
Meter Reader: Responsible for reading all customer meters and recording the data.
Table 8-1
Water System Operations and Maintenance Organization Chart
Water and Sewer Manager
Jim Waite
Public Works Director
Noel Miller
5.26.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Water Quality Technician
Linda McMurphy
Water Division Lead
Kris Kuhnhausen
Meter Reader
Steve Leonard
Water Maintenance
Rick Shore
Vincent Smith
Jason Daniels
Dan Gilbert
Jeff Kobylk
Packet Page 208 of 562
CHAPTER 8 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
09-1030.103 Page 8-3 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table 8-2
Personnel Certification
Name Position Certification No. Certification Type
Jim Waite Water and Sewer Manager 3763 WDM4, WDS, CCS, BAT, WTPOIT
Kris Kuhnhausen Water Division Lead 5199 WDM3, WDS, CCS
Linda McMurphy Water Quality Technician 3256 WDM2, MDS, CCS, BAT
Rick Shore Water Maintenance II 5411 WDM1, WDS, CCS
Vincent Smith Water Maintenance II 6887 WDS, CCS
Jason Daniels Water Maintenance II 8002 WDS
Dan Gilbert Water Maintenance II 10939 WDS, CCS
Jeff Kobylk Water Maintenance II 11735 WDS
Certification Definitions
WDM - Water Distribution Manager
WDS - Water Distribution Specialist
CCS - Cross Connection Control Specialist
BAT - Backflow Assembly Tester
WTPOIT - Water Treatment Plant Operator In Training
NORMAL OPERATIONS
Available Equipment
The City owns and regularly uses a variety of equipment for daily routine operation and
maintenance of the water system. The equipment and supplies needed for normal operation
and maintenance of the water system is stored at the City's Public Works Facility. The City
will also rent additional equipment, as needed, or contract with a local contractor for
additional services. The following equipment and supplies are maintained by the City:
• Repair bands, couplers and replacement pipe for all sizes and types of water mains found
in the system to be used for the repair or replacement of leaking or broken water mains.
• Spare service saddles, corporation stops, service lines, meter setters, meters and boxes to
be used for the repair of service connections from leaking, structural damage or frost
damage.
• A complete hydrant assembly to be used for the repair or replacement of a leaking or
damaged hydrant.
• Spare parts for facilities found in the distribution system, including gate valves, pressure
reducing valves and air release valves.
• An adequate supply of dry chlorine is kept on hand. Chlorine is the only treatment
chemical kept in stock.
5.26.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 209 of 562
CHAPTER 8 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
09-1030.103 Page 8-4 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.26.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
• Vehicles that include three crew trucks, one dump truck, one flat bed track, one meter
reading vehicle and one backhoe. All vehicles are equipped with communications
equipment to ensure a reliable method of communication within the organization.
Routine Operations
Routine operations involve the planning and implementation of procedures to ensure that the
water system is functioning properly and providing reliable, high-quality water to all customers
at all times. Routine operations also involve planned maintenance activities and reading of
customer meters.
Routine Water Quality Sampling
The City routinely samples water throughout the distribution system to ensure the water is safe
for its customers use, as required by law. The Department of Health (DOH) has adopted federal
regulations that specify minimum sampling requirements for water systems. The sampling
requirements are contained in WAC 246-290-300 and depend on the population served, source
type, and treatment provided. Water quality monitoring is discussed further in Chapter 6, the
City’s latest Water Quality Report in Appendix J, and the City’s Coliform Monitoring Plan in
Appendix K.
Cross Connection Control
The City adopted a cross connection control program that complies with WAC 246-290-490
for the protection of its potable water from contamination due to cross connections.
Backflow prevention devices are required at any service connection where a potential for
contamination exists, as defined by City ordinance (Chapter 7.20 Backflow Prevention).
The premise where the backflow prevention device is installed is placed on a yearly
inspection list that is maintained by the Water Division.
The City routinely reviews building permit applications for potential cross connection
situations. Several Water Division staff have the Cross Connection Specialist certification as
shown in Table 8-2 and are capable of implementing the cross connection control program.
Information from the City’s cross connection control program is contained in Appendix H.
Customer Complaint Response Program
The City maintains a log of complaints received from water customers. Depending on the
nature of the complaint, a Water Division employee may be contacted by radio or mobile
phone to respond immediately if a public health issue is apparent. If not of immediate
urgency, a work order will be completed, and staff will respond as soon as feasible.
The City dedicates one full-time employee to distribution system water quality. One of
responsibilities of this position is to address water quality complaints and inquiries. A
computerized maintenance management system is used to document and track this activity.
Packet Page 210 of 562
CHAPTER 8 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
09-1030.103 Page 8-5 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.26.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Recordkeeping and Reporting
Regulations for recordkeeping and reporting are contained in WAC 246-290-480. The City
maintains all records in its Information and Management System (IMS). All water system
operating records are kept for an indefinite period. Records and reports maintained by the City
include, but are not limited to the following:
• Water quality monitoring
• Water quality complaints
• Actions taken to correct MCL violations
• Variances or exemptions
• Public notifications
• Flushing activities
• Backflow prevention devices and customer notices
• Maintenance and construction records
• System charts and drawings
• O&M manuals
• Personnel and legal records
The required retention periods of critical records required by DOH are as follows:
• Bacteriological analysis results: 5 years
• Chemical analysis results: for as long as the system is in operation
• Daily source meter readings: 10 years
• Other records of operation and analyses as may be required by DOH: 3 years
• Documentation of actions to correct violations of primary drinking water standards: 3
years after last corrective action
• Records of sanitary surveys: 10 years
• Project reports, construction documents and drawings, inspection reports, and approvals:
life of the facility
The notification and reporting requirements of DOH are as follows:
• The City must report the following to DOH:
o Within one business day: a backflow incident per WAC 246-290-490 (8)f.
o Within 48 hours: a failure to comply with the primary standards or treatment
technique requirements specified in WAC 246-290.
o Within 48 hours: a failure to comply with the monitoring requirements specified
in WAC 246-290.
o Within 48 hours: a violation of a primary maximum contaminant level (MCL).
Packet Page 211 of 562
CHAPTER 8 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
09-1030.103 Page 8-6 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.26.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
• The City must submit to DOH all applicable reports required by WAC 246-290. Monthly
reports are due by the 10th day of the following month, unless otherwise specified.
• Daily source meter readings and total annual source meter readings must be made
available to DOH on request.
• Water facilities inventory form (WFI) must be submitted to DOH within 30 days of any
change in name, category, ownership, or responsibility for management of the water
system.
• The City must notify DOH of the presence of:
o Coliform in a sample within 10 days of notification by the testing laboratory.
o Fecal coliform or E. coli in a sample by the end of the business day that the City
is notified by the testing laboratory.
• 6. When a coliform MCL violation is determined, the City must:
o Notify DOH within 24 hours of determining acute coliform MCL violations.
o Notify DOH before the end of the next business day when a non-acute coliform
MCL is determined.
o Notify water customers in accordance with WAC 246-290-495.
• Any reports or communications related to monitoring waivers must be submitted to DOH
during each monitoring period or as required.
Public Notification
In accordance with WAC 246-290-495, the City must notify water system customers if any of the
following conditions occur:
• Failure to comply with monitoring requirements under WAC 246-290.
• Failure to comply with a primary MCL described under WAC 246-290-310.
• Failure to comply with a surface water treatment technique.
• Failure to comply with testing requirements.
• Failure to comply with a DOH order.
• Failure to comply with a variance or exemption schedule from DOH.
• If the system is operating under a variance or exemption.
• If system is identified as a source of waterborne disease outbreak.
• If DOH issues the system a category red operating permit.
• If DOH issues an order.
The City will comply with public notification content requirements, notice distribution
requirements, and time limit requirements specified in WAC 246-290-495.
Packet Page 212 of 562
CHAPTER 8 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
09-1030.103 Page 8-7 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.26.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Safety Procedures and Equipment
The City provides ongoing safety education for its staff to ensure a safe working environment.
The American Water Works Association publishes a manual titled, Safety Practices for Water
Utilities (M3), that describes safety programs and provides guidelines for safe work practices and
techniques for a variety of water utility work situations. The City has implemented several
safety rules related, but not limited to, the following:
• Climbing tanks or standpipes.
• Entering manholes, vaults, or open trenches.
• Operating heavy equipment or handling chemicals.
All employees in the Water Division have basic first aid training. All Water Division vehicles
are equipped with first aid kits. First aid kits are also maintained at the Public Works Facility.
A copy of Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for the chemicals used in the operations and
maintenance of the water system are kept on file at the Public Works Department. The data
sheets identify the chemical name, hazardous ingredients, physical data, fire and explosion
hazard data, health hazards, spill and disposal procedures, user protection information, handling
and storage precautions, as well as other information about the product.
EMERGENCY OPERATIONS
The Water Division staff are trained and equipped to respond to emergency events. The water
system has been designed and constructed to operate under emergency conditions. A brief
discussion of the capabilities of the water system infrastructure and its operation during
emergency events follows.
Multiple Supply Sources
The City has the capability to maintain water service to its customers if its primary supply
facility, the Alderwood Supply Station, is out of service. The City’s standby supply facility, the
SPU Supply Station, could be used to supply the system during an emergency event. The City
also has multiple emergency interties with adjacent water systems that could be used during this
type of event. The City has four emergency interties with City of Lynnwood and five emergency
interties with the Olympic View Water District.
Multiple Reservoirs
The City has multiple reservoirs that provide redundancy to the operating areas they serve,
should one of the reservoirs be out of service. The reservoirs include a 3.0 MG steel standpipe
and 1.5 MG steel standpipe at the Five Corners site, a 1.5 MG buried concrete reservoir at the
Yost Park site, and a 1.5 MG buried concrete reservoir at the Seaview Park site.
Packet Page 213 of 562
CHAPTER 8 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
09-1030.103 Page 8-8 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.26.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Distribution System
The City has installed water mains with multiple connections to other water mains and created
looped water mains where possible. This enables the City to maintain service to customers and
minimize the number of customers taken out service during maintenance and repairs to the
distribution system.
Emergency Telephone Calls
Emergency calls during business hours are handled through the City switchboard. Calls during
non-business hours are handled through the Snohomish County Emergency Communication
System (Sno-Com). One Water Division employee is on-call 24-hours a day.
On-Call Personnel
The City’s "on-call" person is equipped with a service vehicle and can respond promptly to any
emergency calls. A list of emergency telephone numbers is provided to each "on-call"
employee.
Employee Cross-Training
The City’s public works operations and maintenance employees are trained in all areas of the
City-owned utilities. This enables the City to draw from a larger pool of workers that are
qualified to deal with water related issues in the event of an emergency. This places the City in a
position of readiness where they are able to effectively deal with almost any problem that arises.
Emergency Response Program
The City of Edmonds Disaster Plan prepared by the City identifies procedures that would be
carried out in the event of a serious emergency or disaster situation. The City has also prepared
an Emergency Response Plan and a Vulnerability Assessment Plan of the water system, which
includes contingency plans for responding to potential emergency conditions. Copies of these
are kept on file at the Public Works Facility.
PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE
The Water Division has developed a preventive maintenance program to ensure all critical
components of the water system are properly functioning and regularly maintained for long-term
performance and reliability. The following schedule is used for the City’s preventive
maintenance program.
• Valves: annually operate, inspect, clean and maintain.
• Fire hydrants: semi-annually operate, inspect, clean and maintain.
• Water mains: semi-annually flush water mains using fire hydrants and blow-off
assemblies to discharge flushing water.
Packet Page 214 of 562
CHAPTER 8 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
09-1030.103 Page 8-9 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.26.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
• PRV stations: annually exercise, inspect, clean and maintain all equipment; rebuild
control valves every five years.
• Supply stations: annually exercise, inspect, clean and maintain all equipment; rebuild
control valves every five years.
• Reservoirs: daily inspect facility site and security; annually inspect exterior coating.
• Pump station: daily inspect facility site and security; annually inspect, clean and maintain
all equipment; rebuild control valves every five years.
STAFFING
The Water Division is currently staffed with eight full-time personnel consisting of five field
technicians, one water quality technician, one meter reader and one lead supervisor. The
Water and Sewer Manager allocates approximately 50 percent of his time to the Water
Division. The Public Works Director oversees all Public Works activities, so a much smaller
portion of his time is available to the water system.
The City’s current staffing level is adequate to operate the water system and meet the
regulatory requirements for public water systems. The City will routinely evaluate staffing
needs and add staff in the future, as allowed by the budget, to ensure compliance with
regulatory requirements and the increasing needs of the system. The City plans to add one
new staff position in the second half of 2010 to maintain the City’s GIS system with one-
third of the position being funded by the Water Utility.
Packet Page 215 of 562
CHAPTER 8 OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE
09-1030.103 Page 8-10 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.26.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 216 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Page 9-1 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
9
Water System Improvements
INTRODUCTION
This chapter presents water system improvements that the City plans to implement within the
20-year planning period to resolve existing system deficiencies and meet the future demands
of the water system. The water system improvements were identified from the results of the
water system analyses presented in Chapter 7 and have been sized to accommodate the
projected demands shown in Chapter 4. This chapter also presents criteria used for
prioritizing the capital improvements, planning level project cost estimates, and an
implementation schedule for the improvements.
DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS
This section provides a general description of capital improvements that have been completed
since the last water system plan was prepared in 2002 and provides a brief description of the
currently planned capital improvements. The water system improvements are shown
schematically in Figure 9-1 and summarized in a table near the end of this chapter.
The water system improvements are grouped into the following categories and briefly
described following the discussion of recently completed improvements:
• Water Main Improvements
• PRV Station and Pressure Relief Improvements
• Facility Improvements
• Other Improvements
Water System Improvements Completed Since 2002
The City has completed several water system improvements that were identified in the 2002
Comprehensive Water System Plan. These include an upgrade to the Five Corners Pump
Station, seismic and control valve improvements at the reservoir sites, pressure reducing
station improvements, and replacement of old and undersized water main. A summary of
water system improvements completed since 2002 is shown in Table 9-1.
Packet Page 217 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-2 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.17.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Table 9-1
Water System Improvements Completed Since 2002
2002 WSP
CIP No.Project Description Length
T-1 South Perrinville Area Water Main Improvements 4,470 LF
T-2 Seaview Area Water Main Improvements 4,140 LF
T-3 Alderwood Master Meter Improvements N/A
T-4 Chase Lake Area Water Main Improvements 4,560 LF
T-5 North Ballinger Water Main Improvements 2,345 LF
T-6 77th Place W Water Main Improvements 2,000 LF
T-7 South Ballinger Area Water Main Improvements 4,760 LF
T-8 College Place Area Water Main Improvements 5,610 LF
T-9 80th Place W Water Main Improvements 640 LF
T-11 Cory Road Water Main Improvements 250 LF
T-12 81st Place W Water Main Improvements 1,340 LF
T-15 215th Street SW Water Main Improvements 200 LF
T-15 215th Place SW Water Main Improvements 300 LF
T-15 92nd Place W Water Main Improvements 350 LF
SC-1 Five Corners Pump Station Improvements N/A
SC-2 Seismic Improvements for Reservoirs N/A
SC-3 Reservoir Security Study & Improvements N/A
SC-4 Chlorine Residual Analyzers N/A
SC-5 Miscellaneous PRV Improvements N/A
Water Main Improvements
The following water main improvements were identified from the results of the distribution
system analyses presented in Chapter 7 and from the City’s list of planned projects.
CIP WM1: Annual Water Main Replacement Program
Deficiency: Most of the water mains to be replaced within this ongoing program are aging,
undersized water mains that do not provide adequate fire flow to meet current requirements.
Much of this water main is older cast iron pipe and some areas have had occurrences of leaks
or breaks. Water main improvement projects previously identified in the City’s CIP program
in 2006, 2007 and 2008 have been carried forward and are included within this CIP project.
Improvement: Replace existing water main with new ductile iron water main in accordance
with the City’s construction standards. The individual water main improvements grouped
under this project are shown in Figure 9-1. Information on the individual projects, including
proposed water main size, location and project cost estimate is presented later in this chapter
in Table 9-6. The selection of specific projects will be accomplished annually during the
City’s budget development process and will be guided by the prioritization presented later in
this chapter. This provides the City with the flexibility to coordinate these projects with
other projects that may occur within the same area. The fire hydrant portion of the new water
main installations has been separated from this project and grouped under project CIP M1 for
cost allocation purposes.
Packet Page 218 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-3 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
CIP WM2: 24-inch Transmission Main Isolation Valves
Deficiency: The existing 24-inch transmission main provides water from the Alderwood
Supply Station to the 596 Zone and does not have enough valves to shut down and isolate
portions of the transmission main for maintenance or repairs.
Improvement: Install up to approximately six isolation valves along the 24-inch transmission
main. The total number of valves and valve locations will be determined during design.
CIP WM3: BNSF Crossings Water Main
Deficiency: The City’s existing water main crossings beneath BNSF’s right of way are not
adequate for BNSF’s future second track.
Improvement: Upgrade the existing 12-inch diameter water main crossings beneath BNSF’s
right of way at Main Street and Dayton Street by installing 18-inch diameter steel casings
that will house the City’s 12-inch diameter water mains. The project will also replace an
existing water main at Brackett’s Landing North Park and add a new water main in James
Street between Sunset Avenue and Railroad Street to improve fire flow service.
CIP WM4: Shell Valley Access Road Water Main
Deficiency: The existing 8-inch diameter water main in Pioneer Way is a dead-end service.
Improvement: Install approximately 300 feet of new 8-inch diameter water main from Main
Street to the existing valve on the water main in Pioneer Way. The new water main will
eliminate the dead-end main on Pioneer Way and improve the water system. The water main
will be installed during construction of the Shell Valley Access Road improvements.
PRV Station and Pressure Relief Improvements
The following PRV station improvements and pressure relief improvements include new
facilities, abandoning old facilities, and improvements to existing facilities.
CIP PRV1: New 596/420 Zone Pressure Reducing Station
Deficiency: Water supply to the 420 Zone is conveyed from the 596 Zone through one
pressure reducing station, thereby lacking supply redundancy. Without a second supply
connection and sufficient water main looping, the single PRV station does not provide
adequate fire flow into the 420 Zone.
Improvement: Install a new PRV station near the intersection of Viewland Way and 12th
Avenue. The size of the control valves and exact location of the station will be determined
during design.
Packet Page 219 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-4 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
CIP PRV2: PRV Station 11 Abandonment (184th St & 84th Ave)
Deficiency: This existing PRV station has been off-line for several years and is no longer
needed.
Improvement: Abandon the PRV station to eliminate any future maintenance requirements
of this facility.
CIP PRV3: PRV Station 12 Abandonment (Olympic View Drive & Sunset Way)
Deficiency: This existing PRV station has been off-line for a several years and is no longer
needed.
Improvement: Abandon the PRV station to eliminate any future maintenance requirements
of this facility.
CIP PRV4: System-Wide Pressure Relief Improvements
Deficiency: The existing water system does not have sufficient pressure relief facilities in all
pressure zones to protect the system from excessively high pressures that would occur if a
control valve fails in the open position in one of the pressure reducing stations or supply
stations.
Improvement: Install new pressure relief stations or modify existing pressure reducing
stations to include a pressure relief valve. A system-wide evaluation will be performed
during the preliminary design phase of the project to determine the size, location, and
recommended improvements to provide pressure relief to the entire water system.
CIP PRV5: Annual PRV Station Improvements Program
Deficiency: Several of the existing PRV stations are old and have reached the end of their
useful service life. Other PRV stations are in need of minor improvements to ensure long-
term operation and reliability.
Improvement: Annually improve or replace PRV stations throughout the system. The City
will evaluate needs and select one or more PRV stations to be improved each year.
Facility Improvements
The following water system facility projects consist of improvements to existing facilities to
improve operation, increase capacity, or to ensure long-term performance of the facility.
CIP F1: Alderwood Supply Station Improvements
Deficiency: The supply station is not setup to operate correctly with the Five Corners Pump
Station and requires manual operation during high demand periods. The station also lacks
sufficient integration with the City’s SCADA system.
Packet Page 220 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-5 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Improvement: Implement improvements to expand the capacity of the station to improve
system operation during peak demand periods when the Five Corners Pump Station is
operating in conjunction with the supply station, including improvements to properly
integrate the station with the City’s SCADA system.
CIP F2: Seaview Reservoir Improvements
Deficiency: The existing reservoir vents are not secure and could allow stormwater to enter
the reservoir. Better monitoring of water quality is needed at the reservoir site.
Improvement: Replace the existing reservoir vents with new vents and install water quality
sampling improvements.
CIP F3: Yost Reservoir Improvements
Deficiency: The existing reservoir vents are not secure and could allow stormwater to enter
the reservoir. Better monitoring of water quality is needed at the reservoir site. Access into
the reservoir for inspection or maintenance purposes is difficult through the existing manhole
structure, located at the outer edge of the Yost Park tennis court.
Improvement: Replace the existing reservoir vents with new vents and install water quality
sampling improvements. Replace the existing access manhole cover with a new locking
access hatch.
CIP F4: Five Corners Pump Station Improvements
Deficiency: The pump station has insufficient capacity and control capabilities to properly
operate in conjunction with the Alderwood Supply Station and meet the supply requirements
of the 596 Zone.
Improvement: Replace the existing pumps with new pumps and VFDs (variable frequency
drives). Install piping, control valve, and SCADA improvements. These improvements were
underway in 2009 and completed in 2010.
CIP F5: Five Corners 3.0 MG Reservoir Recoating
Deficiency: The last interior and exterior coating of the steel reservoir was completed in
1994. The reservoir should be recoated every 15 to 20 years, based on the typical life of
coating on steel reservoirs.
Improvement: Recoat the interior and exterior of the reservoir to prevent premature
corrosion of the facility. Inspect and sample the interior and exterior reservoir coatings
approximately one year prior to commencement of the project to determine the properties of
the existing coatings and requirements for the project.
Packet Page 221 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-6 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
CIP F6: Five Corners 1.5 MG Reservoir Recoating
Deficiency: The last interior and exterior coating of the steel reservoir was completed in
1994. The reservoir should be recoated every 15 to 20 years, based on the typical life of
coating on steel reservoirs.
Improvement: Recoat the interior and exterior of the reservoir to prevent premature
corrosion of the facility. Inspect and sample the interior and exterior reservoir coatings
approximately one year prior to commencement of the project to determine the properties of
the existing coatings and requirements for the project.
Other Improvements
CIP M1: Fire Hydrant Improvements
Deficiency: The City has identified approximately 12 fire hydrants that are old and have
reached the end of their useful service life. Fire hydrants on water mains to be replaced
under the Annual Water Main Replacement Program (CIP WM1) are old and will not be
reused on the new water mains.
Improvement: Replace the 12 old fire hydrants with new fire hydrants. This project also
includes the fire hydrant portion of the new water main installations planned under CIP
WM1.
CIP M2: AMR Meter Evaluation Study
Deficiency: The City’s existing water customer meters will eventually reach the end of their
useful service life and need replacing. New automatic meter reading (AMR) technologies are
available that offer improved metering accuracy, reduced labor requirements, and capabilities
that support water conservation efforts.
Improvement: Conduct a study that evaluates the different AMR technologies and costs,
potential benefits to the City, and provides recommendations for meter replacements and
implementation of a long-term metering system.
CIP M3: Telemetry System Improvements
Deficiency: The telemetry system will need to be upgraded on a regular basis to maintain up-
to-date equipment to ensure reliable and continuous operation, with a major system upgrade
anticipated in approximately 2020.
Improvement: Upgrade the hardware and software, as necessary, to keep the system up-to-
date. Replacement of major components is anticipated in approximately 2020.
Packet Page 222 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-7 Comprehensive Water System Plan
CIP M4: Comprehensive Water System Plan Update
Deficiency: The City is required to update its Comprehensive Water System Plan every six
years and submit to the Department of Health for review and approval. Drinking water
regulations are continuously changing and must be addressed in the City’s Comprehensive
Water System Plan.
Improvement: Update the Comprehensive Water System Plan every six years to meet the
requirements that are in effect at the time of the update and to provide the City with an
updated plan for implementing water system improvements.
PROJECT COST ESTIMATES
Project costs were estimated for each of the planned improvements and are presented in 2009
dollars. The planning level project cost estimates include the estimated construction cost and
indirect costs. The construction cost estimate portion includes all construction related costs,
sales tax and a 10 percent contingency. The indirect cost portion is estimated at 35 percent of
the construction cost and includes engineering (preliminary design, final design, and
construction management services), surveying, permitting, legal, and administrative services.
Water Main Cost Estimates
Construction costs for water main projects were estimated using the water main unit costs
(i.e., cost per foot length) shown in Table 9-2. The unit cost of construction for each water
main size is based on estimates of all construction-related improvements, which include
materials and labor for the water main installation, water services, fittings, valves,
connections to the existing system, trench restoration, full-width roadway asphalt overlay,
and other work for a complete installation. The indirect cost component is not included in
the water main unit costs.
Table 9-2
Water Main Unit Costs for Construction
Water Main Construction Cost
Diameter per Foot Length
(inches)(2009 $$/LF)
8 $230
12 $280
Costs related to the fire hydrant portion of the water main improvements are included in the
unit costs shown in Table 9-2, but have been removed from project CIP WM1 and shown
separately under project CIP M1 in Table 9-7 near the end of this chapter.
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 223 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-8 Comprehensive Water System Plan
PRIORITIZING IMPROVEMENTS
The prioritization of water system improvements is based on criteria that were developed to
ensure projects with the most deficiencies and greatest need for improvements are completed
first. A description of the criteria is provided below.
Prioritizing Water Main Improvements
Table 9-3 shows the criteria used for prioritizing the water main improvements. The criteria
are based on the existing water main deficiencies, as determined by the categories shown in
the table. Each category is assigned a weight factor that reflects the relative importance of
each category compared to the others. The Existing Water Main Fire Flow Capability
category ranks the water main improvements based on the ability of the existing water mains
to provide the required fire flow, as determined from the results of the hydraulic analyses
presented in Chapter 7. The Occurrence of Leaks or Breaks category ranks the water main
improvements based on the amount of leaks or breaks incidents and maintenance required in
the past. The Existing Water Main Year of Installation and Existing Water Main Material
categories rank the water main improvements based on the existing pipe age and material.
The water main priority ranking criteria was applied to each water main improvement
project, which resulted in a total ranking score for each project. The results of the priority
ranking are summarized in Table 9-4. Table 9-5 presents the results in an order that is
sorted according to total ranking points.
Table 9-3
Water Main Improvements Priority Ranking Criteria
Weight
Factor
Weighted
Points
Available Fire Flow is 69% or 412
Available Fire Flow is 70% or 80% of Target Fire Flow 4 8
Available Fire Flow is 90% or 100% of Target Fire Flow 4 4
48
44
1929 -3 9
1950 -3 6
1970 &3 3
26
24
HDPE or 2 2Ductile Iron
3
2
1
Points
Existing Water Main Fire Flow Capability
3
2
1
Category
Less of Target Fire Flow
Occurrence of Leaks or Breaks
2 Frequent Reports of Leaks or Breaks
1 Occasional Reports of Leaks or Breaks
Existing Water Main Year of Installation
3
2
1
Existing Water Main Material
1949
1969
after
Steel
Cast Iron
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 224 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-9 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table 9-4
Water Main Improvements Priority Ranking – Sorted by CIP Number
Priority Ranking Points
Leaks/Pipe Total
CIP No. Fire Flow Breaks Pipe Year Material Points
11106 320
21208 424
31005 318
4808420
5803415
6803213
7806216
8602210
9* 8 0 5 3 16
10 8 0 3 4 15
11 12 0 3 6 21
12 12 0 6 4 22
13 12 0 3 4 19
14 9 0 3 3 15
15 8 0 3 2 13
16 11 0 4 3 18
17 12 0 3 2 17
18 9 0 3 3 15
19 8 0 3 4 15
20 12 0 5 4 20
21 8 0 5 4 17
22 12 0 3 2 17
23 12 0 3 2 17
24 8 0 3 4 15
25 4 0 6 4 14
26 8 0 3 4 15
27 8 0 6 4 18
28 8 0 3 2 13
29 8 0 3 4 15
30 8 0 3 4 15
31 12 0 6 3 21
32 8 0 6 4 18
33 8 0 3 2 13
34 8 0 6 4 18
35 8 0 6 2 16
36 8 0 3 2 13
37 10 0 3 2 15
38 8 0 6 4 18
39 8 0 3 4 15
40 8 0 3 2 13
41 9 0 5 3 17
42 8 0 3 2 13
43 8 0 6 4 18
44 8 0 3 4 15
45* 12 0 3 4 19
46 10 0 3 3 16
47 12 0 3 4 19
48 12 0 3 2 17
49 8 0 3 2 13
50 4 0 5 2 11
51 12 0 4 3 19
52 12 0 9 4 25
53 8 0 3 2 13
54 8 0 6 4 18
55 8 0 6 4 18
56 8 0 3 4 15
57 8 0 3 4 15
58 8 0 5 4 17
59 12 0 6 4 22
60 12 0 2 3 17
61 12 0 3 3 18
62 12 4 3 2 21
63 8 4 3 4 19
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 225 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-10 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table 9-4
Water Main Improvements Priority Ranking – Sorted by CIP Number (continued)
Priority Ranking Points
Leaks/Pipe Total
CIP No. Fire Flow Breaks Pipe Year Material Points
64 11 4 3 2 20
65 10 4 3 3 21
66 8 0 3 4 15
67 8 0 5 2 15
68 8 8 3 4 23
69 12 0 6 4 22
70 8 0 3 2 13
71 12 0 3 4 19
72 12 0 5 3 20
73 8 0 3 3 14
74 4 0 3 4 11
75 12 0 3 3 18
76 8 0 3 4 15
77 0 0 2 2 4
78 0 0 0 0 0
79 0 0 3 4 7
80 0 0 6 6 12
81 0 0 3 4 7
82 0 0 3 4 7
83 0 0 3 4 7
84 0 0 3 4 7
85 0 0 0 0 0
86 0 0 0 0 0
87 0 0 0 0 0
88* 0 0 3 4 7
89* 0 0 3 4 7
90* 0 0 3 4 7
91* 0 0 9 6 15
92* 0 0 6 4 10
93* 0 0 3 4 7
94* 0 0 3 4 7
95* 6 0 5 5 16
96* 0 0 3 6 9
97* 0 0 0 0 0
98* 0 0 0 0 0
99* 12 0 6 6 24
100* 0 0 0 0 0
101*0 8 9 4 21
102*12 4 6 4 26
103* 12 0 3 4 19
104* 0 0 3 4 7
105* 8 0 0 0 8
106 0 0 0 0 0
107 0 0 0 0 0
108 0 0 9 4 13
109 0 0 9 4 13
110 0 0 9 4 13
111 0 0 9 4 13
112 0 0 9 4 13
113 0 0 9 4 13
114 0 0 9 4 13
115 0 0 9 4 13
116 0 0 9 4 13
117 0 0 9 4 13
118 0 0 9 4 13
119 0 0 9 4 13
120 0 0 9 4 13
121 0 0 9 4 13
122 0 0 9 4 13
123 0 0 9 4 13
124 0 0 9 4 13
125 0 0 9 4 13
126 0 0 9 4 13
* 2006-2008 CIP projects carried forward
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 226 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-11 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table 9-5
Water Main Improvements Priority Ranking – Sorted by Total Points
Priority Ranking Points
Leaks /Pipe Total
CIP No. Fire Flow Breaks Pipe Year Material Points
102* 12 4 6 4 26
52 12 0 9 4 25
99* 12 0 6 6 24
21208 424
68 8 8 3 4 23
12 12 0 6 4 22
59 12 0 6 4 22
69 12 0 6 4 22
11 12 0 3 6 21
31 12 0 6 3 21
62 12 4 3 2 21
101* 0 8 9 4 21
65 10 4 3 3 21
20 12 0 5 4 20
64 11 4 3 2 20
11106 320
4808420
72 12 0 5 3 20
13 12 0 3 4 19
45* 12 0 3 4 19
47 12 0 3 4 19
63 8 4 3 4 19
71 12 0 3 4 19
103* 12 0 3 4 19
51 12 0 4 3 19
31005 318
16 11 0 4 3 18
27 8 0 6 4 18
32 8 0 6 4 18
34 8 0 6 4 18
38 8 0 6 4 18
43 8 0 6 4 18
54 8 0 6 4 18
55 8 0 6 4 18
61 12 0 3 3 18
75 12 0 3 3 18
60 12 0 2 3 17
17 12 0 3 2 17
22 12 0 3 2 17
23 12 0 3 2 17
41 9 0 5 3 17
48 12 0 3 2 17
21 8 0 5 4 17
58 8 0 5 4 17
7806216
9* 8 0 5 3 16
35 8 0 6 2 16
46 10 0 3 3 16
95* 6 0 5 5 16
5803415
10 8 0 3 4 15
18 9 0 3 3 15
19 8 0 3 4 15
26 8 0 3 4 15
29 8 0 3 4 15
30 8 0 3 4 15
37 10 0 3 2 15
39 8 0 3 4 15
44 8 0 3 4 15
56 8 0 3 4 15
57 8 0 3 4 15
66 8 0 3 4 15
76 8 0 3 4 15
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 227 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-12 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table 9-5
Water Main Improvements Priority Ranking – Sorted by Total Points (continued)
Priority Ranking Points
Leaks/Pipe Total
CIP No. Fire Flow Breaks Pipe Year Material Points
91* 0 0 9 6 15
14 9 0 3 3 15
24 8 0 3 4 15
67 8 0 5 2 15
25 4 0 6 4 14
73 8 0 3 3 14
70 8 0 3 2 13
6803213
15 8 0 3 2 13
28 8 0 3 2 13
33 8 0 3 2 13
36 8 0 3 2 13
40 8 0 3 2 13
42 8 0 3 2 13
49 8 0 3 2 13
53 8 0 3 2 13
108009 4 13
109009 4 13
110009 4 13
111009 4 13
112009 4 13
113009 4 13
114009 4 13
115009 4 13
116009 4 13
117009 4 13
118009 4 13
119009 4 13
120009 4 13
121009 4 13
122009 4 13
123009 4 13
124009 4 13
125009 4 13
126009 4 13
80 0 0 6 6 12
74 4 0 3 4 11
50 4 0 5 2 11
92*0 0 6 4 10
8602210
96* 0 0 3 6 9
105* 8 0 0 0 8
7900347
8100347
8200347
8300347
8400347
88* 0 0 3 4 7
89* 0 0 3 4 7
90* 0 0 3 4 7
93* 0 0 3 4 7
94* 0 0 3 4 7
104* 0 0 3 4 7
7700224
7800000
8500000
8600000
8700000
97* 0 0 0 0 0
98* 0 0 0 0 0
100* 0 0 0 0 0
106000 0 0
107000 0 0
* 2006-2008 CIP projects carried forw ard
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 228 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-13 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Prioritizing Other Improvements
All other improvements were prioritized based on project need, maintenance requirements,
existing deficiencies, capacity requirements, and reliability considerations. The results of the
priority ranking of the water main and all other improvements were used to schedule the
improvements, as presented in the section that follows.
SCHEDULE OF IMPROVEMENTS
All water main projects are shown in Table 9-6, which includes a breakdown of each project
along with the proposed pipe size, location, and estimated project cost. The estimated project
costs are based on 2009 dollars and include all costs (engineering, construction and other
costs). The selection and implementation of these water main projects will be accomplished
annually by the City, utilizing the priority ranking information presented earlier. This
provides the City with the flexibility to coordinate water main projects with street or other
projects that may be planned for the same area. These water main projects will be
implemented under the Annual Water Main Replacement Program, which is identified as
project WM1 in Table 9-7.
The implementation schedule shown in Table 9-7 includes the previously described water
main improvements and all other improvements described earlier in this chapter that are
planned in the next 20 years. The implementation schedule will be used by the City to assist
in the planning and budgeting of capital improvement projects for the Water Utility.
The project cost estimates shown in the table are based on 2009 dollars for all years shown.
These cost estimates will be adjusted by the City at the time of project implementation to
include an escalation factor that represents inflation and the construction market conditions
anticipated at the actual time of construction. The financial program in Chapter 10 describes
in more detail the escalation factor to be used for future project cost adjustments.
Packet Page 229 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-14 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table 9-6
Water Main Improvement Projects
CIP Size Description Estimated
No. Length Dia In From To Project Cost
340 8 Pine St B Ave 8th Ave $106,000
350 8 Fir St C Ave 9th Ave $109,000
300 8 Pine St C Ave 8th Ave $93,000
330 8 Fir St B Ave 8th Ave $102,000
300 8 Fir St 7th Ave B Ave $93,000
670 8 B Ave Fir St Pine St $208,000
315 8 Pine St 8th Ave C Ave $98,000
535 8 Sea Vista Pl C Ave 9th Ave $166,000
260 8 C Ave Fir St Sea Vista Pl $81,000
650 8 C Ave Pine St Fir St $202,000
510 8 C Ave 8th Ave C Ave $158,000
330 8 172nd St 67th Ave 68th Ave $102,000
420 8 172nd St Olympic View Drive 67th Ave $130,000
570 8 68th Ave 172nd St Dead-end $177,000
510 8 67th Ave 172nd St Dead-end $158,000
305 8 Aloha Way Daley St Glen St $95,000
810 8 Aloha Way Glen St Dead-end $252,000
5 510 8 81st Ave 206th St Dead-end $158,000
6 570 8 Sea Lawn Dr 171st St Dead-end $177,000
7 1980 8 Lake Ballinger Way 76th Ave Dead-end $615,000
1010 8 Walnut St 9th Ave 8th Ave $314,000
300 8 Walnut St 8th Ave 7th Ave $93,000
390 8 217th St 96th Ave 95th Ave $121,000
940 8 217th St 95th Ave 92nd Ave $292,000
400 8 95th Ave 217th St 218th Pl $124,000
410 8 218th Pl 95th Ave 93rd Pl $127,000
620 8 95th Ave 218th Pl 220th St $193,000
60 8 Spruce St 9th Ave -$19,000
1240 8 Spruce St 9th Ave 96th Ave $385,000
11 760 8 Hillcrest Pl Main St Dead-end $236,000
12 420 8 192nd St 93rd Pl 94th Ave $130,000
490 8 Sierra Dr 80th Ave 81st St Pl $152,000
590 8 81st St Pl Sierra Dr Dead-end $183,000
560 12 82nd Ave 208th Pl Dead-end $212,000
680 12 81st Pl 212th St Dead-end $257,000
720 8 208th Pl 82nd Ave 80th Ave $224,000
735 8 208th Pl 82nd Ave 80th Ave $228,000
1440 12 83rd Ave 84th Ave 82nd Ave $544,000
380 12 84th Ave 212th St 83rd Ave $144,000
465 12 SR 104 Hwy 99 -$176,000
195 12 -SR 104 242nd St $74,000
825 12 242nd St -McAleer Way $312,000
680 12 McAleer Way 242nd St Lake Ballinger Way $257,000
1210 8 Lake Ballinger Way Hwy 99 McAleer Way $376,000
460 12 242nd St Mathat Ballinger Park 78th Pl $174,000
330 12 242nd St 78th Pl 77th Pl $125,000
455 12 77th Pl 242nd St Dead-end $172,000
970 8 Braemar Dr 76th Ave Dead-end $301,000
870 8 175th St 76th Ave Dead-end $270,000
375 8 176th St 76th Ave Sound View Way $116,000
270 8 Sound View Way 176th St Sound View Dr $84,000
470 8 76th Ave 175th St Braemar Dr $146,000
240 8 76th Ave 175th St 176th St $75,000
105 8 76th Ave 176th St 175th St $33,000
850 12 215th St 76th Ave 73rd Pl $321,000
495 12 73rd Pl 216th St 215th St $187,000
270 12 216th St Stevens Hospital 73rd Pl $102,000
680 12 Stevens Hospital --$257,000
690 12 Stevens Hospital --$261,000
50 12 220th St --$19,000
830 12 76th Ave 215th St 212th St $314,000
300 12 76th Ave -216th St $113,000
275 12 76th Ave 216th St -$104,000
200 12 76th Ave 215th St -$76,000
400 12 76th Ave 218th St -$151,000
325 12 76th Ave 218th St 219th St $123,000
325 12 76th Ave 219th St 220th St $123,000
17
18
19
1
2
3
4
8
9*
10
13
14
20
21
15
16
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 230 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-15 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table 9-6
Water Main Improvement Projects (continued)
CIP Size Description Estimated
No. Length Dia In From To Project Cost
22 570 12 Seaview Elementary 188th St Dead-end $215,000
140 12 Maplewood School 200th St -$53,000
310 12 Maplewood School --$117,000
550 12 Maplewood School --$208,000
320 12 Maplewood School --$121,000
120 12 Maplewood School -200th St $45,000
340 8 72nd Ave 174th St 173rd St $106,000
330 8 72nd Ave 173rd St 172nd St $102,000
710 8 172nd St 72nd Ave 74th Ave $220,000
290 8 173rd St 72nd Ave 73rd Pl $90,000
490 8 176th St 72nd Ave Dead-end $152,000
230 8 176th St -Dead-end $71,000
26 510 8 179th St 72nd Ave Dead-end $158,000
27 750 12 80th Pl 212th St Dead-end $284,000
28 1010 8 80th Pl 200th St Dead-end $314,000
29 480 8 86th Pl Maplewood Ln Dead-end $149,000
30 505 8 198th Pl Maplewood Ln Dead-end $157,000
390 8 217th St -Dead-end $121,000
390 8 217th St 88th Ave -$121,000
32 450 8 12th Pl N 12th Ave -$140,000
33 335 8 185th Pl 92nd Ave Dead-end $104,000
34 535 8 186th Pl 92nd Ave Dead-end $166,000
35 425 8 -184th St Dead-end $132,000
36 560 8 182nd Pl 88th Ave Dead-end $174,000
700 8 74th Pl Meadowdale Beach Road Dead-end $217,000
570 8 74th Pl Meadowdale Beach Road -$177,000
38 465 8 164th Pl 72nd Ave Dead-end $144,000
39 850 8 192nd Pl 80th Ave Dead-end $264,000
40 620 8 Main St Olympic Ave -$193,000
330 8 9th Ave N Glen St Daley St $102,000
1250 8 Daley St Olympic Ave 9th Ave $388,000
640 8 Glen St Olympic Ave 10th Ave $199,000
1235 8 Sprague St Olympic Ave 9th Ave $383,000
1280 8 Edmonds St Olympic Ave 9th Ave $397,000
43 370 8 179th Pl Talbot Rd Dead-end $115,000
350 8 Wharf St Sound View Pl Olympic View Dr $109,000
515 8 Sound View Pl Wharf St Dead-end $160,000
45* 510 8 72nd Ave 164th St 162nd St $158,000
480 8 Water St Sound View Dr Ocean Ave $149,000
580 8 Ocean Ave Water St Dead-end $180,000
47 770 8 Northstream Ln 9th Ave Dead-end $239,000
48 680 8 Puget Ln 8th Ave Dead-end $211,000
49 320 8 Brookmere Dr 8th Ave Dead-end $99,000
580 8 -3rd Ave Daley St $180,000
1045 8 3rd Ave Caspers St -$324,000
670 8 Daley St Brookmere Dr 8th Ave $208,000
635 8 Daley St 9th Ave 8th Ave $197,000
570 8 8th Ave Edmonds St Daley St $177,000
665 8 Aloha St Brookmere Dr -$206,000
1200 8 Aloha Pl Daley St Aloha St $373,000
53 490 8 High St 183rd Pl Dead-end $152,000
54 950 8 79th Ave 186th St 185th Pl $295,000
55 700 8 79th Ave 186th St 185th St $217,000
56 500 8 86th Pl 188th St Dead-end $155,000
57 520 8 170th Pl Olympic View Dr Dead-end $161,000
200 8 177th St 72nd Ave Sound View Ln $62,000
650 8 Sound View Dr Sound View Ln Dead-end $202,000
59 340 8 182nd Pl 72nd Ave Dead-end $106,000
910 12 192nd St 80th Ave 83rd Ave $344,000
450 12 196th St 80th Ave 81st Pl $170,000
270 12 196th St 81st Pl 82nd Pl $102,000
570 12 196th St 82nd Pl 84th Ave $215,000
670 12 196th St 84th Ave 86th Ave $253,000
665 12 196th St 86th Ave 88th Ave $251,000
670 12 88th Ave 196th St 194th St $253,000
600 12 194th St 88th Ave 89th Pl $227,000
465 8 Homeland Dr 5th Ave S Dead-end $144,000
665 8 Holly Dr 5th Ave S Dead-end $206,000
58
60
61
62
25
42
44
46
50
51
23
24
31
37
41
52
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 231 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-16 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table 9-6
Water Main Improvement Projects (continued)
CIP Size Description Estimated
No. Length Dia In From To Project Cost
345 12 5th Ave S Pine St Forsyth Ln $130,000
610 12 5th Ave S Forsyth Ln Elm Way $231,000
230 12 5th Ave S Holly Dr Howell Way $87,000
250 12 5th Ave S Holly Dr Walnut St $95,000
180 12 6th Ave S Homeland Dr Howell Way $68,000
280 12 5th Ave S Homeland Dr Hemlock Way $106,000
540 12 5th Ave S Hemlock Way Pine St $204,000
660 8 4th Ave S Howell Way Erben Dr $205,000
350 8 4th Ave S Erben Dr Pine St $109,000
270 12 Howell Way -4th Ave S $102,000
290 12 Pine St 4th Ave S 5th Ave S $110,000
890 12 4th Ave S Dead-end Pine St $336,000
70 12 Howell Way 5th Ave S -$26,000
70 12 Pine St 5th Ave S -$26,000
66 695 8 69th Pl 174th St 176th St $216,000
1510 8 Sunset Ave Edmonds St Caspers St $469,000
580 8 Sunset Ave Edmonds St -$180,000
68 650 8 Cedar St 9th Ave 8th Ave $202,000
69 400 8 Sierra Pl 12th Ave Dead-end $124,000
340 8 200th St 89th Pl 88th Ave $106,000
420 8 200th St Maplewood Dr 89th Pl $130,000
560 8 Maplewood Dr Casecade Dr 200th St $174,000
390 8 Cascade Dr Maplewood Dr 12th Pl $121,000
610 8 92nd Ave Sierra St Cascade Dr $189,000
71 520 8 87th Ave 202nd St 204th St $161,000
70 12 186th St 80th Ave 81st Ave $26,000
330 12 186th St 80th Ave 81st Ave $125,000
510 12 76th Ave -228th St $193,000
110 12 -Hwy 99 76th Ave $42,000
840 12 76th Ave Hwy 99 224th St $318,000
325 8 Fir St 6th Ave S A Ave $101,000
325 8 Fir St A Ave 7th Ave S $101,000
205 8 216th St 73rd Pl -$64,000
310 8 217th St 0 0 $96,000
380 8 Private Property 212th St 213th Pl $118,000
315 8 213th Pl 72nd Ave Private Property $98,000
915 8 72nd Ave 213th Pl 216th St $284,000
76 650 12 12th Ave N Main St Maple St $246,000
310 8 Skyline Dr Dead-end Dead-end $96,000
210 8 Skyline Dr Dead-end Dead-end $65,000
600 8 205th Pl Skyline Dr Maplewood Dr $186,000
400 8 Main St Skyline Dr Park Rd $124,000
40 12 Maple St 10th Ave -$15,000
300 12 9th Ave Dayton St Main St $113,000
300 12 9th Ave Maple St Dayton St $113,000
580 12 9th Ave Main St Edmonds St $219,000
735 12 Maple St 12th Ave N 10th Ave $278,000
620 12 Maple St 10th Ave 9th Ave $234,000
80 640 12 184th St 80th Ave Sound View Dr $242,000
81 630 8 Puget Way 8th Ave 9th Ave $196,000
460 8 10th Ave Carol Way Mountain Ln $143,000
660 8 10th Ave Brookmere St Mountain Ln $205,000
620 8 Puget Way 9th Ave 10th Ave $193,000
320 8 10th Ave Viewland Way Brookmere St $99,000
360 8 10th Ave Puget Way Viewland Way $112,000
83 300 8 12th Ave N Emerald Hills Dr Main St $93,000
84 240 8 77th Pl 195th St 196th St $75,000
85 680 8 72nd Ave 162nd St North Meadowdale Rd $211,000
86 1150 8 72nd Ave North Meadowdale Rd 157th St $357,000
87 950 8 172nd St 72nd Ave 69th Pl $295,000
88* 1200 8 Highland Dr 12th Ave N Main St $373,000
89* 500 8 Cascade Ln Olympic Ave 10th Ave $155,000
90* 400 8 Cary Road Caspers St Dead-end $124,000
91* 340 8 Carol Way 6th Ave N Dead-end $106,000
92* 1400 8 81st Pl 200th St 196th St $435,000
93* 640 8 ForsythLn 5th Ave S 6th Ave S $199,000
94* 200 8 Fir Pl 4th Ave S Dead-end $62,000
75
77
79
82
74
63
64
65
67
70
72
73
78
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 232 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-17 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table 9-6
Water Main Improvement Projects (continued)
CIP Size Description Estimated
No. Length Dia In From To Project Cost
1700 8 Dellwood Dr 76th Ave 80th Ave $528,000
400 8 78th Ave Dellwood Dr Dead-end $124,000
96* 325 8 92nd Pl Bowdoin Way Dead-end $101,000
97* 150 8 Spruce Pl 96th Ave Dead-end $47,000
98* 250 8 Spruce Pl 8th Ave Dead-end $78,000
99* 220 8 215th St 96th Ave Dead-end $68,000
100* 220 8 215th St 98th Ave Dead-end $68,000
101* 1300 8 Maple St 5th Ave N 7th Ave N $404,000
330 8 Erben Dr 4th Ave S 3rd Ave S $102,000
450 8 Erben Dr 3rd Ave S City Park $140,000
45 8 Erben Dr 3rd Ave -$14,000
1150 8 2nd Ave S Elm St Pine St $357,000
350 8 Elm St 2nd Ave S 3rd Ave S $109,000
104* 260 8 10th Pl S Spruce St Dead-end $81,000
105* 250 8 Private Property 81st Pl 80th Pl $78,000
106 1130 8 76th Ave Olympic View Dr 188th St $351,000
107 460 8 Puget Way 3rd Ave N Brookmere Dr $143,000
300 8 8th Ave N Edmonds St Bell St $93,000
300 8 8th Ave N Bell St Main St $93,000
660 8 Bell St 8th Ave N 9th Ave N $205,000
610 12 Main St 9th Ave N 8th Ave N $231,000
660 12 Main St 8th Ave N 7th Ave N $249,000
110 1300 12 Main St 7th Ave N 5th Ave S $491,000
111 1330 12 Dayton St 7th Ave N 5th Ave S $503,000
310 12 7th Ave S Bell St Main St $117,000
300 12 7th Ave S Main St Dayton St $113,000
280 12 7th Ave S Dayton St Maple St $106,000
290 12 7th Ave S Maple St Alder St $110,000
290 12 7th Ave S Alder St Walnut St $110,000
300 12 7th Ave S Walnut St Cedar St $113,000
80 12 7th Ave S Cedar St Howell Way $30,000
230 12 7th Ave S Howell Way Spruce St $87,000
580 12 7th Ave S Spruce St Laurel St $219,000
300 12 5th Ave S Holly Dr Alder St $113,000
290 12 5th Ave S Alder St Maple St $110,000
290 12 5th Ave S Maple St Dayton St $110,000
330 12 5th Ave S Dayton St Main St $125,000
290 8 6th Ave N Daley St Sprague St $90,000
230 8 6th Ave N Sprague St Edmonds St $71,000
350 8 6th Ave N Edmonds St Bell St $109,000
500 8 Sprague St 6th Ave N 4th Ave N $155,000
670 8 Bell St 7th Ave N 6th Ave N $208,000
450 8 Bell St 6th Ave N 5th Ave N $140,000
420 8 5th Ave S Edmonds St Bell St $130,000
420 8 5th Ave S Bell St Main St $130,000
320 8 4th Ave N Edmonds St Bell St $99,000
820 8 4th Ave N Bell St Main St $255,000
830 8 3rd Ave N Edmonds St Main St $258,000
140 8 3rd Ave N Edmonds St Daley St $43,000
640 8 3rd Ave N Daley St Glen St $199,000
120 820 8 2nd Ave N Edmonds St Main St $255,000
121 840 8 Sunset Ave Edmonds St Main St $261,000
310 8 Edmonds St Sunset Ave 2nd Ave N $96,000
320 8 Edmonds St 2nd Ave N 3rd Ave N $99,000
320 8 Edmonds St 3rd Ave N 4th Ave N $99,000
320 8 Edmonds St 4th Ave N 5th Ave N $99,000
123 1640 8 2nd Ave N Edmonds St Caspers St $509,000
250 12 Main St Railroad Ave Sunset Ave $95,000
330 12 Main St Sunset Ave 2nd Ave N $125,000
310 12 Main St 2nd Ave N 3rd Ave N $117,000
330 12 Main St 3rd Ave N 4th Ave N $125,000
310 12 Main St 4th Ave N 5th Ave N $117,000
125 1020 8 Sunset Ave Dayton St Main St $317,000
126 1360 8 Railroad Ave Dayton St Main St $422,000
$46,265,000
* 2006-2008 CIP projects carried forward
Total - Water Main Improvements
114
119
122
124
115
116
117
118
108
109
112
113
103*
95*
102*
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 233 of 562
CHAPTER 9 WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
09-1030.103 Page 9-18 Comprehensive Water System Plan
Table 9-7
Planned Improvements Implementation Schedule
Estimated 20-Year Schedule of Improvements
CIP Cost Planned Year of Project and Estimated Cost in 2009 $$ (x 1000)
No. Description (2009 $$) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017-22 2023-29
Water Main Improvements
WM1 Annual Water Main Replacement Program $44,501,000 $1,800 $2,260 $2,260 $2,260 $2,260 $2,260 $2,260 $13,560 $15,581
WM2 24-inch Transmission Main Isolation Valves $100,000 $100
WM3 BNSF Crossings Water Main $620,000 $620
WM4 Shell Valley Access Road Water Main $25,000 $25
Total - Water Main Improvements $45,246,000 $2,420 $2,285 $2,360 $2,260 $2,260 $2,260 $2,260 $13,560 $15,581
PRV Station & Pressure Relief Improvements
PRV1 New 596/420 Zone PRV Station $125,000 $125
PRV2 PRV Station 11 Abandonment $8,000 $8
PRV3 PRV Station 12 Abandonment $8,000 $8
PRV4 System-wide Pressure Relief Improvements $500,000 $25 $225 $250
PRV5 Annual PRV Station Improvements Program $1,500,000 $125 $125 $125 $125 $125 $125 $750
Total - PRV Station & Relief Improvements $2,141,000 $0 $266 $150 $350 $375 $125 $125 $750 $0
Facility Improvements
F1 Alderwood Supply Station Improvements $215,000 $215
F2 Seaview Reservoir Improvements $56,000 $56
F3 Yost Reservoir Improvements $131,000 $131
F4 Five Corners Pump Station Improvements $223,000 $223
F5 Five Corners 3.0 MG Reservoir Recoating $630,000 $630
F6 Five Corners 1.5 MG Reservoir Recoating $400,000 $400
Total - Facility Improvements $1,655,000 $625 $0 $0 $0 $0 $630 $400 $0 $0
Other Improvements
M1 Fire Hydrant Improvements*$1,764,000 $51 $96 $96 $96 $96 $96 $96 $549 $588
M2 AMR Meter Evaluation Study $50,000 $50
M3 Telemetry System Improvements $430,000 $10 $10 $10 $10 $10 $10 $300 $70
M4 Comprehensive Water System Plan Update $515,000 $65 $75 $75 $150 $150
Total - Other Improvements $2,759,000 $116 $156 $106 $106 $106 $181 $181 $999 $808
TOTAL - ALL IMPROVEMENTS $51,801,000 $3,161 $2,707 $2,616 $2,716 $2,741 $3,196 $2,966 $15,309 $16,389
* M1 Includes 12 fire hydrant replacements first six years of CIP and fire hydrant portion of Annual Water Main Replacement Program.
5.20.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
Packet Page 234 of 562
DRAFT
Page 10-1 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
10
Financial Plan
INTRODUCTION
The objective of the water system financial plan is to identify the total cost of providing
water service, and to provide a financial program that allows the water utility to remain
financially viable during execution of its short-term (6-year) and long-term (20-year) Capital
Improvement Programs (CIPs). This viability analysis considers the historical financial
condition of the utility, the sufficiency of utility revenues to meet current and future financial
and policy obligations, and the financial impact of executing the CIP. Furthermore, the plan
provides a review of the utility’s current rate structure with respect to rate adequacy, equity,
promotion of water conservation and customer affordability.
PAST FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE
The City of Edmonds legally owns and operates a combined utility fund that includes water,
sewer, and stormwater utilities. Therefore, standard financial statements are not readily
available for the water utility alone. Financial information regarding an individual utility is
available in the form of utility accounting reports at sub-account level of detail. Using these
reports and detailed utility financial data provided by City staff, we tried to construct a simple
financial report mimicking an income and cash flow statements.
Table 10-1 summarizes the water utility’s revenues, operating expenses, and transfer and debt
service payments.
Packet Page 235 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-2 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Table 10-1
Historical Financial Performance; 2004 - 2009
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Meter Water Sales 3,723,583$ 3,556,909$ 3,699,146$ 3,626,368$ 3,778,231$ 3,917,613$
Hyrdant Revenue - - - - - 256,650
Subtotal: Rate Revenues 3,723,583$ 3,556,909$ 3,699,146$ 3,626,368$ 3,778,231$ 4,174,263$
Water Utility Tax Collections 214,103 204,546 212,712 217,656 226,690 518,778
Miscellaneous Revenues 193,350 205,819 237,376 164,904 205,597 162,893
TOTAL REVENUES 4,131,035$ 3,967,274$ 4,149,235$ 4,008,927$ 4,210,518$ 4,855,934$
OPERATING EXPENDITURES
Salaries and Wages 564,631$ 589,581$ 626,742$ 681,746$ 645,806$ 596,155$
Benefits 150,105 164,170 182,881 212,077 231,916 229,884
Water Purchased for Resale 1,329,114 1,221,154 1,340,265 1,256,697 1,218,234 1,470,888
Supplies 146,468 81,135 109,514 178,041 248,868 182,298
Services 408,492 406,082 453,977 412,210 425,955 424,424
Intergovernmental Services 233,234 211,817 239,963 250,893 251,221 544,717
Building, Machinery, & Equipment 12,633 26,725 - 1,470 - -
Interfund Services & Rentals 444,788 372,358 415,569 433,300 403,409 375,010
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES 3,289,465$ 3,073,021$ 3,368,911$ 3,426,434$ 3,425,409$ 3,823,376$
OPERATING SURPLUS / (DEFICIT)841,571$ 894,253$ 780,323$ 582,494$ 785,109$ 1,032,558$
Debt Service Interest 276,417$ 95,821$ 91,098$ 88,178$ 83,285$ 78,583$
Total Operating Expenses and Debt Interest 3,565,882$ 3,168,842$ 3,460,010$ 3,514,612$ 3,508,694$ 3,901,959$
Surplus / (Deficit)565,153$ 798,433$ 689,225$ 494,316$ 701,824$ 953,975$
Interfund Transfer Out for Capital 744,416$ 700,000$ 700,000$ 400,000$ 700,000$ 500,000$
Operating Expenses, Debt Interest, & Interfund Transfers 4,310,298$ 3,868,842$ 4,160,010$ 3,914,612$ 4,208,694$ 4,401,959$
Surplus / (Deficit)(179,263)$ 98,433$ (10,775)$ 94,316$ 1,824$ 453,975$
Debt Service Principal 1,125,000$ 157,862$ 165,047$ 167,778$ 151,795$ 128,294$
TOTAL CASH OUTLAY 5,435,298$ 4,026,704$ 4,325,057$ 4,082,390$ 4,360,489$ 4,530,252$
Surplus / (Deficit)(1,304,263)$ (59,430)$ (175,822)$ (73,462)$ (149,971)$ 325,682$
The water utility’s rate revenues from metered water sales fluctuated between $3.5 million
and $3.9 million in last six years. The main determining factor in the amount of water sold,
and hence revenues collected, has been the weather patterns. Historically, the City’s growth
rates has been low, and the only rate adjustments in the last six years has been inflationary;
one in January 2007 (3%), and another one in January 2008 (3%).
In 2009, to comply with the State Supreme Court’s ruling, the City started charging its
General Fund for fire protection costs, and increased the City utility tax rate for the water
utility from 10% to 18.7% to generate the necessary revenues for its General Fund. The
revenue generated from the incremental tax increase (8.7%) has been paid by the City’s
General Fund to the water utility for fire protection services. The hydrant revenue shown in
2009 ($256,650) represents this transfer from the General Fund. Parallel to this change, water
utility tax collections and corresponding payments to the General Fund (Intergovernmental
Services line under operating expenditures) increased significantly in 2009.
Miscellaneous revenues have also been steady ranging from $165,000 to $206,000. On
average, the utility earned approximately $195,000 miscellaneous revenues in the last six
years.
Packet Page 236 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-3 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Total operating expenditures increased from $3.1 million in 2005 to $3.8 million in 2009.
The large increase in 2009 (almost $400,000 compared to 2008) mostly stemmed from the
increase in City utility taxes (as explained earlier) and water purchase costs
Water purchase costs constitute the largest portion of the utility’s operating costs. Similar to
revenues from metered water sales, water purchases for resale (from the Alderwood Water
and Wastewater District) has been steady. It fluctuated between $1.2 million and $1.5
million. This expenditure line item represents approximately 42% of the total operating costs
(excluding City utility taxes), and around 35% of the rate revenues are spent to purchase the
water.
Salary and benefits costs represent approximately 24% of the total operating expenditures.
Salaries and wages increased steadily from 2004 to 2007. The average annual increase was
6%. In the last two years, this expenditure line item dropped considerably (5% in 2008, and
8% in 2009). Due to recent economic downturn and associated budgetary problems in local
governments, the City implemented a series of furlough days. The decreases in salary and
benefits expenses seen in 2009 are a result of this policy.
As a result of steep increases in health care costs observed in recent years, the utility’s labor
benefits costs increased considerably; from $150,000 in 2004 to $230,000 in 2009 (despite
furloughs). The average rate of increase in the last five years is 9%, and the total percentage
increase between 2004 and 2009 is 53%.
The other operating and maintenance expenditure line items have been steady over the last 6
years, and they did not change significantly.
Over the last six years, the utility posted operating surpluses ($820,000 on average). These
surpluses have been used to make debt service payments (principal and interest), and
transferred to capital construction fund for funding the utility’s capital projects.
In 2004, the City refinanced its outstanding revenue bonds. Ignoring 2004, the utility’s
interest payments on its existing debt and debt principle payments have been around $87,000
and $154,000, respectively. Hence the utility’s annual debt service payments have been
around $241,000.
Over the last six years, the City transferred approximately $3.7 million from the water
utility’s operating fund to capital construction fund to pay for the utility’s capital needs. On
average, this amount corresponds to approximately $624,000 a year.
In the years 2005 and 2008, the utility operated with cash deficiency after paying for its
operating expenditures, servicing its debt, and transferring monies for capital needs (2004 is
not considered because of the cash flow impact of bond refinancing). During these four years,
the utility used its available cash balances. In 2009, this trend reversed due to high water
sales and corresponding increase in revenues, and savings due to furloughs and other cost
Packet Page 237 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-4 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
cutting measures. However, 2009 might be an anomaly and might not represent a breaking
point in utility’s financial performance trends. It remains to be seen. On the other hand, the
utility needs substantial capital investments to rehabilitate its aging infrastructure and meet
regulatory requirements, as identified in this comprehensive plan. To be able to finance these
capital projects and maintain a financially prudent and solid utility, the City would need a
series of rate increases. The analysis of the utility’s capital funding needs and other financial
requirements, and hence projected rate adjustments are provided later in this chapter.
CAPITAL FUNDING RESOURCES
The City may fund the water CIP from variety of sources. In general, these sources can be
summarized as: 1) governmental grant and loan programs; 2) publicly issued debt (tax
exempt or taxable); and 3) cash resources and revenues. These sources are described below.
Government Programs
Historically, federal and state grant programs were available to local utilities for capital
funding assistance. However due to budgetary constraints, these assistance programs have
been mostly eliminated, substantially reduced in scope and amount, or replaced by loan
programs. Remaining miscellaneous grant programs are generally lightly funded and heavily
subscribed. Nonetheless, the benefit of even the very low-interest loans makes the effort of
applying worthwhile. Grants and low cost loans for Washington State utilities are available
from the Department of Commerce and the Department of Health. They are primarily
targeted at low-income and/or rural communities.
The Department of Commerce administers three grant and loan programs (one administered
jointly by the Public Works Board and the Department of Health) that the City might be
eligible for:
Community Economic Revitalization Board (CERB) Grant and Loan Program
Public Works Trust Fund Loan Program (PWTF)
Drinking Water State Revolving Loan (DWSRF) Program
While the CERB and DWSRF programs are currently funded and accepting applications, the
PWTF is providing no funding in the 2009-2011 biennium and may or may not be restored in
the near future. Regardless, each of these programs is described in greater detail below.
Community Economic Revitalization Board - CERB primarily offers low-cost loans; grants
are made available only to the extent that a loan is not reasonably possible. The CERB
targets public facility funding for economically disadvantaged communities, specifically
targeting job creation and retention. Priority criteria include the unemployment rates,
number of jobs created and/or retained, wage rates, projected private investment and
estimated state and local revenues generated by the project. Traditional construction projects
Packet Page 238 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-5 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
are offered at a maximum dollar limit per project of $1 million. Local match of 25% is
targeted. Eligible applicants include cities, towns, port districts, special purpose districts,
federally recognized Indian tribes, and municipal corporations.
The Board’s policy is that all loans made by the CERB will be secured by a general
obligation pledge of the taxing power of the borrowing entity. Terms do not exceed 20 years
including available payment deferral of interest and principal for up to five years. Interest
rates match the most current rate of Washington State bonds (not to exceed 10%).
Further detail is available at
http://www.choosewashington.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/CERB/CERB%20Fact%20She
et.pdf
Public Works Trust Fund – Cities, towns, counties and special purpose districts are eligible to
receive loans. Water, sewer, storm, roads, bridges and solid waste/recycling are eligible and
funds may be used for repair, replacement, rehabilitation, reconstruction and improvements
including reasonable growth (generally the 20-year growth projection in the comprehensive
plan).
PWTF loans are available at interest rates of 0.5%, 1% and 2% with the lower interest rates
given to applicants who pay a larger share of the total project costs. The loan applicant must
provide a minimum local match of funds of 5% towards the project cost to qualify for a 2%
loan, 10% for a 1% loan, and 15% for a 0.5% loan. The useful life of the project determines
the loan term up to a maximum of 20 years.
Further detail is available at http://www.commerce.wa.gov/site/361/default.aspx.
Drinking Water State Revolving Loan Program – Funding historically targets protection of
public health, compliance with drinking water regulations and assistance for small and
disadvantaged communities. Recent legislation requires $7 million be provided for “green”
or environmentally beneficial infrastructure. $58 million was available in the 2010 loan
cycle. Loans range from $50,000 to $8 million.
Further detail is available at http://www.doh.wa.gov/ehp/dw/Publications/331-233.pdf
Public Debt
General Obligation Bonds – General obligation (G.O.) bonds are bonds secured by the full
faith and credit of the issuing agency, committing all available tax and revenue resources to
debt repayment. With this high level of commitment, G.O. bonds have relatively low interest
rates and few financial restrictions. However, the authority to issue councilmanic G.O. bonds
is restricted in terms of the amount and use of the funds, as defined by Washington
constitution and statute. Specifically, the amount of debt that can be issued without a public
vote is linked to assessed valuation.
Packet Page 239 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-6 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
RCW 39.36.020 states:
“(ii) Counties, cities, and towns are limited to an indebtedness amount not exceeding
one and one-half percent of the value of the taxable property in such counties, cities,
or towns without the assent of three-fifths of the voters therein voting at an election
held for that purpose.
(b) In cases requiring such assent counties, cities, towns, and public hospital districts
are limited to a total indebtedness of two and one-half percent of the value of the
taxable property therein.”
While bonding capacity can limit availability of councilmanic G.O. bonds for utility
purposes, these can sometimes play a valuable role in project financing. A rate savings may
be realized through two avenues: the lower interest rate and related bond costs; and the
extension of repayment obligation to all tax-paying properties (not just developed properties)
through the authorization of an ad valorem property tax levy.
Revenue Bonds – Revenue bonds are commonly used to fund utility capital improvements.
The debt is secured by the rate revenues of the issuing utility and the debt obligation does not
extend to the City’s other revenue sources. With this limited commitment, revenue bonds
typically bear higher interest rates than G.O. bonds and also require security conditions
related to the maintenance of dedicated reserves (a bond reserve) and financial performance
(added bond debt service coverage). The City agrees to satisfy these requirements by
ordinance as a condition of bond sale.
Revenue bonds can be issued in Washington without a public vote. There is no bonding
limit, except perhaps the practical limit of the utility’s ability to generate sufficient revenue to
repay the debt and provide coverage. In some cases, poor credit might make issuing bonds
problematic.
Build America Bonds – (from munibondadvisor.com) The Economic Recovery and
Reinvestment Act (the "Act") created a new form of bonds known as Build America Bonds
("BABs"). Build America Bonds are taxable and, through Federal subsidies or tax credits,
are intended to reduce municipal borrowing costs.
The Act created two types of BABs. The first type of BAB provides a Federal subsidy to
investors equal to 35% of the interest payable by the issuer ("Tax Credit BAB"). The second
type of BAB provides a direct Federal subsidy that will be paid to state and local
governments in an amount equal to 35% of the interest ("Direct Payment BAB"). Both types
of BABs must be issued before January 1, 2011.
Tax Credit BABs provide a 35% interest subsidy (net of the tax credit) to investors that
results in a Federal subsidy to the issuer equal to approximately 25% of the total return to the
Packet Page 240 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-7 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
investor (interest and the tax credit). Tax Credit BABs may be issued to finance any
governmental purpose for which tax-exempt government bonds (excluding private activity
bonds) could be issued including current refundings and one advance refunding. The bonds
must comply with all requirements applicable to the issuance of tax-exempt governmental
bonds.
Direct Payment BABs offer a larger Federal subsidy than Tax Credit BABs; however, they
are subject to more restrictions. In general, Direct Payment BABs may be issued to finance
capital expenditures for any governmental purpose for which tax-exempt government bonds
may be issued, excluding private activity bonds and excluding refunding bonds. Costs of
issuance paid from Direct Payment BAB proceeds are limited to 2%. In order to receive a
Federal subsidy, issuers will be required to submit a payment request form no earlier than 90
days, and no later than 45 days, before each interest payment date. Issuers will receive the
requested payment within 45 days of the date the form is filed with the Internal Revenue
Service. In the future, the payment procedures may be changed to an electronic platform.
Financing for a project may be subdivided into two issues; one comprised of traditional tax-
exempt municipal bonds and one comprised of BABs.
Further detail is available at http://www.munibondadvisor.com/BuildAmericaBonds.htm.
Cash Resources
Capital Facilities Charges – A capital facilities charge (CFC) as provided for by RCW
35.92.025, refers to a one-time charge imposed on new customers as a condition of
connection to the utility system. The purpose of the CFC is two-fold: (1) to promote equity
between new and existing customers; and (2) to provide a source of revenue to fund capital
projects. Equity is served by providing a vehicle for new customers to share in the capital
costs incurred to support their addition to the system. CFC revenues provide a source of cash
flow used to support utility capital needs; revenue can only be used to fund utility capital
projects or to pay debt service incurred to finance those projects.
In the absence of a CFC, growth-related capital costs must be borne in large part by existing
customers. In addition, the net investment in the utility already collected from existing
customers, whether through rates, charges and/or assessments, would be diluted by the
addition of new customers, effectively subsidizing new customers with prior customers’
payments. To establish equity, a CFC should recover a proportionate share of the existing
and future infrastructure costs from a new customer. From a financial perspective, a new
customer should become financially equivalent to an existing customer by paying the CFC.
The City currently imposes a charge of $908 per meter capacity equivalent and intends to
maintain the current charge.
Packet Page 241 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-8 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Utility Funds and Cash Reserves – User charges (rates) paid by the utility’s customers are the
main funding source for all water utility activities. The rates cover total annual costs
associated with operation and maintenance of the water system, and other ongoing costs of
providing water services. Rates can pay for capital improvement projects in two ways: either
paying for debt service or directly paying for capital projects. Although funding the capital
costs directly through rates does not result in the additional interest expense associated with
issuing debt, this approach can cause large and/or volatile rate increases.
Summary
An ideal funding strategy would include the use of grants and low-cost loans when debt
issuance is required. However, these resources are very limited and competitive in nature
and do not provide a reliable source of funding for planning purposes. It is recommended
that the City pursue these funding avenues but assume for planning purposes that bond
financing will be utilized to meet needs above the utility’s available cash resources. G.O.
bonds may be useful for special circumstances, but due to the bonding capacity limits, this
vehicle is most often reserved for other City (non-utility) purposes. Revenue bonds are a
more secure financing mechanism for utility needs. This analysis conservatively assumes no
tax credits or subsidies from BABs, though the City should consider BABs when it is ready
to begin the process of debt issuance. The Capital Financing Strategy developed to fund the
updated CIP assumes the following funding priority:
a) Available grant funds,
b) Accumulated capital cash reserves,
c) Annual revenue collections from capital facilities charges (CFCs),
d) Annual use of excess cash (above minimum balance targets) from operating reserves,
e) Interest earnings on capital reserves and other miscellaneous capital resources,
including government program loans to the extent that they are accessible,
f) Revenue bond financing, and
g) Direct rate funding.
FINANCIAL PLAN
The City of Edmonds’ water utility operates as an enterprise fund and as such it is
responsible to fully fund all of its related costs. It is not dependent on general tax revenues or
general fund resources. The primary source of funding for the utility is collections from
water service charges. The City controls the level of service charges by ordinance, and
subject to statutory authority, can adjust user charges as needed to meet financial objectives.
The financial plan can only provide a qualified assurance of financial feasibility if it
considers the total system costs of providing water service – both operating and capital. To
meet these objectives, the following elements are completed:
Packet Page 242 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-9 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Capital Funding Plan – This plan identifies the total CIP obligations for the planning
period 2010 – 2016. The plan defines a strategy for funding the CIP, including an
analysis of available resources from rate revenues, existing reserves, capital facilities
charges, debt financing and any special resources that may be readily available (e.g.
grants, developer contributions, etc). The capital funding plan impacts the financial
plan through use of debt financing (resulting in annual debt service) and the assumed
rate revenue resources available for capital funding.
Financial Plan – This forecast identifies annual non-capital costs associated with the
operation, maintenance, and administration of the water system. Included in the
financial plan is a reserve analysis that forecasts cash flow and fund balance activity
along with testing for satisfaction of actual or recommended minimum fund balance
policies. The financial plan ultimately evaluates the sufficiency of utility revenues in
meeting all obligations, including cash uses such as operating expenses, debt service,
and reserve contributions, as well as any coverage requirements associated with long-
term debt.
Financial Policies
A brief summary of the key financial policies employed by the City, as well as those
recommended in the financial program are discussed below:
Reserve Policies
Utility reserves serve multiple functions. They can be used to address variability and timing
of expenditures and receipts, occasional disruptions in activities, costs or revenues, utility
debt obligations; and many other functions. The collective use of individual reserves helps to
limit the City’s exposure to revenue shortfalls and meet long-term capital obligations.
Common reserves among municipal utilities are operating reserves, capital contingency
reserves, and bond reserves.
Operating Reserve – An operating reserve, or working capital reserve, provides a
minimum unrestricted fund balance needed to accommodate the short-term cycles of
revenues and expenses. These reserves are intended to address both anticipated and
unanticipated changes in revenues and expenses. Anticipated changes may include
billing and receipt cycles, payroll cycles, and other payables. Operating reserves can
be used to meet short-term cash deficiencies due to the timing of actual revenues and
expenditures.
Generally, utilities target a certain number of days of working capital as a beginning
cash balance to provide the liquidity needed to allow regular management of payable
and payment cycles. Consistent with industry practice, a working capital reserve of
between 45 to 60 days of operating and maintenance (O&M) expenses is targeted.
Packet Page 243 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-10 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Based upon the City’s 2010 budget, this target range is equivalent to approximately
between $470,000 and $625,000.
Capital Contingency Reserve – A capital contingency reserve is an amount of cash set
aside in case of an emergency should a piece of equipment or a portion of the utility’s
infrastructure fail unexpectedly. Additionally, the reserve could be used for other
unanticipated capital needs including capital project cost overruns. There are various
approaches to identifying an appropriate level for this reserve, such as 1) identifying a
percentage of a utility system fixed asset costs and, 2) determining the cost of
replacing highly critical assets or facilities. For purposes of this analysis, no minimum
target fund balance is set, per City staff’s direction, to reduce the utility’s rate
adjustment needs.
Bond Reserve – Bond covenants often establish reserve requirements as a means of
protecting an agency against the risk of nonpayment. This bond reserve can be funded
with cash on hand, but is more often funded at the time of borrowing as part of the
bond principal. This reserve requirement can also be met by using a surety bond. The
City maintains a restricted bond reserve in compliance with its bond covenants.
System Reinvestment Policies
The purpose of system reinvestment funding is to provide for the replacement of aging
system facilities to ensure sustainability of the system for ongoing operation. Each year, the
utility’s assets lose value, and as they lose value they are moving toward eventual
replacement. That accumulating loss in value and future liability is typically measured for
reporting purposes through annual depreciation expense, which is based on the original cost
of the asset over its anticipated useful life. While this expense reflects the consumption of
the existing asset and its original investment, the replacement of that asset will likely cost
much more, factoring in inflation and construction conditions. Therefore, the added annual
replacement liability is even greater than the annual depreciation expense.
On the spectrum of policy options related to system reinvestment funding, basing a system
reinvestment policy on the projected replacement cost of assets would result in the largest
immediate rate impact and the lowest future debt obligation. A policy based on annual
depreciation expense has the next greatest immediate rate impact. This policy does not target
a replacement reserve level sufficient to cash fund 100% of future replacement costs and
therefore assumes some replacement costs will be debt-financed.
One approach aimed at mitigating the accumulating asset replacement liability, as well as
current rate impacts, is to fund an amount from rates equal to annual depreciation expense,
net of annual debt principal repayment. Annual debt principal payments are one source of
annual equity contribution to the system. Using annual depreciation expense as the measure
of annual equity loss, and basis for a system reinvestment policy, it is appropriate then, to
reduce the annual depreciation expense by the annual equity contribution, as measured by
Packet Page 244 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-11 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
debt principal repayment. This approach tends to balance reducing near-term rate impacts
with mitigating accumulating asset replacement liability.
The analysis provided herein does not incorporate any system reinvestment funding, per City
staff’s direction, to reduce immediate rate impacts.
Debt Policies
Bond covenants often establish a minimum debt coverage ratio as a means of protecting an
agency against the risk of nonpayment. The City’s current bond covenants require a ratio of
1.25 times annual revenue bond debt service on a combined basis for the City’s all three
utilities (i.e. water, wastewater, and stormwater). This means that annual rate revenue must
be set sufficient to support annual operating expenses, annual revenue bond debt repayment,
and a cushion of 25% of the annual revenue bond debt repayment. For the purposes of this
analysis, it is assumed that the water utility would meet 1.25 revenue bond coverage ratio
independently, without relying on the other two utilities’ financial performance.
As stated previously, The City maintains a restricted bond reserve in compliance with its
bond covenants.
Capital Funding Plan
The CIP developed for this Plan totals $20.1 million ($21.6 million inflated) over the 2010 -
2016 planning horizon, and $51.8 million for the 20-year total ($71.7 million inflated). Costs
are stated in 2009 dollars and escalated to the year of planned spending for financing
projections at an annual inflation rate of 2% for 2012 and 4% thereafter. It is assumed that
construction costs will stay the same in 2010 and 2011 due to current economic conditions.
Table 10-2 summarizes the annual CIP expenditures in 2009 and inflated costs.
Packet Page 245 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-12 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Table 10-2
Water Utility Capital Improvement Program
Year 2009 Dollars Inflated Dollars
2010 3,161,000$ 3,161,000$
2011 2,707,000 2,707,000
2012 2,616,000 2,668,320
2013 2,716,000 2,881,133
2014 2,741,000 3,023,959
2015 3,196,000 3,666,967
2016 2,966,000 3,539,196
Total: 2010 - 2016 20,103,000$ 21,647,575$
Total: 2017 - 2022 [a]15,309,000 21,002,492
Total: 2023 - 2029 [a]16,389,000 29,037,194
GRAND TOTAL 51,801,000$ 71,687,261$
[a] Inflated project costs are calculated using average annual spending in related periods.
A capital funding plan is developed to determine the total resources available to meet CIP
costs and determine if new debt financing will be required. 2010 beginning operating and
capital fund balances were $1,877,099 and ($133,802), respectively. After evaluating the
utility’s working capital needs, $1.4 million of the beginning operating fund balance was
deemed excess fund balance and assumed to be available for capital. With the assumed
transfer of $1.4 million from the operating fund, the total available capital fund balance at the
beginning of the analysis period reached $1,266,197. The capital funding plan is summarized
in Table 10-3 below.
Table 10-3
2010 – 2016 Annual Capital Fund Cash Flow
Capital Fund 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Beginning Balance 1,266,197$ 43,993$ 2,199,663$ 86,813$ 2,490,260$ 124,845$ 2,825,182$
plus: Capital Facilities Charges 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000
plus: Net Debt Proceeds Available for Projects 1,550,000 4,700,000 - 5,000,000 - 6,000,000 -
plus: Interest Earnings 18,993 880 54,992 2,170 62,256 3,121 70,630
plus: Transfer of Surplus from Operating Fund - 136,790 6,821 257,410 37,588 339,183 -
plus: Direct Rate Funding 344,803 - 468,657 - 533,699 - 714,014
less: Capital Expenditures (3,161,000) (2,707,000) (2,668,320) (2,881,133) (3,023,959) (3,666,967) (3,539,196)
Ending Balance 43,993$ 2,199,663$ 86,813$ 2,490,260$ 124,845$ 2,825,182$ 95,630$
The costs shown in the table are inflated to the year of spending. A majority (80%) of the 7-
year CIP is projected to be financed with new debt issues. The remaining 20% of the 7-year
CIP is financed from utility resources such as existing cash balances, rates, capital facility
charge revenues, and capital fund interest earnings.
Packet Page 246 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-13 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Industry best practice suggests maintaining a debt to equity ratio of no greater than 60% debt
to 40% equity. By comparison, the City is currently leveraged at 15% debt to 85% equity in
the system, leaving significant capacity to debt-finance future CIP costs. At the end of the
analysis period, debt to equity ratio is projected to be 39% debt to 61% equity.
FINANCIAL FORECAST
The Financial Forecast, or revenue requirement analysis, projects the amount of annual
revenue that needs to be generated by rates. The analysis incorporates operating revenues,
operating and maintenance (O&M) expenses, debt service payments, rate funded capital
needs, and any other identified revenues or expenses related to utility operations, and
determines the sufficiency of the current level of rates. Revenue needs are also impacted by
debt covenants (typically applicable to revenue bonds) and specific fiscal policies and
financial goals of the utility (as described above).
For this analysis, two revenue sufficiency criteria have been developed to reflect the financial
goals and constraints of the utility: (1) cash needs must be met and (2) debt coverage
requirements must be realized. In order to operate successfully with respect to these goals,
both tests of revenue sufficiency must be met.
Cash Test
The cash flow test identifies all known cash requirements for the utility in each year of the
planning period. Capital needs are identified and a capital funding strategy is established.
This may include the use of debt, cash reserves, outside assistance, and rate funding. Cash
requirements to be funded from rates are determined. Typically, these include O&M
expenses, debt service payments, system reinvestment funding or directly funded capital
outlays, and any additions to specified reserve balances. The total annual cash needs of the
utility are then compared to total operating revenues (under current rates) to forecast annual
revenue surpluses or shortfalls.
Coverage Test
The coverage test is based on a commitment made by the City when issuing revenue bonds.
For purposes of this analysis, revenue bond debt is assumed for any needed debt issuance.
As a security condition of issuance, the City is required per covenant to agree that the
revenue bond debt would have a higher priority for payment (a senior lien) compared to most
other utility expenditures; the only outlays with a higher lien are O&M expenses. Debt
service coverage is expressed as a multiplier of the annual revenue bond debt service
payment. For example, a 1.0 coverage factor would imply no additional cushion is required.
A 1.25 coverage factor means revenues must be sufficient to pay O&M expenses, annual
revenue bond debt service payments, plus an additional 25% of annual revenue bond debt
service payments. The excess cash flow derived from the added coverage, if any, can be used
Packet Page 247 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-14 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
for any utility purpose, including funding capital projects. The existing coverage
requirement on the City’s outstanding revenue bonds is 1.25 times bond debt.
In determining the annual revenue requirement, both the cash and coverage sufficiency tests
must be met – the test with the greatest deficiency drives the level of needed rate increase in
any given year. The analysis uses this rate revenue requirement to indicate annual rate
adjustments.
Fire Protection Costs
Fire protection costs have historically been recovered through water rates, and assigned to
customer classes in proportion to fire protection requirements. Through legal action, fire
protection costs have been defined as general purpose government service. In the Lane v.
Seattle decision of the Washington Supreme Court, fire protection costs of Seattle Public
Utilities were found to be outside the valid basis for recovery through retail water rates.
Instead, fire protection “customers” should be charged for the services provided. This would
typically include general governments requiring fire protection through their land use
regulation and thus receiving the benefit of public fire protection, along with customers
receiving direct private fire protection service, such as through sprinklers or onsite fire
distribution systems. Cities are now specifically required to identify and separate these costs
from water rate revenue requirements (and therefore rate structures) and recover fire
protection costs from general purpose government agencies.
The court upheld “a solution” that an increase to the utility tax on the water utility to recover
identified fire protection costs is valid and within statutory authority.
In 2009, to comply with the Supreme Court’s ruling, the City started charging its General
Fund for fire protection costs, and increased the City utility tax rate for the water utility from
10% to 18.7% to generate the necessary revenues for its General Fund. The revenue
generated from the incremental tax increase (8.7%) has been paid by the City’s General Fund
to the water utility for the fire protection services.
The analysis results presented here reflect this change, and total rate revenues include the
projected transfer amounts (8.7% of the rate revenues from retail rates) from the General
Fund for fire protection costs. It is assumed that any projected rate increase would also
automatically increase related transfer amount from the General Fund.
Projected Financial Performance
The revenue requirement analysis is based on the following data, assumptions, and
adjustments:
The 2010 budget is used as the basis of analysis.
Packet Page 248 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-15 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Rate revenues under the existing rates are calculated to increase with customer
growth, which is projected to be approximately 0.5% per year.
Salary and benefits costs are escalated annually at 5% for assumed labor cost
inflation.
Other operating and maintenance expenses are escalated annually at 2% in 2011, and
3% thereafter.
Alderwood Water and Wastewater District water rates are assumed to increase by
10% in 2011 through 2013, and 5% annually thereafter.
Per City staff’s direction, one-third of a full-time employee (FTE) for GIS is added in
mid-year 2010. The annual cost of this position is assumed to be $30,000 per year.
Inflated capital expenses reflect 2% construction cost inflation in 2012, and 4%
annual inflation thereafter. It is assumed that the construction costs would not increase
in 2010 and 2011 given the current economic conditions.
In addition to maintenance and operating costs, revenue requirements include capital
costs for new debt service incurred to fund the CIP.
CFC revenues are assumed to stay the same throughout the projection period at the
2010 budget level of $25,000.
The City’s annual fund interest earnings rate is assumed to be 1.5% in 2010, 2% in
2011, and 2.5% thereafter.
The 2010 beginning operating fund (Fund 411) balance was $1,877,099. Of this
amount, $1.4 million is assumed to be transferred to the capital fund (Fund 412).
The forecast assumes a revenue bond interest rate of 5%, and a repayment term of 20
years.
Table 10-4 summarizes the projected financial performance and rate revenue requirements of
the water utility for 2010 through 2016 based upon the above assumptions.
Packet Page 249 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-16 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Table 10-4
Projected Cash Balances
Revenue Requirements 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Revenues
Rate Revenues Under Existing Rates 4,258,446$ 4,279,738$ 4,301,137$ 4,322,642$ 4,344,256$ 4,365,977$ 4,387,807$
Non-Rate Revenues 109,003 115,591 134,366 135,404 145,974 146,774 160,698
Total Revenues 4,367,448$ 4,395,329$ 4,435,503$ 4,458,046$ 4,490,229$ 4,512,751$ 4,548,505$
Expenses
Cash O&M Expenses [a]3,814,003$ 4,083,196$ 4,357,499$ 4,652,656$ 4,871,986$ 5,100,863$ 5,341,268$
Existing Debt Service 205,923 219,022 208,412 161,999 161,394 160,685 139,833
New Debt Service 135,227 545,270 545,270 981,486 981,486 1,504,945 1,504,945
Rate Funded System Reinvestment - - - - - - -
Rate Funded CIP 344,803 - 468,657 - 533,699 - 714,014
Total Expenses 4,499,955$ 4,847,488$ 5,579,838$ 5,796,141$ 6,548,565$ 6,766,494$ 7,700,061$
Annual Rate Adjustment 8.50%8.50%8.50%8.00%8.00%7.50%7.50%
Rate Increases Dictated by:Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy Policy
Rate Revenues After Rate Increase 4,409,266$ 5,038,215$ 5,493,795$ 5,962,965$ 6,472,202$ 6,992,406$ 7,554,420$
Net Cash Flow After Rate Increase 18,313 306,318 48,323 302,228 69,611 372,686 15,057
Coverage After Rate Increases 2.36 1.50 1.88 1.26 1.65 1.26 1.51
[a] Includes additional State Excise and B&O Taxes due to the proposed rate increases.
As shown in the table, planned and forecasted water utility service charges under the existing
rates are not sufficient to fund projected rate needs. The projected revenue deficiency is
primarily due to new debt repayment obligations and funding of the proposed capital
improvement program.
It is projected that the City will need to increase its water rates by approximately 8.5%
annually in 2010 through 2012, 8.0% in 2013 and 2014, and 7.5% in 2015 and 2016. The
analysis assumes that the rate adjustment in 2010 would be implemented in July, and the new
rates will be in effect in the last 5-months of the year (i.e. August through December). The
subsequent rate increases are assumed to be effective as of January 1st of each year.
Table 10-5 below demonstrates the projected cash balances (operating, capital, and debt
reserve funds) for the water utility, assuming that the rate increases proposed in Table 10-3
above are implemented.
Table 10-5
Projected Cash Balances
Fund Balances 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Operating Fund 495,412$ 664,940$ 706,442$ 751,260$ 783,283$ 816,786$ 831,843$
Capital Fund 43,993 2,199,663 86,813 2,490,260 124,845 2,825,182 95,630
Debt Reserve Fund 361,710 771,753 771,753 1,149,729 1,149,729 1,673,188 1,673,188
Total 901,115$ 3,636,356$ 1,565,008$ 4,391,248$ 2,057,856$ 5,315,156$ 2,600,660$
Combined Minimum Target Balance 775,805$ 1,215,071$ 1,246,197$ 1,657,650$ 1,681,667$ 2,230,253$ 2,256,543$
Packet Page 250 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-17 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
If the City is able to obtain available low cost loan and/or grant alternatives to fund its capital
needs, required rate increases would be significantly less than the projected rate increases
presented above.
It is important to note that these projections are based upon current assumptions and the
capital program identified herein. Circumstances might change over time, causing actual rate
adjustments to be higher or lower once actual costs are known. It is imperative that the City
track its costs as they become available and compare them to assumptions used in the study.
If significant changes occur, the City should revisit the analysis and make appropriate
changes.
CURRENT AND PROJECTED RATES
Existing Rates
The City’s existing water rate structure has two components; a bimonthly base charge and a
uniform volume charge. Residential customers pay the base charge on a per unit basis,
whereas other customers’ base charges vary by meter size. All customers pay the same
volume rate per hundred cubic feet (ccf) of water consumption. The City’s current rate
structure is presented in Table 10-5 below.
In order to enhance conservation signals to water customers, the City might consider
transitioning to increasing block rate structure for single family residential customers, and
differentiate volume rates among the customer classes. Other potential options for enhancing
conservation signals would be designating irrigation customers (if there are any) as a separate
customer class, and considering implementing seasonal rates for customer classes with
seasonal usage patterns. It should be noted that such changes in the rate structure require a
more comprehensive and detailed rate and cost of service analyses, which the City is
considering in the future.
Projected Rates
Table 10-6 presents the City’s existing and projected water rate schedule incorporating the
rate adjustments shown in the financial forecast. The projected rates are calculated on an
across-the-board basis; the percentage increase is applied to all classes and to each rate
component (fixed rates and volume rates) on an equal basis.
Packet Page 251 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-18 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Table 10-6
Existing and Projected Rates
Current 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Rates 8.5%8.5%8.5%8.0%8.0%7.5%7.5%
Bimonthly Base Rate
Single Family Residential (per unit)16.58$ 17.99$ 19.52$ 21.18$ 22.87$ 24.70$ 26.55$ 28.55$
Multi Family Residential (per unit)14.60 15.84 17.19 18.65 20.14 21.75 23.38 25.14
All Other Customers:
3/4" meter 20.05$ 21.75$ 23.60$ 25.61$ 27.66$ 29.87$ 32.11$ 34.52$
1" meter 40.82 44.29 48.05 52.14 56.31 60.81 65.38 70.28
1.5" meter 75.49 81.91 88.87 96.42 104.14 112.47 120.90 129.97
2" meter 115.09 124.87 135.49 147.00 158.76 171.46 184.32 198.15
3" meter 248.27 269.37 292.27 317.11 342.48 369.88 397.62 427.44
4" meter 351.68 381.57 414.01 449.20 485.13 523.94 563.24 605.48
6" meter 697.15 756.41 820.70 890.46 961.70 1,038.64 1,116.53 1,200.27
Volume Rate
All Customers (per ccf)1.72$ 1.87$ 2.02$ 2.20$ 2.37$ 2.56$ 2.75$ 2.96$
AFFORDABILITY
Affordability or hardship can be defined as the charge for service that a consumer can pay
without jeopardizing their ability to pay for other necessities (food, shelter, etc.). In 2002, the
American Water Works Association published a briefing paper that cited the Environmental
Protection Agency’s (EPA) affordability study. The EPA study concluded that households
could afford to pay water bills ranging from 1.5% to 3.0% of the household’s income.
Although the study referred to water, it also referenced other public services such as
wastewater, storm, and solid waste. EPA settled on 2.5% of median household income after
comparing water service to the cost of other household services such as telephone and cable
service. In the state of Washington, the Department of Ecology has defined financial hardship
as 2% or greater of the median household income. The Department of Ecology uses financial
hardship and affordability criteria to evaluate applications for the Centennial Clean Water
Fund and State Revolving Fund grants and loans for water pollution control facilities
construction projects.
The median household income for the City of Edmonds in the 2000 census was $53,522. The
2000 census figure was escalated based on Consumer Price Index (CPI) for years 2001
through 2009; the subsequent years assumed a 3% inflation rate. Table 10-7 presents the
City’s rates with the projected rate increases annually for the forecast period (using single
family residential rates and 8 ccf/month water consumption assumption), tested against the
1.5% threshold.
Applying the 1.5% test, the City’s rates are forecasted to remain well within the indicated
affordability threshold throughout the projection period.
Packet Page 252 of 562
CHAPTER 10 FINANCIAL PLAN
Page 10-19 Comprehensive Water System Plan
6.18.2010 FCS GROUP City of Edmonds
Table 10-7
Affordability Test
Year Annual
Inflation
Median
Household
Income
2%
Monthly
Threshold
SFR
Monthly
Bill (8 ccf)
2000 53,522$ 89.20$
2001 2.85%55,047 91.75
2002 1.58%55,917 93.20
2003 2.28%57,192 95.32
2004 2.66%58,713 97.86
2005 3.39%60,704 101.17
2006 3.23%62,664 104.44
2007 2.85%64,450 107.42
2008 3.84%66,925 111.54
2009 3.00%68,933 114.89 22.05$
2010 3.00%71,001 118.34 23.92
2011 3.00%73,131 121.89 25.96
2012 3.00%75,325 125.54 28.16
2013 3.00%77,585 129.31 30.42
2014 3.00%79,912 133.19 32.85
2015 3.00%82,310 137.18 35.31
2016 3.00%84,779 141.30 37.96
CONCLUSION
Starting in 2010, the City’s current rates are projected to be insufficient to fully fund the
forecasted financial obligations of the utility. New financial obligations for which the utility
will require additional rate revenues are mostly driven by the capital financing impacts (i.e.
debt service payments for the new bond issues, and rate funding) of the proposed $20.1
million CIP (2009 dollars; $21.6 inflated dollars).
To generate adequate working capital to fund utility obligations and meet annual cash flow
and debt service coverage requirements, a series of rate increases will be needed in years
2010 through 2016.
Packet Page 253 of 562
Packet Page 254 of 562
Packet Page 255 of 562
Packet Page 256 of 562
76
T
H
A
V
E
W
220TH ST SW
MAIN ST
E
D
M
O
N
D
S W
AY
212TH ST SW
PINE ST
1 0 0 T H A V E W
9 T H A V E N
8 0 T H A V E W
8 T H A V E S
9 6 T H A V E W
DAYTON ST
9 8 T H A V E W9TH A V E S
244TH ST SW/LAKE BALLINGER WAY
DALEY ST
MAPLE ST
WALNUT ST
238TH ST SW
T A L B O T R O AD
224TH ST SW
240TH ST SW
ALDER ST
7 T H A V E N
7 T H A V E S
PUGET DRIVE
O L Y M P I C A V E
FIR ST
1 2 T H A V E N
9 5 T H P L W
3 R D A V E N
B O W D O I N W A Y
9 3 R D P L W
232ND ST SW
2 N D A V E N
7 2 N D A V E W
7 1 S T A V E
158TH
P
L
S
W
7 5 T H P L W
7 3 R D P L W
1
6
1S
T PL SW
160TH PL SW
6 6 T H P L S W
161ST ST SW
162ND PL SW
162ND ST SW
7
0
T
H
P
L
S
W
7 2 N D A V E W
163RD PL SW
164TH ST SW
6 6 T H A V E W
163RD PL SW
162N D
163RD PL SW
165TH PL SW
MAGNOLIA LN
CEDAR ST
WALNUT ST
ALDER ST
7 5 T H A V E W
9 0 T H A
V E W
242ND ST SW
A A V E S
N. 205TH ST
9 2 N D A V E W
1 0 4 T H A V E W
6 T H A V E N
234TH ST SW
1 0 T H A V E N
CASPERS ST
C A V E S
M A P L E W O O D D R
N W T R A C T I O N R /W
CEDAR ST
184TH ST SW
S U N S E T A V E N
1 0 6 T H A V E W
ELM ST
4 T H A V E N
210TH ST SW
MEADOWDALE ROAD
206TH ST SW
231ST ST SW
222ND ST SW
8 1 S T P L W
8 1 S T A V E W
9 7 T H P L W
SPRAGUE ST
F
I
R
D
A
L
E
A
V
E
165TH PL SW
7 6 T H A V E W
MEADOWDALE RD
6 7 T H A V E W 6 6 T H A V E W
6 5 T H A V E W
MEADOWDALE BEACH RD
74TH PL W
B U R L I N G T O N N O R T H E N R A I L R O A D
B
E
R
T
O
LA RD
171ST ST S
W
7 5 T H P L W
7 6 T H A V E W
1
6
9
TH PL W
7 3 R D P L W
6 8 T H A V E W
O L Y M P I C V I E W D R
MEADOWDALE BEACH R
D
O L Y M P I C V I E W D R
175TH PL
174TH ST SW
B R AE MAR DR
SIERRA DR
8 0 T H A V E W
8 3 R D A V E W
196TH ST SW
MAPLE ST
7 2 N D P L W
233rd St SW
9 T H A V E S
FREDERICK PL
179TH ST SW
SIERRA DR
A D M I R A L W A Y
7 8 T H A V E W
7 7 T H P L W
MAPLE LANE
1 5TH ST SW
8 6 T H A V E W
8 2 N D A V E W
9 7 T H A V E W HOLLY LANE
SPRUCE ST
1
0
2
N
D
P
L
W
237TH PL SW
CHERRY ST
217TH ST SW
199TH ST SW
HIG
H S
T
175TH ST SW
JAMES ST
9 5 T H A V E W
ELM PL
8 3 R D A V E W
174TH ST SW
B U R L I N G T O N N O R T H E N R A I L R O A D
T A L B O T R D
T A L B O T R D
7 6 T H A V E W
6 9 T H A V E W
S
O
U
ND VIE W D R
S
O
U
N
D
V
I
E
W LN
180TH ST SW
7 4 T H A V E W
7 3 R D A V E W
1 7 9TH ST SW
H
O
M
E
V
I
E
W D R
R I D G E WAY
O
L
Y
M
P
I
C
V
I
E
W
D
R
OLYMP I C V I E W D R
O L Y M P I C VIEW DR
T A L B O T R D
K A I R E Z D R
9 1 S T P L W 184TH ST SW
7 6 T H A V E W
OLYMPIC VIEW DR
E O L Y M P I C V I E W D R
7 6 T H A V E W186TH ST SW
188TH ST SW
84
T
H
A
V
E
W
81
S
T
A
V
E
W
8 5 T H P L W
92
N
D
A
V
E
W
H I G H S T
OL
Y
M
PIC
V
I
E
W
D
R
94
T
H
A
V
E
W
188TH ST SW
S O U N D V I E W P L
86
T
H
A
V
E
W
8 8 T H A V E W
9 1 S T A V E W
O L Y M P I C V I E W D RDRIFTWOOD LANE
HINDLEY LANE
W I L L O W I C K L N
91
S
T
A
V
E
W
R A I L R O A D A V E
202ND PL SW
1 0 T H P L N
MADRONA LANE
5 T H A V E N
10
7
T
H
P
L
W
201ST ST SW
10
6
T
H
P
L
W
CAROL WAY
172ND ST SW
HINDLEY LANE
83
R
D
P
L
W
10
1
S
T
A
V
E
W
240TH PL SW
1 0 4 T H P L W
HEMLOCK WAY
P I O N E E R W A Y
8 4 T H A V E W
HOWELL WAY
169TH PL
ROBBERS ROOST/235TH PL SW
S U N S E T A V E S
1 7 0 T H P L SW
ELM WAY
P
A
R
A
D
IS
E LA
N
E
GLEN ST
A N D O V E R S T
8 9 T H P L W
1 0 T H A V E S
S
O
U
N
D
V
I
E
W
D
R
241ST PL SW
B U R L I N G T O N N O R T H E R N R A I L R O A D
191ST PL SW
8 8 T H A V E W
8 9 T H A V E W
192ND ST SW
8 4 T H A V E W
192ND ST SW
DELL
W
O
O
D
D
R
191ST ST SW
7 6 T H A V E W
7
6
T H A V E W
196TH ST SW
8 0 T H A V E W
VIEWLAND WAY
8 T H A V E N
I N T E R S T A T E 5
188TH PL SW
6 8 T H A V E W
8 8 T H P L W
HEMLOCK ST
8 0 T H P L W
6 T H P L S
7 4 T H P L W
8 5 T H A V E W
CY
R
U
S P
L
2 3 1 S T P L S W
2 3 8 T H P L S W
8 2 N D P L W
ALOHA ST
WHARF ST
2 N D A V E S
PINE ST
8 T H P L S
1 1 T H P L N
SIERRA PL
HOLLY DR
213TH PL SW
9 4 T H P L W
9 2 N D P L W
8 8 T H A V E W
7
5
T
H
P
L
W
9 9 T H P L W
8 7 T H A V E W
190TH PL SW
LAUREL ST
14TH ST SW
9 3 R D A V E W
207TH PL SW
205TH PL SW
6 9 T H A V E W
194TH ST SW
13TH WAY
1 0 5 T H P L W
S E A V I S T A P L
94TH PL
PUGET D
R
I
V
E
8 8 T H A V E W
198TH ST SW
7 6 T H A V E W
200TH ST SW
202ND ST SW
201ST ST SW
200TH ST SW
8 0 T H A V E W
8 4 T H A V E W
BLAKE PL
O C E A N A V E
216TH PL SW
164TH PL SW
214TH PL SW
PUGET LANE
7 8 T H P L W
229TH PL SW
BIRCH ST
9 8 T H P L W
C O R O N A D O P L
208TH PL SW
NOTTINGHAM LANE
SHELL VALLEY ROAD
198TH ST SW
DRIFTWOOD PL
MAPLE WAY
187TH PL SW
LUND'S GULCH ROAD
215TH ST SW
173RD ST SW
EUCLID AVE
191ST PL SW
7 3 R D P L W
7 9 T H P L W
7 9 T H A V E W
8 5 T H P L W
1 0 2 N D A V E W
S E A L A W N DR
207TH ST SW
6 9 T H P L W
186TH PL SW
209TH PL SW
243RD PL SW
8 9 T H A V E W
SOMERSET LANE
9 6 T H P L W
176TH PL SW
177TH ST SW
CAROL WAY
VISTA PL
O L Y M P I C A V E
8 T H A V E N
BROOKMERE DR
B R O O K M E R E D R
C A R Y R O A D
H A N N A P A R K
2 N D A V E N
2 N D A V E N
3 R D A V E N
CAROL WAY
3 R D A V E N
BELL ST
MAIN ST
6 T H A V E N
DAYTON ST
FORSYTH LANE
DA L EY
P L
HOMELAND DR
195TH ST SW
8 4 T H P L W
MELODY LANE
242ND PL SW
MOUNTAIN LANE
BROOKMERE DR
8 7 T H P L W
168th P
L S
W
S O U N D V I E W P L
H I L L C R E S T P L
SATER LANE
229TH ST SW
PUGET WAY
179TH PL SW
CASCADE DR
WATER ST
9 0 T H P L W
1 5 7 T H P L S W
12TH PL N
GRAND
VIE
W ST
218TH PL W
201ST PL SW
NORTHSTREAM LANE
198TH PL SW
PARK ROAD
EMERALD HILLS DR
204TH PL SW
W DAYT
ON ST
3 R D A V E S
4 T H A V E S
E D M O N D S W Y /S R 1 0 4
6 T H A V E S
5 T H A V E S
7 T H A V E N
WALNUT ST
5 T H A V E S
7 T H A V E S
HEMLOCK WAY
SEAMONT LN
ERBEN DR
3 R D A V E S
PINE ST
ELM WAY
B A V E S
BELL ST
1 0 T H A V E N
1 0 1 S T P L W
SHELL PL
FIR PL
228TH PL SW
77
T
H
A
V
E
W
R A I L R O A D S T
7 T H P L S
VISTA WAY
157TH ST SW
19
9
T
H PL
227TH PL SW
8 5 T H A V E W
SKYLINE DR
GILTNER LANE
POPLAR WAY
14TH WAY
89 T H P L
221ST PL SW
235th ST SW
224th PL SW
BOAT LAUNCH
VIEWLAND WAY
D U R B I N S T
215TH PL SW
182ND PL SW
240TH ST
158TH ST
W O O D L A K E D R
DRIFTWOOD LN
6 T H P L
220TH PL SW
V I E W P L
H I G H L A N D D R
A L A N A D A L E P L
1 0 T H P L S
EXCELSIOR PL
ALOHA WAY
1 0 T H P L N
DALEY ST
9 T H A V E N
1 2 T H P L N
1 2 T H A V E N
H I G H L A N D D R
S K Y L I N E D R
MAIN ST
8 5 T H P L W
8 8 T H A V E W
M A P L E W O O D D R
MAIN ST
P A R K R D
M
A
I
N
S
T
S H E L L V A L L E Y
W
Y
8 3 R D A V E W
8 2 N D A V E W
211TH PL
8 0 T H A V E W
8 2 N D A V E W
8 1 S T A V E W
8 0 T H A V E W
8 0 T H A V E W
7 6 T H A V E W
7 7 T H A V E W
208TH ST SW
7 2 N D A V E W
H W Y 9 9
6 8 T H A V E W
212TH ST SW
H W Y 9 9
N W T R A CTI O N R /W
216TH ST SW
233RD PL SW
SIERRA ST
SEAL
A
W
N PL
SPRUCE PL
7 6 T H P L W
BIRCH PL
8 0 T H W Y
FOREST DELL DR
233RD ST SW
Suns
e
t
W
a
y
CASCADE LANE
20 9TH ST SW
LINDSAY PL
LAUREL WAY
196TH PL SW
1 5 T H W A Y S W
1 0 5 T H A V E W
203RD PL SW
184TH PL SW
210TH PL SW
LAUREL LANE
A L O H A P L
VIEWMOOR PL
217TH PL SW
206TH PL
205TH ST
L I T T L E
180TH PL
8
7
T
H
P
L
7 6 T H P L W
7 0 T H P L W
9 1 S T A V E W
219TH ST SW
203RD ST SW
6 8 T H A V E W
7 0 T H A V E W
H W Y 9 9
220TH ST SW
226TH ST SW
227 TH P L
L A K E V I E W D R I V E
7 4 T H A V E W
7 2 N D A V E W
229TH ST SW
230TH ST SW
229TH PL SW
7 5 T H A V E W
7 4 T H A V E W
236TH S
T
S
W
M C A L E E R WAY
237TH ST S W
7
4
T
H
A
V
E
W
7 4 T H A V E W
B E E S O N P L
240TH PL SW
225TH ST
8 6 T H P L W
187TH ST SW
8
6
T
H
P
L
W
8 0 T H P L W
90 T H P L W
8 T H A V E N
7
4
T
H
P
L
W
7 0 T H A V E W
215TH ST SW
7 8 T H A V E W
226TH PL
242ND PL SW
8 T H P L S
7 3 R D A V E W
8 9 T H A V E W
7 6 T H A V E W
8 0 T H L N
238TH ST SW
H W Y 9 9
7 6 T H A V E WHWY 9 9
8 1 S T P L W
H W Y 9 9
8 0 T H A V E W
226TH ST SW
225TH PL SW
7 6 T H A V E W
224TH ST SW
223RD ST SW
8 2 N D P L W
218TH ST SW
8 0 T H A V E W
7 6 T H A V E W
239TH ST SW
237TH PL SW
GLEN ST
7
T
H
P
L S
EDMONDS ST
1 0 1 S T A V E W
1 6 4 T H P L SW
7 1 S T P L W
ELM PL
7
4
T
H
P
L
W
204TH ST SW
8 8 T H P L W
181ST PL
7 0 T H A V E W
231ST ST SW
191ST ST SW
2 4 2 N D P L
7 2 N D A V E W
9 5 T H A V E W
7 7 T H P L W
203RD ST SW
7 8 T H A V E W
9 3 R D P L W
234TH PL
181ST PL SW
8
0
T
H
P
L
241ST ST SW
S U M M I T L N
8 6 T H P L W
87TH P L
W
8 8 T H A V E W
8 8 T H P L W
220TH ST SW
8 4 T H A V E W
8 8 T H A V E W
9
0
T
H
A V
E
W
8 5 T H A V E
224TH ST SW
8 7 T H P L W
8 7 T H A V E W
224TH ST SW
8 6 T H A V E W
228TH ST SW
8 8 T H A V E W
9 0 T H A V E W
2 3 2 N D S T S W 231ST PL SW
E
D
M
O
N
D
S
W
A
Y
8 4 T H A V E W
240TH ST SW
8 9 T H P L W
8 9 T H P L W
9 0 T H A V E W
8 7 T
H P L W
2 N D A V E S
189TH PL
78TH P
L
W
7 8 T H P L W
181ST PL SW
202ND PL SW
7 3 R D A V E W
8 5 T H P L W
8 1 S T P L W
EDMONDS ST
8 7 T H A V E W
182ND ST
7 7 T H A V E W
7 9 T H A V E W
8 4 T H A V E W
236TH ST SW
237TH PL SW
189TH PL SW
219TH ST SW
9
0
T H
P
L
W
7 8 T H P L W
238TH ST SW
8 0 T H P L W
242ND PL SW
1 2 T H P L N
182ND PL SW
244TH ST SW/205TH ST NW
2
4
2
N
D
P
L
S
W
2
4
2
N D S T
9 2 N D A V E W
242ND ST SW
9 7
T H P L W
9 2 N D A V E W
8 1 S T A V E W
7 T H A V E S
9 0 T H A V E W
6 6 T H P L W
8 4 T H A V E W
211TH PL
7 2 N D P L W
8 T H A V E S
8 1 S T A V E
226TH PL SW
7 8 T H P L W
230TH ST SW
7 9 T H P L W
8 6 T H P L W
221ST PL
CASCADE DR
236TH ST SW
234TH ST SW94TH P L W
9 9 T H P L W
235TH PL
236TH PL
9 7 T H P L W
231ST PL SW
9 4 T H A V E W
9 8 T H A V E W
9 6 T H A V E W
9 5 T H P L W
228TH ST SW
227TH PL SW
226TH PL SW
9 9 T H A V E W
9 9 T H P L W
9 3 R D P L W
9 2 N D A V E W
9 8 T H A V E W
220TH ST SW
9 6 T H A V E W
9 3 R D A V E
9 2 N D A V E W
216TH ST SW
7
7
T
H
P
L
W
207TH PL SW
BELL ST
193RD PL SW
194TH PL SW
197TH ST
8 2 N D P L W
202ND PL SW
190TH ST SW
9 9 T H P L W
192ND ST SW
8 5 T H A V E W
241ST PL SW
243RD PL SW
6 T H A V E S
ALDER ST
238TH ST SW
218TH ST SW
8 4 T H P L W
7 8 T H A V E W
9 6 T H P L W
9 3 R D P L W
B U R L I N G T O N N O R T H E R N R A I L R O A D
219TH ST SW
6 8 T H A V E W
PINE ST
9 2 N D A V E W
9 2 N D P L W
9 5 T H P L W
BOWDOIN WAY96TH A V E W
E
D
M
O N D S W A Y
E L M W A Y
8 T H A V E S
E
D
M
O
N
D
S
W
A
Y
14TH WAY
1 4 T H W A Y
1 0 6 T H P L W
E
D
M
O
N
D
S
W
A
Y
1 0 0 T H A V E W
231ST ST SW
J O HN C T
232ND ST SW
ROBIN HOOD DR
H U M B E R L N
W E S T G R E Y S T O N E L N
1 7 0 TH P L S W
9 4 T H P L W
9 5 T H P L W
9 7 T H P L W
209TH ST SW
6 8 T H A V E W
190TH ST SW
236TH ST SW
7 7 T H P L W
189TH PL SW
240TH PL SW
7 7 T H A V E
223RD ST SW
8 3 R D P L W
213TH ST SW
7 2 N D A V E W
242ND PL SW
8 0 T H A V E W
228TH ST SW
160TH ST SW
FRIAR T
U
C
K
L
N
R
O
B
I
N
H
O
O
D
D
R
237TH PL SW
1 0 1 S T P L W
1 0 1 S T A V E W
1 0 0 T H A V E W
1 0 2 N D P L W
10
0
T
H A V E W
244TH ST SW
1 0 1 S T A V E W
1 0 4 T H A V E W
244TH ST SW/205TH ST NW
E A S T G R E Y S T O N E L N
TOTEM POLE LNEAGEL LN/242ND ST SW
BERRY LN/243RD PL
T I M B E R L N
1 1 4 T H A V E W
IVY RD/240TH ST SW
239TH PL SW
W E S T W O O D W A Y L N
239TH PL SW
7 8 T H A V E W
7 1 S T A V E W
8 4 T H P L W
8 5 T H P L W
204TH ST SW
ALOHA ST
192N
D PL S
W
7 8 T H P L W
BROOKMERE DR
7
5
T
H
P
L
W
1 0 6 T H P L W
7 8 T H A V E W
8 3 R D A V E W
7 4 T H A V E W
7 8 T H A V E W
8 2 N D P L W
SPRUCE ST
7 9 T H A V E W
9 2 N D A V E W
2 N D A V E S
238TH ST SW
236TH PL SW
1 1 1 T H P L W
1 1 0 T H P L W
1 1 3 T H P L W
6 3 R D A V E W
6 6 T H A V E W
168T
6 8 T H A V E W
225TH PL
156TH ST SW
8 2 N D A V E W
9 3 R D A V E W
8 7 T H A V E W
242ND ST SW
6 7 T H A V E W
7 7 T H P L W
206TH ST SW
230TH ST SW
7 4 T H A V E W
9
1
S
T
A
V
E
W
2 27TH PL SW
9 0 T H P L W
8 0 T H P L W
7 5 T H P L W
244TH ST SW/205TH ST NW
226TH PL SW
PINE ST
208TH ST SW
1 1 5 T H P L W
1 1 2 T H P L W
236TH PL SW
WOODHAVEN PL 1 1 0 T H P L S WWOODWAY P A R K R D
T I M B E R L N
B U R L I N G T O N N O R T H E R N R A I L R O A D
1 1 6 T H A V E W
B U R L I N G T O N N O R T H E R N R A I L R O A D
WACHUSETT ROAD
W A C H U S E T T R O A D
W O
O D W A Y P A R K R D
W O O D W A Y P A R K R D
NORTH DEER D R
SOUTH DEER D R
1 0 8 T H A V E W
D O G W O O D P L
SO UT H D O G W O O D L N
N O R T H D E E R D R
D O G W O O D L N
DO G W O O D LN
ALGONQUIN RD
W O O D W A Y P A R K R D
KUSHAN RD
NORTH DOGWOOD LN
N
O
RT
H DO
G
W
OOD LN
M
A
K
A
H
R D
WHITCOM PL
W O O D W A Y P A R K R D
3 R D A V E S
7 3 R D P L W
191ST ST
181ST PL SW
9 9 T H A V E W
236TH PL SW
185TH PL SW
225TH PL SW
ELM WAY
7 8 T H P L W
222ND ST SW
194TH ST SW
7 9 T H P L W
8 5 T H P L W
217TH ST S W
180TH ST SW
S E A V I S T A P L
ELM ST
BELLA COOLA RD
C H I N O O K P L /1 1 7 T H P L W
N O O T K A R D
M A K A H R D
MAKAH RD
POINT EDWARDS PL
216TH ST SW
3 R D A V E S
4 T H A V E S
7 T H A V E S
6 T H A V E S
6 T H A V E S
9 T H A V E S
8 T H A V E S
2 N D A V E S
3 R D A V E S
4 T H A V E S
8 2 N D P L W
230TH ST SW
P I O N E E R W Y
235TH ST SW
6 9 T H P L W
1 0 7 T H P L W
7 8 T H P L W
8 1 S T A V E W
232ND PL SW
7 7 T H P L W
229TH ST SW
8 2 N D A V E W
185TH ST SW
193RD PL SW
8 8 T H A V E W
8 6 T H P L W
240TH ST SW
BIRCH ST
183 R D P L S W
9 7 T H A V E W
207TH PL
8 6 T H A V E W
9 4 T H A V E W
236TH ST SW
185TH PL SW
8 0 T H P L W
QUAIL LN
164TH PL SW 164TH
6 4 T H A V E W
170T
171ST
172ND PL SW
172ND PL SW
M E A D O W D A L E D R
173RD ST SW
172ND ST SW
M E A D O W D A L E D R
165TH PL SW
O L Y M P I C V I E W D R
169TH P L W
1 7 0 T H P L W
175TH ST SW
173RD PL SW
8 6 T H A V E W
204TH ST SW
8 6 T H P L W
182ND PL
236TH PL
8 9 T H P L W
7 6 T H P L W
EDMONDS ST
198 T H S T S W
VISTA WAY
186TH ST SW
217TH ST SW
9 5 T H P L W
233RD PL
1 0 1 S T P L W
8 7 T H A V E W
173RD ST SW
1 0 7 T H P L W
7 8 T H P L W
8 2 N D P L W
228TH ST SW
7 1 S T P L W
168TH ST SW
173RD ST SW
174TH ST SW
176TH ST SW
6 6 T H P L W
175TH PL
232ND ST SW
8 2 N D P L W
214TH PL SW
222ND ST SW
176TH ST SW
242ND PL SW
243RD PL SW
235TH PL
O L Y M P I C V I E W D R
7 4 T H A V E W
204TH PL SW
7 0 T H P L W
SPRAGUE ST
8 3 R D A V E W
229TH PL SW
8 0 T H P L W
FIR PL
M A P LE W O O D L N
172N D P L S W
13TH WAY
6 4 T H A V E W
6 5 T H P L W
6 5 T H A V E W
6 6 T H P L W
6 7 T H P L W
6 4 T H A V E W
6 5 T H A V E W
177TH PL SW
1 7 8 T H P L SW178TH PL SW
180TH ST SW
225TH PL SW
8 3 R D A V E W
8 3 R D A V E W
192ND PL SW
O L Y M P I C V I E W D R
8 9 T H A V E W
7 9 T H A V E W
178TH PL SW
PUGET WAY
8 1 S T P L W
172ND ST SW
215TH ST SW
1 0 5 T H P L W
9 1 S T A V E W
8 5 T H P L W
8 9 T H P L
7 7 T H A V E W
VISTA PL
7 T H P L S
8 6 T H P L W
188TH ST SW
185TH PL SW
PENNY LN
6 4 T H A V E W
6 6 T H A V E W
6 7 T H A V E W
189TH PL SW
190TH ST SW
191ST PL SW
171ST ST SW
184TH ST SW
9
5
T
H
P
L
W
8 6 T H P L W
194TH PL
8 5 T H P L W
185TH ST SW
218TH ST SW
198TH PL SW
8 2 N D A V E W
229TH PL
224TH ST SW
240TH PL SW
8 1 S T P L W
227TH ST SW
8 1 S T P L W
4 T H A V E S
180TH ST SW
9 0 T H A V E W
8 1 S T A V E W
VIEWLAND WAY
9 4 T H A V E W
187TH PL SW
8 T H A V E N
228TH ST SW
6 5 T H P L W
6 4 T H A V E W
186TH ST SW
6 6 T H
P L
185TH ST SW
183RD PL SW
183RD PL SW
182ND PL SW
183RD ST SW
182ND ST SW
6 3 R D C T
6 7 T H A V E W
181ST ST SW
181ST ST SW
6 7 T H A V E
F I R E R D
6 9 T H P L W
7 1 S T A V E W
192ND ST SW
191ST PL SW 191ST ST SW
7 2 N D A V E W
9 2 N D A V E W
8 6 T H A V E W
8 6 T H P L W
215TH PL SW
9 7 T H A V E W
200TH ST SW
7 8 T H A V E W
226TH PL SW
8 T H A V E N
PUGET DR
205TH PL SW
8 2 N D A V E W
164TH ST SW
226TH ST SW
7 7 T H P L W
202ND ST SW
9 6 T H A V E W
2 3 9 T H P L S W
160TH ST SW
8 2 N D A V E W
229TH ST SW
6 8 T H A V E W
6 8 T H A V E WBLUE R I D G E D R
7 0 T H A V E W
7 1 S T A V E W
185TH ST SW
185TH PL SW
187TH PL SW
186TH
188TH ST SW
7 9 T H P L W
226TH ST SW
7 9 T H A V E W
240TH PL
202ND ST SW
8 3 R D P L
7 4 T H P L W
7 2 N D A V E W
14TH WAY
215TH ST SW
1 7 5 T H S T SW
7 7 T H A V E
182ND PL SW
9 8 T H P L W
8 6 T H A V E W
1 0 6 T H P L W
241ST ST
214TH PL SW
9 0 T H A V E W
8 0 T H A V E W
8 2 N D A V E W
2 2 1 S T S T S W
174TH ST SW
215TH ST SW
8 3 R D P L
225TH PL SW
6 9 T H P L W
6 8 T H P L W
7 0 T H A V E W
7 5 T H A V E W
1
9
1
ST ST SW
7 4 T H A V E W 192ND PL SW
192ND PL SW
6 9 T H P L W
7 0 T H A V E W
7 1 S T P L W
7 2 N D P L W
7 3 R D A V E W
193RD PL SW
194TH PL SW
194TH PL SW
193RD PL SW
7
3
R
D
P
L
194TH ST SW
7 2 N D P L
190TH ST SW
191ST ST SW
192ND PL SW
6 6 T H P L W
1
0
2
N
D
P
L
W
7 7 T H A V E W
216TH ST SW
8 4 T H A V E W
7 2 N D A V E WEDMONDS W A Y /S R 1 0 4
1 2 T H A V E N
182ND ST SW
187TH PL SW
7 2 N D A V E W
1
0
1
S
T
A
V
E
W
8 1 S T A V E W
194TH ST SW
8 6 T H A V E W
187TH ST SW
8 6 T H P L W
8 1 S T A V E W
221ST PL SW
216TH ST SW
224TH ST SW
7 3 R D P L W
8 3 R D A V E W
7 4 T H P L
6 3 R D P L W
189TH PL SW 189TH PL SW
6 7 T H A V E W
193RD ST SW
193RD ST SW
194TH ST SW
195TH PL SW
196TH ST SW
6 6 T H A V E W
196TH ST SW
197TH ST SW
H E IN Z P L
6 9 T H P L W
7 1 S T P L W
7 3 R
D A V E W
189TH ST SW
6 8 T H A V E W
7 5 T H A V E 201ST PL
7 4 T H P L W
7 5 T H P L W
7 3 R D A V E W
204TH ST SW
203RD PL SW
GLEN ST
H W Y 9 9
204TH
6 3 R D P L W
6 3 R D A V E W
208TH ST SW
210TH ST SW
212TH ST SW
6 6 T H A V E W
6 7 T H A V E W
N W TR A C T I O N R /W
214TH ST SW
213TH P
215TH S
6 7 T H A V E W
6 6 T H A V E W
216TH ST SW
218TH ST SW
219TH ST SW
6 6 T H A V E W
6 4 T H A V E W
220TH ST SW
6 8 T H P L W
6 8 T H A V E W
222ND ST SW
224TH ST SW 224TH ST SW
220TH PL
221ST PL
221ST PL SW
223RD PL
223RD PL S
6 7 T H P L W
6 8 T H A V E W
6 6 T H A V E W
6 5 T H A V E W
6 4 T H A V E W
6 7 T H P L W
6 6 T H
P L W
226TH ST SW
225TH PL
225TH PL SW
225TH PL SW
226TH ST SW
227TH PL SW
6 7 T H P L W
6 3 R D P L W
6 2 N D A V E W
6 2 N D A V E W
2
2
7
T
H ST SW
6 8 T H A V E W
6 7 T H P L W
6 6 T H P L
6 5 T H P L
6 4 T H P L W
228TH ST SW
229TH PL
230TH ST SW
68TH AVE W
230TH ST SW
231ST ST SW
6 3 R
D A V E
W
6 3
R
D
P
L
6 6 T H A V E W
6 7 T H P L W
6 6 T H A V E W
6 7 T H P L W
232ND ST SW
232ND PL SW
233 PL
234TH PL
233RD ST SW
234TH ST SW
234TH ST
6 4 T H A V E W
6
3
R
D
A
V
E
W
6 3
R D
A
V
E
W
6 6 T H A V E W
234TH PL 2 3 4 TH P L
235TH PL
65TH PL W67TH A V E W
234TH ST S
W235TH ST SW
231ST ST SW
9 2 N D A V E W
9 1 S T A V E W
N W T R A C T I O N R /W
7 8 T H P L W
236TH ST SW
8 T H A V E N
A l b i o n
8 5 t h A v e W
5 T H A V E S
6 T H A V E S
A A V E S
7 T H A V E S
B A V E S
C AVE S
178TH PL SW
6 9 T H P L W
B U R L I N G T O N N O R T H E R N R A I L R O A D
W
e
s
t
g
a
t
e
C
o
rri
d
o
r
Downtown / Waterfront
Activity Center
Medical / Highway 99
Activity Center
H i g h w a y 9 9 C o r r i d o r
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
W
a
y
C
o
rri
d
o
r
Westgate
Five
Corners
Perrinville
Puget Drive
Former Edmonds Woodway
High School
Old Woodway
Elementary
Sherwood
Elementary
Madrona K-8 School
Woodway
Elementary
Edmonds
Memorial
Cemetery
Edmonds Woodway
High School
Stevens
HospitalChase Lake
Elementary
Maplewood
K-8 Co-op School
Westgate
Elementary
Holy Rosary
Private School
Edmonds
Elementary
Seaview
Elementary
Southwest County Park
Meadowdale Beach County Park
Seaview Park
Hutt
Park
Sierra Park
Maplewood Hill
Park
Pine
Ridge
Park
Yost Park
Pine St
Park
Park
City Park
Frances Anderson
Center
Edmonds Marsh
Edmonds
Wastewater
Treatment
Plant
Point Edwards
Port of Edmonds
Harbor
Square
Edmonds
Public
SafetyCity
Hall
Ferry Terminal
Meadowdale
Play
Fields
Lynndale Park / Skatepark
College Place
Elementary
College Place
Middle School
Edmonds
Community
College
Lake Ballinger
Edmonds
Center
for the
Arts
Olympic Beach
Brackett's
Landing
North
Brackett's
Landing
South
Lynnwood Treatment Plant
Firdale
Village
E
d
m
o
n
ds W
ay C
orrid
or
Plan Designations
Retail Core
Arts Center Corridor
Downtown Mixed Commercial
Downtown Convenience
Downtown Mixed Residential
Downtown Master Plan
Shoreline Commercial
Downtown Residence-Office
Single Family - Urban 1
Single Family - Urban 2
Single Family - Urban 3
Single Family - Resource
Single Family Master Plan
Multi Family - Medium Density
Multi Family - High Density
Neighborhood Commercial
Community Commercial
Planned Business / Neighborhood Business
Mixed Use Commercial
Highway 99 Corridor
Edmonds Way Corridor
Hospital / Medical
Master Plan Development
Public
Park / Open Space
Plan Overlays
Activity Center
Corridor Development
Park
School
Hi-Rise Node
Edmonds City Limits
Note:
This is a reduction of the official Comprehensive Plan Map
on file at the City of Edmonds. A full size 36" x 60" map can
be obtained from the Edmonds Planning Division.
²
This map is a representation of the official
Comprehensive Plan Map of the City of Edmonds.
Please check with the City of Edmonds
Planning Division before relying on the
information described on this map.
Map revision date: December 16, 2008
1,000 0 1,000500
Feet
Figure 3-1
City of Edmonds Comprehensive Plan Map
Packet Page 257 of 562
Packet Page 258 of 562
APPENDIX A
Packet Page 259 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 260 of 562
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
6
1
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
6
2
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
6
3
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
6
4
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
6
5
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
6
6
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
6
7
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
6
8
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
6
9
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
7
0
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
7
1
o
f
5
6
2
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 1 -
0006.900000
09/25/03
WSS/amg
R:10/27/03gjz
R:11/13/03gjz
R:6/9/04gjz
R:6/11/04gjz
ORDINANCE NO. 3506
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS,
WASHINGTON, GRANTING OLYMPIC VIEW WATER AND
SEWER DISTRICT A NON -EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO
CONSTRUCT, MAINTAIN, OPERA TE, REPLACE AND
REPAIR A WATER AND SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM
WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHTS -OF-WAY OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN
THE SAME SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE.
WHEREAS, RCW 35A.11.020 grants the City broad authority to regulate the use
of the public right of way; and
WHEREAS, RCW 35A.47.040 authorizes the City "to grant nonexclusive
franchises for the use of public streets, bridges or other public ways, structures or places above or
below the surface of the ground for facilities for public conveyances, for poles, conduits, tunnels,
towers and structures, pipes and wires and appurtenances thereof for transmission and
distribution of electrical energy, signals and other methods of communication, for gas, steam and
liquid fuels, for water, sewer and other private and publicly owned and operated facilities for
public service," and
WHEREAS, the Council finds that it is in the best interests of health, safety and
welfare of residents of the Edmonds community to grant a non -exclusive franchise to the
Packet Page 272 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 2 -
Olympic View Water and Sewer District for the operation of a water and sanitary sewer system
within the City right-of-way, NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Definitions. The following terms contained herein, unless otherwise
indicated, shall be defined as follows:
1.1 City. The City of Edmonds, a municipal corporation of the
State of Washington, specifically including all areas
incorporated therein as of the effective date of this
ordinance and any other areas later added thereto by
annexation or other means.
1.2 City Urban Growth Area. The urban growth area means
that area defined by the City’s comprehensive planning
process.
1.3 Days: Calendar days.
1.4. Director: The Mayor or designee.
1.5. District : Olympic View Water and Sewer District.
1.6. Facilities : All pipes, access ways, pump stations, storage
facilities, equipment, and appurtenances thereto, located in
the City's right-of-way, utilized by the District in the
operation of activities authorized by this Ordinance. The
abandonment by District of any facilities as defined herein
shall not act to remove the same from this definition.
1.7. Permittee : A person who has been granted a permit by the
Permitting Authority, and District operating under Section
4.6 Blanket Permit of this agreement.
1.8 Permitting Authority: The City department authorized to
process and grant permits (permitting authority) required to
work in the City's right-of-way, or any agency authorized
to perform this function on the City's behalf. Unless
otherwise indicated, all references to Permitting Authority
Packet Page 273 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 3 -
shall include the designee of the department or agency
head.
1.9 Person: An entity or natural person.
1.10 Right-of-way : As used herein shall refer to the surface of
and the space along, above, and below any street, road,
highway, freeway, lane, sidewalk, alley, court, boulevard,
parkway, drive, utility easement, and/or road right-of-way
now or hereafter held or administered by the City of
Edmonds.
1.11 Olympic View Water & Sewer District Service Area : All
the land located within the corporate boundaries of the
District as they now or may in the future exist, plus those
areas lying outside of the corporate boundaries of the
District in which the District's water and sanitary sewer
system sand appurtenances are now or may in the future be
located.
Section 2. Franchise.
2.1 Pursuant to RCW 35A.47.040 the City hereby grants to
District, it's successors and assigns, subject to the terms and
conditions hereinafter set forth, a Franchise beginning on
the effective date of this Ordinance.
2.2 This Franchise shall grant District the right, privilege and
authority, subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set
forth; to construct, operate, maintain, replace and use all
necessary equipment and facilities related to its water and
sanitary sewer systems in, under, on, across, over, through,
along or below the right-of-way for the purpose of its water
and sanitary sewer utility facilities as approved under City
perm its issued by the Permitting Authority pursuant to the
Franchise and City ordinances.
2.3 This ordinance is to be construed as granting permission to
District to go only upon any public right-of-way described
herein. Permission to go upon any other property owned or
controlled by the City must be sought from the City and
may be approved on a case by case basis.
Section 3. Non-Interference of Facilities.
Packet Page 274 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 4 -
3.1 District's Facilities shall be located, relocated and
maintained within the right-of-way so as not to
unreasonably interfere with the free and safe passage of
pedestrian and vehicular traffic and ingress or egress to or
from the abutting property and in accordance with the
ordinances of the City and laws of the State of Washington.
Nothing herein shall preclude District from affecting
temporary road closures as reasonably necessary during
construction or maintenance of its Facilities provided
District receives prior City approval, which shall not be
unreasonably withheld. Whenever it is necessary for
District, in the exercise of its rights under this Franchise, to
make any excavation in the right-of-way, District shall,
upon completion of such excavation, restore the surface of
the right-of-way to a condition that meets the specifications
established within the Cit y of Edmonds Engineering
development standards and pre-approved plans and in
accordance with standards of general applicability imposed
by the City by ordinance or administrative order.
Section 4. Right-of- Way Management.
4.1 Excavation.
4.1.1 During any period of relocation or maintenance, all surface
structures, if any, shall be erected and used in such places
and positions within the right-of-way so as to interfere as
little as possible with the safe and unobstructed passage of
traffic and the unobstructed use of adjoining property.
District shall at all times post and maintain proper
barricades and comply with all applicable safety
regulations during such period of construction as required
by the ordinances of the City or state law, including RCW
39.04.180, fo r the construction of trench safety systems.
4.1.2 Whenever District excavates in any right-of-way for the
purpose of installation, construction, repair, maintenance or
relocation of its facilities, it shall apply to the City for a
permit to do so in accord with the ordinances and
regulations of the City requiring permits to operate in the
right-of-way. In no case shall any such work commence
within any right-of-way without a permit, except as
otherwise provided in this Ordinance. During the progress
of the work, District shall not unnecessarily obstruct the
passage or use of the right-of-way, and shall provide the
City with plans, maps, and information showing the
Packet Page 275 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 5 -
proposed and final location of any facilities in accordance
with Section 15 of this Ordinance. Approval shall be
obtained in accordance with the provisions of Sections
4.6.2 and 4.6.3.
4.2 Abandonment of District's Facilities. District shall not
abandon any of its facilities within the right-of-way without
the prior written consent of the City.
4.3 Restoration after Construction.
4.3.1 District shall, after any installation, construction,
relocation, maintenance, or repair of Facilities within the
right-of-way, restore the right-of-way to City standard and
at least the same condition existing prior to any such
installation, construction, relocation, maintenance or repair.
Survey monuments shall not be removed or destroyed
without the District first obtaining the required Department
of Natural Resources (DNR) permit in accordance with
RCW 58.09.1 30 and WAC 332-120 -030. All survey
monuments, which have been disturbed or displaced by
such work, shall be restored pursuant to all federal, state
and local standards and specifications. District agrees to
promptly complete all restoration work and to promptly
repair any damage caused by such work at its sole cost and
expense.
4.3.2 If it is determined that District has failed to restore the
right-of-way in accordance with this Section, the City shall
provide District with written notice, which shall include a
description of actions the City believes necessary to restore
the right-of-way. If the right-of-way is not restored in
accordance with the City's notice within fifteen (15) days of
that notice, or such longer period as may be specified in the
notice, the City, or its authorized agent, may restore the
right-of-way and District shall be responsible for all
reasonable costs and expenses incurred by the City in
restoring the right-of-way in accordance with this Section.
The rights granted to the City und er this Paragraph shall be
in addition to those otherwise provided by this Franchise.
4.4 Bonding Requirement. District, as a public agency, is not
required to comply with the City's standard bonding
requirement for working in the City's right-of-way.
Packet Page 276 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 6 -
4.5 Emergency Work, Permit Waiver. In the event of an
emergency where any facilities located in the right-of-way
are broken or damaged, or if District's construction area for
their facilities is in such a condition as to place the health or
safety of any person or property in imminent danger,
District shall immediately take necessary emergency
measures to repair or remove its facilities without first
applying for and obtaining a permit as required by this
Franchise. However, this emergency provision shall not
relieve District from later obtaining necessary permits for
the emergency work. District shall apply for the required
permits the next business day following the emergency
work or as soon as practical thereafter given the nature and
duration of the emergency.
4.6 Blanket Permit. The terms "Minor Activities" and "Blanket
Activities" are defined in a specifically negotiated "Blanket
Permit for Activity Within The Public right-of-way," which
is incorporated by this reference as fully as if herein set
forth, a copy of which has been filed with the City Clerk
and identified by Clerk's Receiving Number _______ .
Permittee shall be authorized to perform Minor Activities
without a City permit of any kind and Blanket Activities
under the terms and conditions of the Blanket Permit. All
other activities will require a separate permit in accordance
with City ordinances.
4.6.1 The Permittee shall pay the City a permit
inspection/processing fee in the amount set out in Blanket
Permit Definitions and as established by the City Council.
4.6.2 The Permittee shall provide a monthly list of Blanket
Permit construction activity by the 10th of the following
month listing the previous month's completed activity
authorized under this Section.
4.6.3 For each separate use of the right-of-way under this
Section, and prior to commencing any work on the right-of-
way under this Section, the Permittee shall:
At least twenty- four (24) hours in advance of entering the
right-of-way, fax or otherwise deliver to the Permitting
Authority a City Job Start Notification Form, as provided
by the Permitting Authority. Said form shall include, at a
minimum, the following information: street address nearest
to the proposed work site and description of work to be
Packet Page 277 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 7 -
performed. Permittee shall not commence work within the
City right-of-way without approval and obtaining of a
permit number and the Job Start Notification by the City
Engineer or his designee.
4.6.4 The City reserves the right to alter the terms and conditions
of Subsection 4.6 and of Blanket Permit by providing thirty
(30) days written notice to the Permittee. Any change made
pursuant to this Paragraph shall thereafter apply to all
subsequent work performed pursuant to this Section.
4.6.6 In the event the Permittee fails to comply with any of the
conditions set forth in this Section, the City may provide
written notice of termination to operate under this Section
to Permittee, stating with specificity, the basis for the
termination of the Permittee's authority.
4.7 Safety.
4.7 .1. District, in accordance with applicable federal, state, and
local safety rules and regulations shall, at all times, employ
ordinary care in the installation, maintenance, and repair of
its facilities utilizing methods and devices commonly
accepted in the sanitary sewer industry to prevent failures
and accidents that are likely to cause damage, injury, or
nuisance to persons or property.
4.7.2. District will make all reasonable effort to construct and
maintain its facilities in the right-of-way in a safe and
operational condition.
4.8. Dangerous Conditions, Authority for City to Abate.
4.8.1 Whenever Facilities or the operations of District cause or
contribute to a condition that appears to endanger any
person or substantially impair the lateral support of the
adjoining right-of-way, public or private property, the City
may direct District, at no charge or expense to the City, to
take actions to resolve the condition or remove the
endangerment. Such directive may include compliance
within a prescribed time period.
4.8.2 In the event District fails or refuses to promptly take the
action, or if emergency conditions exist which require
immediate action to prevent imminent injury or damage to
persons or property, the City may take such action as it
Packet Page 278 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 8 -
believes necessary and District shall reimburse the City for
its actual costs incurred.
Section 5. Relocation of System Facilities.
5.1 Whenever the City causes the grading or widening of the
right-of-way or undertakes construction of any water or
storm drainage line, lighting, signalization, sidewalk
improvement, pedestrian amenities, or other public street
improvement (for purposes other than those described in
Section 5.3 below) and such project requires the relocation
of District's then existing Facilities lying within that portion
of the right-of-way, or an area affected by such city
projects, the City shall:
(1) Provide District, at least one hundred twenty (120)
days prior to the commencement of such project,
written notice that a project is expected which will
or may require relocation of a portion of District's
facilities; and
(2) Provide District at least sixty (60) days prior to the
commencement of such project, with reasonable
plans and specifications for such grading, widening,
or construction and a proposed new location within
or adjacent to the right-of-way for District's
Facilities.
5.2. After receipt of such notice and the plans and
specifications, District shall relocate such Facilities within
the right-of-way as to accommodate such street and utility
improvement project ten (10) days prior to commencement
of the project unless there is agreement to a different
schedule for coordinating completion of relocation of
Facilities, provided, however, District may, after receipt of
written notice requesting a relocation of its Facilities,
submit to the City written alternatives to such relocations of
its Facilities and the time schedule. The City shall within a
reasonable time evaluate such alternatives and advise the
District in writing whether one or more of the alternatives
is suitable to accommodate work that would otherwise
necessitate relocation of the Facilities. If so requested by
the City, District shall submit such additional information
as is reasonably necessary to assist the City in making such
evaluation. The City shall give each alternative full and fair
consideration. In the event the City ultimately reasonably
Packet Page 279 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 9 -
determines that there is no other reasonable or feasible
alternative, then District shall relocate its Facilities as
otherwise provided in this Section 5. The City shall
cooperate with District to designate a substitute location for
its Facilities within the right-of-way. The cost of relocating
such Facilities existing within the present limits of the City
shall be paid as follows:
(1) if the relocation occurs within five (5) years after
District initially constructed such Facility, then the
relocation shall be at the City's sole cost;
(2) if the relocation occurs more than five (5) years
after District initially constructed such Facility, then
the relocation shall be at District's sole cost.
5.3 Obligations under this Section 5 shall not apply whenever
any person or entity, other than the City, requires the
relocation of District Facilities to accommodate the work of
such person or entity wit hin the Right-of way, or whenever
the relocation of District's Facilities within the right-of-way
is necessary to satisfy any requirement or condition of a
City permit or approval issued on a land use action
(including, without limitation, any condition or requirement
imposed pursuant to any contract or in conjunction with
approvals or permits for zoning, land use, construction or
development) for the benefit of any person or entity other
than the City. However, in the event the City reasonably
determines (and promptly notifies District in writing of
such determination) that the primary purpose of imposing
such condition or requirement upon such person or entity
which necessitates such relocation is to cause the
construction of an improvement on the City's behalf and in
a manner consistent with City approved improvement plans
(as described in subsection 5.1 above) within a segment of
the right-of-way then District shall require only those costs
and expenses incurred by District in integrating and
connecting such relocated Facilities with District's other
Facilities to be paid to District by such person or entity, and
District shall otherwise relocate its Facilities within such
segment of the right-of-way in accordance with the
provisions of subsection 5.1 above.
The provisions of this Section 5.3 shall in no manner
preclude or restrict District from making any arrangements
it may deem appropriate when responding to a request for
Packet Page 280 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 10 -
relocation of its Facilities by any person or entity other than
the City, where th e facilities to be constructed by such
person or entity are not or will not become City owned,
operated or maintained facilities, provided that such
arrangements do not unduly delay a City construction
project.
5.4 Any cost or expense in connection with the location or
relocation of any Facilities existing under benefit of
easement or other rights not arising under this Franchise,
shall be borne fifty percent (50%) by the City, and fifty
percent (50%) by District.
Section 6. Compliance with Codes and Regulations.
6.1 The rights, privileges and authority herein granted are
subject to and governed by this ordinance and all other
applicable ordinances and codes of the City of Edmonds, as
they now exist or may hereafter be amended. Nothing in
this ordinance limits the City's lawful power to exercise its
police power to protect the safety and welfare of the
general public. Any location, relocation, erection or
excavation by District shall be performed by District in
accordance with applicable federal, state and city rules and
regulations, including the City Public Works Policies and
Pre-approved Plans, and any required permits, licenses or
fees, and applicable safety standards then in effect or any
Memorandum of Understanding with District.
6.2 Upon written inquiry, Distr ict shall provide a specific
reference to either the federal, state or local law or the
Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission
(WUTC) order or action establishing a basis for District's
actions related to a specific franchise issue.
6.3 In the event that any territory served by District is annexed
to the City after the effective date of this Franchise, such
territory shall be governed by the terms and conditions
contained herein upon the effective date of such
annexation.
Section 7. System Development Information.
7.1 District will assign a representative whose responsibility
shall be to coordinate with the City on planning for CIP
Packet Page 281 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 11 -
projects including those that involve under grounding. At a
minimum, such coordination shall include the following:
(1) District shall meet with the City, other franchisees
and users of the right-of-way, according to a
schedule to be determined by the City, to schedule
and coordinate construction; and
(2) All construction locations, activities, and schedules
shall be coordin ated, as required by the Mayor or
his designee, to minimize public inconvenience,
disruption, or damages.
(3) For the purpose of planning, District and the City
shall provide each other with a copy of their
respective current adopted Capital Improvement
Plan annually and upon request by the other party.
Section 8. Planning Coordination. The parties agree, as follows, to participate in
the development of, and reasonable updates, to each other's planning documents.
8.1 For District's service within the City Urban Growth Area
limits, District will participate in a cooperative effort with
the City of Edmonds to develop a Comprehensive Plan -
Utilities Element, that meets the requirements described in
RCW 36.70A.O70 (4).
8.2 District will participate in a cooperative effort with the City
to ensure that the Utilities Element of the City's
Comprehensive plan is accurate as it relates to District's
operations and is updated to ensure it's continued relevance
at reasonable intervals.
8.3 District shall submit information related to the general
location, proposed location, and approximate capacity of all
existing and proposed Facilities within the City as
requested by the Director within a reasonable time, not
exceeding sixty (60) days from receipt of a written request
for s uch information.
8.4 District will update information provided to the City
whenever there are major changes in the District’s system
plans for the City.
Packet Page 282 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 12 -
8.5 District will provide information relevant to its operation
within the City within a reasonable period of time after a
written request to assist the City in it's need to develop and
update it's Comprehensive Plan - Utilities Element,
provided that such information is in District's possession or
can be reasonably developed from information in District's
possession.
8.6 The City will provide information relevant to District's
operations within a reasonable period of time following a
written request to assist District in the development or
update of its Comprehensive Sewage System Plan,
provided that such information is in the City's possession,
or can be reasonably developed from the information in the
City's possession.
Section 9. Indemnification by District and Edmonds.
9.1 District hereby releases, covenants not to bring suit, and
agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City, its
elected officials, employees, agents, and volunteers from
any and all claims, costs, judgments, awards, attorney's
fees, or liability to any person, including claims by
District's own employees to which District might otherwise
be immune under Title 51 RCW, arising from personal
injury or damage to property allegedly due to the negligent
or intentional acts or omissions of District, its agents,
servants, officers or employees in performing activities
authorized by this Franchise. This covenant of
indemnification shall include, but not be limited by this
reference, claims against the City arising as a result of the
acts or omissions of District, its agents, servants, officers or
employees except for claims for injuries and damages
caused by the sole negligence of the City. If final judgment
is rendered against the City, its elected officials,
employees, agents, and volunteers, or any of them, District
shall satisfy the same. The City may appear in any
proceeding it deems necessary to protect the City's or the
public's interests.
9.2 The City hereby releases, covenants not to bring suit, and
agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the District,
its elected officials, employees, agents, and volunteers from
any and all claims, costs, judgments, awards, attorney's
fees, or liability to any person, including claims by City's
own employees to which City might otherwise be immune
Packet Page 283 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 13 -
under Title 51 RCW, arising from personal injury or
damage to property allegedly due to the negligent or
intentional acts or omissions of City, its agents, servants,
officers or employees in performing construction,
maintenance or other city activities within the Rights-of-
way. This covenant of indemnification shall include, but
not be limited by this reference, claims against the District
arising as a result of the acts or omissions of City, its
agents, servants, officers or employees except for claims
for injuries and damages caused by the sole negligence of
the District. If final judgment is rendered against the
District, its elected officials, employees, agents, and
volunteers, or any of them, City shall satisfy the same. The
District may appear in any proceeding it deems necessary
to protect the District's interests or the interests of its
ratepayers.
9.3 In the event any such claim or demand be presented to or
filed with either party, such party shall promptly notify the
other thereof, which party shall have the right, at its
election and at its sole cost and expense, to settle and
compromise such claim or demand. In the event any suit or
action be begun against either party based upon any such
claim or demand, such party shall likewise promptly notify
the other party thereof, which party shall have the right, at
its election and its sole cost and expen se, to settle and
compromise such suit or action, or defend the same at its
sole cost and expense, by attorneys of its own election.
9.4 Inspection or acceptance by one party of any work
performed by the other at the time of completion of
construction shall not be grounds for avoidance of any of
these covenants of indemnification. Said indemnification
obligations shall extend to claims that are not reduced to a
suit and any claims that may be settled prior to the
culmination of any litigation or the institution of any
litigation.
9.5. In the event either refuses to undertake the defense of any
suit or any claim, after a request for defense and
indemnification has been made pursuant to the
indemnification clauses contained herein, and such refusal
is subsequently determined by a court having jurisdiction
(or such other tribunal that the parties shall agree to decide
the matter), to have been a wrongful refusal, such party
shall pay all of the other party's costs and expenses for
Packet Page 284 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 14 -
defense of the action, including reasonable attorney's fees
or recovering under this indemnification clause as well as
any judgment against the party.
9.6. Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this
Franchise is subject to RCW 4.24.115, then, in event of
liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons
or damages to property caused by or resulting from the
concurrent negligence of District and the City, its officers,
employees and agents, each party's liability hereunder shall
be only to the extent of its negligence. This waiver has been
mutually negotiated by the parties.
Section 10. Insurance.
10.1. District shall procure and maintain in full force for the
duration of the Franchise, insurance against claims for
injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise
from or in connection with the exercise of the rights,
privileges and authority granted hereunder to District, its
agents or employees.
10.2 In satisfying the insurance requirement set forth in this
section, District may self-insure against such risks in such
amounts as are consistent with good utility practice.
District shall provide the City with sufficient written
evidence, the sufficiency of which shall be determined at
the reasonable discretion of the City, upon request, that
such insurance (o r self -insurance) is being so maintained by
District. Such written evidence shall include, to the extent
available from District's insurance carrier, a written
certificate of insurance with respect to any insurance
maintained by District in compliance with this Section.
10.3 Commercial General Liability insurance policy, written on
an occurrence basis with limits no less than $1,000,000
combined single limit per occurrence and $2,000,000
aggregate for personal injury, bodily injury and property
damage. Coverage shall include premises, operations,
independent contractors, products-completed operations,
personal injury and advertising injury. There shall be no
endorsement or modification of the Commercial General
Liability insurance excluding liability arising from
explosion, collapse or underground property damage. The
City shall be named as an additional insured under
District's Commercial General Liability insurance policy.
Packet Page 285 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 15 -
10.4 Excess Liability in an amount of $5,000,000 each
occurrence and $20,000.00 aggregate limit. The City shall
be named as an additional insured on the Excess Liability
insurance policy.
10.5 Automobile Liability insurance for owned, non -owned and
hired vehicles with limits no less than $2,000,000
Combined Single Limit per accident for bodily injury and
property damage
10.6 Payment of deductible or self-insured retention shall be the
sole responsibility of District.
10.7 District shall require all its subcontractors to carry
insurance consistent with this Section 10.3, and shall
provide evidence of such insurance to the City upon
request.
10.8 The coverage shall contain no special limitations on the
scope of protection afforded to the City, its officers,
officials, or employees. In addition, the insurance policy
shall contain a clause stating that coverage shall apply
separately to each insured against whom claim is made or
suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the
insurer's liability. District's insurance shall be primary. Any
insurance, self -insurance, or insurance po ol coverage
maintained by the City shall be excess of District's
insurance and shall not contribute with it. Coverage shall
not be suspended, voided, canceled by either party, reduced
in coverage or in limits except after thirty (30) days prior
written notice has been given to the City.
Section 11. Default / Enforcement.
11.1 The City reserves the right to revoke and terminate this
Franchise and all rights and privileges of District in the
event of a substantial violation or material breach of its
terms and conditio ns.
11.2 A substantial violation or material breach by District shall
include, but shall not be limited to, the following:
(1) An uncured violation of any material provision of
this Franchise, or any material rule, order or
Packet Page 286 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 16 -
regulation of the City which would endanger the
public health, safety and welfare;
(2) The practice of any fraud or deceit upon the
ratepayers served by the District's water and
sanitary sewer system.
(3) The practice of any fraud or deceit upon the City.
(4) Misrepresentation of material facts in the
negotiation of this Franchise or its implementation.
(5) An uncured failure to pay the fee associated with
this Franchise.
11.3 No violation or breach of this Franchise shall occur which
is without fault of either District or the City, unless they are
the result of circumstances beyond District's or the City's
reasonable control, such as Acts of God or unrelated third
parties.
Neither District, nor the City, shall be excused by economic
hardship or by nonfeasance or malfeasance of its elected
officials, officers, agents or employees.
Damage to equipment causing service interruption shall be
deemed to be the result of circumstances beyond District's
or the City's control if it is caused by any negligent act or
unintended omission of its employees (assuming proper
training) or agents (assuming reasonable diligence in their
selection), or sabotage, vandalism or malicious mischief by
its employees or agents. District, or the City, shall bear the
burden of proof in establishing the existence of such
conditions.
11.4 Except in the case of termination of this Franchise pursuant
to Paragraph 11.2d, the City, or District, prior to any
termination or revocation of this Franchise, shall provide
the other with detailed written notice describing an y
substantial violation or material breach upon which it
proposes to take action. The party who is allegedly in
breach shall have a period of 60 days following such
written notice to cure the alleged violation or breach, or
demonstrate to the other's satis faction that a violation or
breach has not occurred or does not exist, or submit a plan
that is satisfactory to the other to correct the violation or
Packet Page 287 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 17 -
breach. If, at the end of said 60-day period, the party giving
such notice reasonably believes that a substantial violation
or material breach is continuing and that the party in breach
is not taking satisfactory corrective action, the noticing
party may, by written notice to the other party, declare that
the party in breach is in default. Within 20 days after
receipt of a written declaration of default, the party that is
alleged to be in default may request, in writing, a hearing
before the City Hearing Examiner, as provided by the
City's development regulations.
The Hearing Examiner's decision may be appealed by
either party to the Snohomish County Superior Court
within thirty (30) days following the date of the decision
rendered.
11.5 The City may, in its discretion and without waiving its
rights under Paragraph 11.4 above, provide, in writing, for
an extension of the period for District to remedy any
violation or breach of the Franchise terms or take such
corrective action specified in the Notice and come into
compliance with its obligations under this Franchise, so as
to avoid its termination or revocatio n.
11.6 Any violation continuing for a period greater than 60 days
may be remedied by the City at District's expense, unless
District is diligently and in good faith proceeding with
corrective action and its failure to complete corrective
action is caused by unavoidable delays or events beyond its
control.
Section 12. Franchise Term. The term of the Franchise granted hereunder shall
remain in full force for an initial term of ten (10) years from the effective date. It may be
renewed for additional term(s) commensu rate with the interlocal agreement between the parties.
Section 13. Non-Exclusive Franchise. This Franchise is not and shall not be
deemed to be an exclusive Franchise. This Franchise shall not in any manner prohibit the City
from granting other and further franchises under, over, upon, and along the right-of-way which
do not interfere with District's existing water and sanitary sewer system and its rights under this
Packet Page 288 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 18 -
Franchise. This Franchise shall not prohibit or prevent the City from using the right-of-way or
affect the jurisdiction of the City over the same or any part thereof.
Section 14. Franchise Fee.
14.1. In consideration for the rights granted District under this
agreement and the parties concomitant Interlocal Operating
Agreement to occupy City right-of-way for the purpose of
operating a water and sanitary sewer utility within the City
dated June 28, 2004 and as compensation for the City's
recovery of actual administrative expenses incurred by the
City that are directly related to receiving and approving
permits, lic enses, cost of inspections, this franchise and
inspecting plans for construction within the right-of-way,
District agrees to pay the City a franchise fee of $10
annually in addition to those fees identified in Right-of-
Way Management, Section 4. If the in terlocal agreement is
terminated by either party or by judicial action, the District
shall pay an annual fee of the lesser of $3,000 or the lowest
fee charged to any other public utility franchised by the
City, whichever is less. Proceeds of the franchise fee
collected shall be distributed to the City no later than 30
days after the end of each calendar year.
14.2 The fees and charges set forth in this ordinance are in
addition to, and not in limitation of, the payments
established by agreement in an interlocal agreement
between the parties.
Section 15. Records. As a condition of this Franchise, and without charge to the
City, District agrees to provide the City with available as-built plans, maps, and records that
show the vertical and horizontal location of it s facilities within the right-of-way. This
information shall be provided between one hundred twenty (120) and one hundred eighty (180)
days of the effective date of this Ordinance and shall be updated upon reasonable request by the
City.
Section 16. Survival. All of the provisions, conditions and requirements of
Sections 4.1 Excavation, 4.2 Abandonment Of District's Facilities, 4.3 Restoration After
Packet Page 289 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 19 -
Construction, 4.8 Dangerous Conditions, Authority For City To Abate, Section 5 Relocation of
System Facilities, and Section 9 Indemnification, of this Franchise, shall be in addition to any
and all other obligations and liabilities District may have to the City at common law, by statute,
or by contract, and shall survive the City's Franchise to District for the use of the areas
mentioned in Section 2.3 herein, and any renewals or extensions thereof. This Ordinance shall
further be binding upon the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, legal representatives and
assigns of District and all privileges, as well as all obligations and liabilities of District shall
inure to its heirs, successors and assigns equally as if they were specifically mentioned wherever
District is named herein.
Section 17. Severability. If any Section, sentence, clause or phrase of this
Ordinance should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction,
such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other
Section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Franchise Ordinance. The Parties may amend, repeal,
add, replace, or modify any provision of this Franchise to preserve the intent of the parties as
expressed herein prior to any finding of invalidity or unconstitutionality.
Section 18. Assignment. This Franchise shall not be sold, transferred, assigned,
or disposed of in whole or in part either by sale, voluntary or involuntary merger, consolidation
or otherwise, without the written approval of the City. This paragraph shall not act to require
City approval of any District action to mortgage or otherwise encumber its facilities, or other
action related to corporate financing, financial reorganization, or refinancing activity.
Section 19. Notice. Any notice or information required or permitted to be given
to the parties under this Franchise may be sent to the following addresses unless otherwise
specified:
Packet Page 290 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 20 -
District General Manager
Olympic View Water & Sewer District
23725 Edmonds Way
Edmonds, WA 98026-1856
Phone: 425 -774-7769
Fax: ______________________
Administrative Services Director
City of Edmonds
12 1 – 5th Ave. North
Edmonds, WA 98020
Phone: 425 -771-02 40
Fax: 425-771 -0265
Section 20. Non-Waiver. The failure of either party to enforce any breach or
violation by the other party of any provision of this Franchise shall not be deemed to be a
waiver or a continuing waiver by the non-breaching party of any subsequent breach or violation
of the same or any other provision of this Franchise.
Section 21. Alternate Dispute Resolution. If the parties are unable to resolve
disputes arising from the terms of this Franchise, prior to resorting to a court of competent
jurisdiction, the parties shall submit the dispute to a non -binding alternate dispute resolution
process agreed to by the parties. Unless otherwise agreed between the parties or determined
herein, the cost of that process shall be shared equally.
Section 22. Entire Agreement. This Franchise constitutes the entire
understanding and agreement between the parties as to the subject matter herein and no other
agreements or understandings, written or otherwise, shall be binding upon the parties upon
execution and acceptance hereof.
Section 23. Directions to City Clerk. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and
directed to forward certified copies of this ordinance to District as set forth in this ordinance.
Packet Page 291 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 21 -
District shall have sixty (60) days from receipt of the certified copy of this ordinance to accept
in writing the terms of the Franchise granted to District by this ordinance.
Section 24. District Acceptance of Franchise. District shall have no rights under
this Franchise nor shall District be bound by the terms and conditions of this Franchise unless
District shall, within thirty (30) days after the effective date of the ordinance, file with the City
its written acceptance of this Franchise, in a form acceptable to the City Attorney.
Section 25. Publication Costs. In accord with state law, this ordinance shall be
published in full.
Section 26. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifi-
cally delegated to the City legislative body, is not subject to referendum, and shall take effect
five (5) days after passage and publication of an approved summary thereof consisting of the
title.
APPROVED:
MAYOR GARY HAAKENSON
ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED:
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY:
BY
W. SCOTT SNYDER
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: 06/11/2004
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: 06/22/2004
PUBLISHED: 06/27/2004
EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/02/2004
ORDINANCE NO. 3506
Packet Page 292 of 562
{WSS572714.DOC;1/00006.900000/} - 22 -
SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. 3506
of the City of Edmonds, Washington
On the 22nd day of June, 2004, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed
Ordinance No. 3506. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title,
provides as follows:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, GRANTING OLYMPIC
VIEW WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT A NON-EXCLUSIVE FRANCHISE TO
CONSTRUCT, MAINTAIN, OPERATE, REPLACE AND REPAIR A WATER AND
SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM WITHIN PUBLIC RIGHTS -OF-WAY OF THE CITY OF
EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AND FIXING A TIME WHEN THE SAME SHALL BECOME
EFFECTIVE.
The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request.
DATED this 23rd day of June, 2004 .
CITY CLERK, SANDRA S. CHASE
Packet Page 293 of 562
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
9
4
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
9
5
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
9
6
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
9
7
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
9
8
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
2
9
9
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
0
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
1
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
2
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
3
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
4
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
5
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
6
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
7
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
8
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
0
9
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
0
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
1
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
2
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
3
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
4
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
5
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
6
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
7
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
8
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
1
9
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
0
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
1
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
2
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
3
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
4
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
5
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
6
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
7
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
8
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
2
9
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
0
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
1
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
2
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
3
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
4
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
5
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
6
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
7
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
8
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
3
9
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
4
0
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
4
1
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
4
2
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
4
3
o
f
5
6
2
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 344 of 562
APPENDIX B
Packet Page 345 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 346 of 562
Page:1DOH 331-011 (Rev. 06/03)
Primary Contact Evening Phone: (xxx) xxx-xxxx Owner Evening Phone: (xxx) xxx-xxxx
Fax:(425)744-6057 | E-mail: waite@ci.edmonds.wa.us Owner Fax Phone: | E-mail:
WAC 246-290-420(9) requires that water systems provide 24-hour contact information for emergencies.
Primary Contact Mobile/Cell Phone: (425) 870-0617 Owner Mobile/Cell Phone:
Primary Contact Daytime Phone: (425) 771-0235 Owner Daytime Phone: (425) 771-0235
9. 24 HOUR PRIMARY CONTACT INFORMATION 10. OWNER CONTACT INFORMATION
STREET ADDRESS IF DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE STREET ADDRESS IF DIFFERENT FROM A
ADDRESS ADDRESS
ATTN ATTN
CITY STATE ZIP CITY STATE ZIP
JIM WAITE [WATER/SEWER MGR]EDMONDS, CITY OF TITLE:WATER MANAGER
EDMONDS, WA 98026-7219 EDMONDS, WA 98026-7219
7110 210TH ST SW 7110 210TH ST SW
6. PRIMARY CONTACT NAME & MAILING ADDRESS 7. OWNER NAME & MAILING ADDRESS 8. Owner Number 001683
Owned Only
Managed Only
Owned and Managed SMA NAME:SMA Number:
Not applicable (Skip to #12
11. SATELLITE MANAGEMENT AGENCY - SMA (check only one)
Day Care Licensed Residential Facility Temporary Farm Worker
Food Service/Food Permit Lodging Other (church, fire station, etc.):
1,000 or more person event for 2 or more days per
year
Recreational / RV Park _______________________________________________
__
Commercial / Business Industrial School
Agricultural Hospital/Clinic Residential
12. WATER SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS (mark all that apply)
City / Town Federal Private State 7,500,000
Association County Investor Special District
13. WATER SYSTEM OWNERSHIP (mark only one)14. STORAGE CAPACITY (gall
22500 U EDMONDS, CITY OF SNOHOMISH A Comm
1. SYSTEM ID NO.2. SYSTEM NAME 3. COUNTY 4. GROUP 5. TYPE
RETURN TO: Northwest Regional Office, 20435 72nd Ave S STE 200, Kent, WA, 98032
Submission Reason: No Change
WFI Printed For: On-Demand
ONE FORM PER SYSTEM
WATER FACILITIES INVENTORY (WFI) FORM
Printed: 4/30/2010
Updated: 01/05/2010
Quarter: 1
S01 24050L/EVERETT 24050 L X Y 0 SE NE 08 27N 04E
S02 77050Y/SEATTLE 77050 Y X Y 0 SE SW 31 27N 04E
15 16
SOURCE NAME
17
INTERTIE
18
SOURCE CATEGORY
19
USE
20 21
TREATMENT
22
DEPTH
23 24
SOURCE LOCATION
S
o
u
r
c
e
N
u
m
b
e
r
LIST UTILITY'S NAME FOR SOURCE
AND WELL TAG ID NUMBER.
Example: WELL #1 XYZ456
IF SOURCE IS PURCHASED OR
INTERTIED,
LIST SELLER'S NAME
INTERTIE
SYSTEM ID
NUMBER
W
E
L
L
W
E
L
L
F
I
E
L
D
W
E
L
L
I
N
A
W
E
L
L
F
I
S
P
R
I
N
G
S
P
R
I
N
G
F
I
E
L
D
S
P
R
I
N
G
I
N
S
P
R
I
N
G
S
E
A
W
A
T
E
R
S
U
R
F
A
C
E
W
A
T
E
R
R
A
N
N
E
Y
/
I
N
F
.
G
A
L
L
O
T
H
E
R
P
E
R
M
A
N
E
A
N
T
S
E
A
S
O
N
A
L
E
M
E
R
G
E
N
C
Y
S
O
U
R
C
E
M
E
T
E
R
E
D
N
O
N
E
C
H
L
O
R
I
N
A
T
I
O
N
F
I
L
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
F
L
U
O
R
I
D
A
T
I
O
N
I
R
R
A
D
I
A
T
I
O
N
(
U
V
)
O
T
H
E
R
D
E
P
T
H
T
O
F
I
R
S
T
O
P
E
N
I
N
T
E
R
V
A
L
I
N
F
E
E
T
C
A
P
A
C
I
T
Y
(
G
A
L
L
O
N
S
P
E
R
M
I
N
U
T
E
)
1
/
4
,
1
/
4
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
N
U
M
B
E
R
T
O
W
N
S
H
I
P
R
A
N
G
E
Packet Page 347 of 562
Page:2DOH 331-011 (Rev. 06/03)
30
33. ROUTINE COLIFORM SCHEDULE
30
A. How many residents are served by this system 180 or more days p
29. FULL-TIME RESIDENTIAL POPULATION
31310
DOH USE ONLY!
CALCULATED
ACTIVE
CONNECTIONS
DATESIGNATURE
36. I certify that the information stated on this WFI form is correct to the best of my knowledge.
36. I certify that the information stated on this WFI form is correct to the best of my knowledge.
SIGNATURE: _________________________________________________________
DATE:_________________________________________
PRINT NAME: _________________________________________________________
TITLE:_________________________________________
35. Reason for Submitting WFI:
30303030303030303030
DECNOVOCTSEPAUGJULJUNMAYAPRMARFEBJAN
DECNOVOCTSEPAUGJULJUNMAYAPRMARFEBJAN
DECNOVOCTSEPAUGJULJUNMAYAPRMARFEBJAN
B. How many days per month are they present?
A. If you have schools, daycares, or businesses connected to
your water system, how many students daycare children
and/or employees are present each month?
B. How many days per month is water accessible to the
public?
A. How many total visitors, attendees, travelers, campers,
patients or customers have access to the water system each
month?
31. TEMPORARY & TRANSIENT USERS
B. How many days per month are they present?
A. How many part-time residents are present each month?
32. REGULAR NON-RESIDENTIAL USERS
DECNOVOCTSEPAUGJULJUNMAYAPRMARFEBJAN30. PART-TIME RESIDENTIAL POPULATION
28. TOTAL SERVICE CONNECTIONS
0
0B. Institutional, Commercial/Business, School, Day Care, Industrial Services, etc.
0A. Recreational Services and/or Transient Accommodations (Campsites, RV sites, hotel/motel/overnight units)
0
0
C. Part Time Residential Units in the Apartments, Condos, Duplexes, Dorms that are occupied less than 180 days/
B. Full Time Residential Units in the Apartments, Condos, Duplexes, Dorms that are occupied more than 180 days/
0A. Apartment Buildings, condos, duplexes, barracks, dorms
0
10031
B. Part Time Single Family Residences (Occupied less than 180 days per year)
A. Full Time Single Family Residences (Occupied 180 days or more per year)
025. SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES (How many of the following do you have?)
26. MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (How many of the following do you have?
27. NON-RESIDENTIAL CONNECTIONS (How many of the following do you have?)
10031
0
10031
DOH USE ONLY!
APPROVED
CONNECTIONS
Unspecified
ACTIVE SERVICE
CONNECTIONS
OtherNew SystemName ChangInactivateUpdate - No ChangeUpdate - Change Re-Activate
EDMONDS, CITY OF CommASNOHOMISH22500 U
5. TYPE4. GROUP3. COUNTY1. SYSTEM ID 2. SYSTEM NAME
WATER FACILITIES INVENTORY (WFI) FORM - Continued
Packet Page 348 of 562
APPENDIX C
Packet Page 349 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 350 of 562
City of Edmonds
Pressure Reducing Station Data
Upper Lower Station
Pressure Pressure Elevation Inlet Outlet
Name Station Location Zone Zone (ft)(psi)(psi)
PRV #2 68th Ave W & North Meadowdale Rd 596 500 430 80 30
PRV #3 72nd Ave W & North Meadowdale Rd 500 325 182 132 54
PRV #5 7082 Meadowdale Beach Rd 596 500 305 135 90
PRV #6 74th Place & Meadowdale Beach Rd 500 325 165 144 65
PRV #7 76th Ave W & Braemar Dr (west side of 76th)425 325 200 100 60
PRV #8 76th Ave W & 176th St SW 596 425 225 165 72
PRV #9 76th Ave W & 188th (west side of 76th Ave)596 425 307 130 50
PRV #10 80th Ave & 184th St SW 596 505 320 122 80
PRV #13 88th Ave W & 185th Place SW 596 505 345 119 70
PRV #14 8900 188th St SW 596 505 340 100 60
PRV #15 8911 192nd St SW 596 505 340 110 60
PRV #16 19822 Maplewood Dr 596 486 360 88 53
PRV #17 12th Ave & Main St (east of intersection)596 486 310 130 69
PRV #18 Olympic Ave & Main St 486 420 240 100 58
PRV #20 6th Ave S & Elm Way 486 325 195 110 52
PRV #21 9th Ave S & Pine St (Offline/Closed)596 486 320 120 72
Normal Pressure
5-11-10
Packet Page 351 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 352 of 562
APPENDIX D
Packet Page 353 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 354 of 562
Local Government Consistency Review Checklist
A consistency review between DOH planning and engineering documents and adopted
comprehensive plans and development regulations is required in certain situations.
This checklist may be used to document the consistency review as required in WAC
246-290-108. A consistency review is required for each local government with
jurisdiction over the applicable service area.
Water System Name:__City of Edmonds________ PWS ID___22500__________
Planning Document Title: Water System Plan_________ Plan Date: __May 2010_____
Local Government with Jurisdiction: ______City of Edmonds_____________ _
I certify that the above statements are true to the best of my knowledge and that these
statements support the conclusion that the subject -planning document is consistent with
adopted comprehensive plans, development regulations, and other policies.
**For any issues of inconsistency, please document the inconsistency, including the
citation from the comprehensive plan or development regulation. Provide direction on
how this inconsistency can be resolved.**
1
Consistency Statement
Page(s) in
Planning
Document
Yes – No – Not
Applicable
The applicable service area is consistent with the land use and zoning in
the adopted comprehensive plan and adopted development regulations.
Fig. 2-3 &
Fig 3-1
For Water System Plans: The six-year growth projection used to
forecast water demand is consistent with the adopted city/county’s
population growth projections. If a different growth projection was used,
the alternative growth projection and methodology proposed is
acceptable based on explanation given.
Pages 3-4 &
4-11
For Water System Plans: Provisions of water service for new service
connections are consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan and
adopted development regulations.
Page 5-2
For city-owned systems only: All utility service extension ordinances
regarding water service are included in the plan. These policies are
consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan and adopted
development regulations.
Page 5-2
Other relevant elements related to water supply (as determined by DOH)
is consistent with the adopted comprehensive plan and adopted
development regulations.
N/A N/A
Where the local government with jurisdiction did not provide a
Consistency Review: Provide documentation of efforts taken and
amount of time provided. Include: name of contact, date, type of effort
attempted, and response from local agency.
N/A N/A
Signature Date
Printed Name, Title, & Jurisdiction
Packet Page 355 of 562
Consistency Review Guidance
This checklist may be used to meet the requirements of WAC 246-290-108.
For water system plans, a consistency review is required for the retail service area and
any additional areas where a municipal water supplier wants to expand their water
right’s place of use.
For small water system management programs, a consistency review is only required
for areas where a municipal water supplier wants to expand its water right’s place of
use. If no water right place of use expansion is requested, a consistency review is not
required.
For engineering documents, a consistency review is only required for areas where a
municipal water supplier wants to expand its water right’s place of use. This is only
allowed for non-community water systems.
Documenting consistency:
Provide a copy of the adopted land use/zoning map that corresponds to the
service area. The uses provided in the WSP should be consistent with the
adopted land use/zoning map.
Include a copy of service area policies on how new water service will be provided
to new customers. Cities and towns must include all service extension
ordinances.
Include a copy of the growth projections that corresponds to the service area. If
the local population growth rate projections are not used, provide a detailed
explanation on why the projections chosen more accurately describe the
expected growth rate. Explain how it is consistent with the adopted land use.
Include any other portions of comprehensive plans or development regulations
which are related to water supply.
2
The Department of Health is an equal opportunity agency. For persons with disabilities, this document is
available on request in other formats. To submit a request, please call 1-800-525-0127 (TTY 1-800-833-
6388).
Packet Page 356 of 562
APPENDIX E
Packet Page 357 of 562
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 358 of 562
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
5
9
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
6
0
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
6
1
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
6
2
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
6
3
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
6
4
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
6
5
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
6
6
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
6
7
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
6
8
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
6
9
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
7
0
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
7
1
o
f
5
6
2
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 372 of 562
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
7
3
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
7
4
o
f
5
6
2
APPENDIX F
Packet Page 375 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 376 of 562
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
7
7
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
7
8
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
7
9
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
8
0
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
8
1
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
8
2
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
8
3
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
8
4
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
3
8
5
o
f
5
6
2
MEMORANDUM
___________________________________________________________________
Date: September 11, 2009
To: Tom Lindberg, MSA
From: Steve Koho and Noel Miller
Subject: Thoughts on reclaimed water at the WWTP and City wide
The City isn’t producing any reclaimed water, as defined by the regulations, for several reasons:
1. There is insignificant demand. There is a naturally high groundwater table in the near by
residential areas which keeps many yards damp thus reducing the need for irrigation water.
The nature of most businesses in the City core also doesn’t require a significant need for
large volumes of potable water.
2. No ability or capital funding to produce it. We would need significant space in order to
provide the additional polishing of our effluent, and there is no area left on the site where this
could be done.
3. Cost and energy prohibitive. The geography in the area of the plant is near sea level. Thus,
all reclaimed water would need to be pumped uphill. The pumps would need to be large to
overcome the head caused by the elevation gain. There is no reclaimed water piping
infrastructure, and no funds available for the purchase and installation of the purple pipe.
Although we don’t use or produce truly reclaimed water, we do recycle our effluent (non-potable
water, or non-pot) in a number of ways to conserve potable water:
1. We use non-pot for the wet scrubbers that serve as air pollution control devices for the
incinerator. This flow volume is approximately 300 gpm for an average of 15 hours per day.
2. We use non-pot for all spray systems and also for washing equipment down.
3. We use non-pot for the make-up water for our odor scrubber.
4. We own heat pumps for heating and cooling the office building because we use non-pot
water as the heating/cooling source for the heat pumps.
We modified a treatment process to use raw sewage for carrier water instead of the previous system
that used high volumes of non-pot water. While this effort didn’t conserve potable water
consumption, it did reduce power consumption by reducing the amount of energy used by the non-
pot water system.
On the private business side, there are two vehicle wash stations in the City for the general public
that use reclaimed water systems. The City uses these stations to wash its passenger vehicles.
At the Public Works Operations and Maintenance Center, a vehicle wash station using a reclaimed
water system is planned to be installed in 2011.
At the Port of Edmonds, a boat washing facility was installed in the past 5 years which uses a
reclaimed water system.
In 2008, a PCC Natural Market store was built which has a rainwater harvest system to reduce
potable water consumption. The City encourages other businesses to do the same.
Packet Page 386 of 562
APPENDIX G
Packet Page 387 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 388 of 562
July 24, 2001
FOREWORD
Pursuant to Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) 18.00.040, these City of Edmonds
Construction Standard Details and Specifications, hereinafter referred to as “Edmonds Standard Details”,
shall apply whenever any public or private work is performed within the City of Edmonds, including work
performed by private parties at their own expense. City capital improvement projects will be required to
meet all the conditions within these standards unless the City Engineer approves an exception from the
design standard in effect at the time of construction. Except where these Edmonds Standards Details
provide otherwise, design, construction and materials shall conform to the appropriate standards of the
most current edition of the following publications produced separately by Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT) or jointly by WSDOT and Washington State Chapter of the American Public
Works Association (APWA).
• WSDOT/APWA Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge and Municipal Construction,
hereinafter referred to as “WSDOT/APWA Standard Specifications”.
• WSDOT/APWA Standard Plans for Road, Bridge and Municipal Construction, hereinafter
referred to as “WSDOT/APWA Standard Plans”.
The City Engineer is hereby delegated the authority to allow minor deviations to these standards after
review of evidence submitted by the developer, establishing that such modifications are equal to or better
than the requirements in these standards, that they are in the public interest, that they are based upon sound
engineering practices and judgment, and that requirements for safety, function, appearance and
maintainability are fully met. Such deviations from the standards must be submitted, reviewed and
approved in writing by the City Engineer prior to construction. The City Engineer will make the
decision as to whether a requested deviation or alternative will be allowed.
Revisions to these Edmonds Standard Details may be issued periodically by the City Engineer as necessary
to make corrections or clarifications or to conform to current municipal practices, state or federal standards
and new technology. Such revisions will be formally issued by the City Engineer in writing, entered into
the Standard Details and recorded in the Revision Log.
NOEL MILLER, P.E.
Public Works Director
Packet Page 389 of 562
EDMONDS STANDARD DETAILS
Modifications to Standard Specifications Log
Revision
Date Title
Modifications to Division 2 of Technical Specifications
(Earthwork)
01/01/04 Modifications to Divisions 3 through 8
01/01/04
Modifications to Division 9 of Technical Specifications
(Materials)
01/01/04 Material Modifications to Divisions 7, 8 and 9
12
Packet Page 390 of 562
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
CITY OF EDMONDS MODIFICATIONS
DIVISION 2 – EARTHWORK
2.09 STRUCTURE EXCAVATION
2.09.1 Description
This section covers the work necessary for trench excavation and backfill for all pipelines, complete.
A. Trench Excavation
Excavation is unclassified. Complete all excavation regardless of the type of materials encountered.
The contractor shall do an estimate of the kind and extent of the various materials that will be
encountered in the excavation.
B. Type of Bedding
Bedding consists of pipe base and pipe zone material. Pipe zone material shall be required for all pipe.
Pipe base material will be required for pipes except ductile iron pipe. Pipe base material for ductile iron
shall be required when, in the opinion of the Engineer, the native trench bottom is not suitable for
laying pipe.
C. Types of Backfill
For bidding purpose, the class of backfill to be used above the pipe zone is indicated on the plans or
class C if not shown. The City reserves the right to modify the use, location, and quantities of the
various types of backfill during construction according to the established bid item prices. The Engineer
will designate the type of backfill to be used in each location throughout the construction of the project.
The general classifications of backfill are as listed below:
1. Class B
Class B backfill will be used in unsurfaced areas where compaction and subsequent settlement
are not critical.
2. Class C
Class C backfill will be used in unsurfaced areas or road shoulders where reseeding, sod
replacement, or shoulder replacement will be required. Compaction in these applications is
important, as the subsequent settlement must be held to a minimum.
3. Class D
Class D backfill will be used in unsurfaced and surfaced areas where compaction is critical to
ensure that no settlement occurs. Pavement replacement and shoulder replacement will be made
shortly after backfilling.
D. Water for Trench Compaction
The contractor shall make all arrangements for a source of water. All City water shall be metered and
supervised by the City. The contractor shall be responsible for any deposit fees.
2-1
13
Packet Page 391 of 562
14
E. Concrete
Concrete shall be as specified in Section 6-02.3 Concrete Structures and shall have a
minimum twenty-eight (28) day compressive strength of 3000 psi.
2.09.3 Construction Requirements
A. Surface Preparation for Excavation
Conform to subsection 2.01.1 Clearing
B. Trench Excavation and Shoring
1. Open Trench Limited
The length of trench excavated in advance of the pipe laying operation shall be kept to
a minimum, and in no case shall it exceed three hundred (300) feet, unless specifically
authorized by the Engineer.
2. Trench Width
Contractor shall conform to state and federal laws. Minimum width of unsheeted
trench in which pipe is to be laid shall be eighteen (18) inches greater than the outside
diameter of the pipe, or as approved. Sheeting requirements on each side shall be
independent of trench widths.
The maximum permissible trench width from the bottom of the trench to the crown of
the pipe shall be as follows:
15 inch diameter and smaller 40 inches
18 inch diameter and larger 1-1/2 times the inside diameter of the
pipe plus 18 inches
If the maximum trench width at the crown of the pipe is exceeded by the contractor
without the written authorization of the Engineer, the contractor will be required, at his
own expense, to provide pipe of higher strength classification or to provide a higher
class of bedding, as approved by the Engineer.
Maximum permissible trench widths shall be as shown on the plans. If the maximum
permissible trench width is exceeded, contractor shall be solely responsible for all
costs associated with the additional trench width including, but not limited to, backfill
and surface restoration.
3. Trench Safety Systems
Safety systems shall be provided in conformance to Washington Industrial Safety and
Health Act, Chapter 49.17 RCW.
4. Grade
Excavate the trench to the lines and grades shown or as established by the Engineer
(Section 1-05.4) with proper allowance for pipe thickness and for pipe bedding (base)
material as required. If the trench is excavated below the required grade, correct any
part of the trench excavated below the grade with material of the type specified for
pipe bedding at no additional cost to the City.
2-2
Packet Page 392 of 562
5. Bell (Joint) Holes
At the location of each joint, the contractor shall dig bell (joint) holes of ample
dimensions in the bottom of the trench and at the sides where necessary to permit the
joint to be made properly and to permit easy visual inspection of the joint.
6. Disposal of Excess Excavated Material
Contractor shall make arrangements for the disposal of all excess material and bear all
costs.
7. Shoring, Sheeting, and Bracing of Trenches
All sheeting, shoring, and bracing of trenches shall conform to the safety requirements
of the federal, state, or local public agency having jurisdiction and as required to
protect the pipe. The most stringent of these requirements shall apply.
8. Location of Excavated Materials
During trench excavation, contractor shall place the excavated material only within the
construction easement, right-of-way, or approved working area in such a manner that
it will cause a minimum of inconvenience to the traveling public and provide for
merging traffic where necessary. Contractor shall not obstruct both lanes of traffic on
any private or public traveled roadways or streets. The contractor shall also take the
necessary steps to control erosion of the excavated material.
C. Dewatering
The contractor shall furnish, install, and operate all necessary machinery, appliances, and
equipment to keep excavations free from water during construction, and shall dewater and
dispose of the water so as not to cause injury to public or private property or to cause a
nuisance or a menace to the public.
D. Bedding
1. General
Where no reference is made to the classification of bedding on the plans or in the
special conditions, bedding shall be selected granular bedding.
When, in the opinion of the Engineer, selected bedding material is unsatisfactory, the
contractor shall furnish imported granular bedding material which has been approved
by the Engineer.
2. Pipe Base
Level the bottom of the trench or the top of the foundation material at such elevations
as shown on the plans. Base material shall provide a firm support along, entire pipe
length. If the trench is over excavated, rebuild the over excavated section of the trench
with compacted, imported granular pipe base material at no additional cost to the City.
Pipe base shall be considered to cover the full width of the excavated trench from the
bottom of the trench or top of foundation stabilization material to the top of the base as
specified or as shown on the plans.
2-3
15
Packet Page 393 of 562
3. Pipe Zone
After the pipe is in place and ready for backfilling, place pipe zone material at
approximately the same rate on each side of the pipe to insure proper alignment. The
material shall be rammed and tamped around the pipe by the use of shovels or other
approved hand-held tools so as to provide firm and uniform support over the full
length of all pipe, valves and fittings. Care shall be taken to prevent any damage to
the pipe.
4. Concrete Bedding
Concrete bedding shall be placed in special areas as shown on the plans.
E. Trench Backfill
1. General
When backfill is placed mechanically, push the backfill material onto the slope of the
previously placed and allow the material to slide down into the trench. Do not push
backfill into the trench in such a way as to permit free fall until two (2) feet of cover or
more is provided over the top of the pipe. Under no circumstances, allow sharp or
heavy pieces of material to drop directly onto the pipe or the tamped material around
it. All backfill, regardless of class, shall be placed in successive layers not to exceed
eight (8) inches in loose thickness and each layer shall be compacted to the density
specified herein. At no time shall backfill material be placed in the trench if the
moisture content exceeds two percent (2%) of optimum moisture for the approved
backfill material. If the moisture content is less than two percent (2%) of the
optimum, additional water may be required based on the recommendations of the
City’s soils testing consultant or approval from the City Engineer.
Backfilled trenches shall be reasonably smooth, free from ruts and material neatly
windowed over the trench and excess removed. If the trench is over driveways,
roadways or paved shoulders, the surface shall be temporarily covered with two
(2) inches of cold mix per the standard trench detail. Unpaved surfaces shall have
material neatly mounded not more than six (6) inches above the existing ground for
the entire width of the trench. Estimate and provide the amount of backfill material
required so after normal settlement, the finished surface will meet the existing grade.
Any excess or deficiency after normal settlement shall be corrected accordingly.
Screen all boulders and stones from the backfill material that are two (2) inches in
diameter or larger in the upper twelve (12) inches of the backfill.
When, in the opinion of the Engineer, selected backfill material is unsatisfactory, the
contractor shall furnish imported backfill material as approved by the Engineer.
2. Class B Backfill
Backfill the trench above the pipe zone and compact to ninety percent (90%) of
maximum density as determined by ASTM D1557 (see 1-06.2). Determine the type of
compaction required to prevent subsequent settlement.
3. Class C Backfill
Backfill the trench above the pipe zone and compact to ninety percent (90%) of the
maximum density as determined by ASTM D1557 (see 1-06.2). Determine the type of
compaction required to prevent subsequent settlement.
2-4
16
Packet Page 394 of 562
4. Class D Backfill
Backfill the trench above the pipe zone with approved backfill material to a minimum
of ninety-five percent (95%) as determined by ASTM D1557 (see 1-06.2).
If the native material does not comply with the specifications, the contractor shall use
imported material as approved by the Engineer.
5. Maintenance of Trench Backfill
Any subsequent settlement of the finished surface during the warranty period shall be
considered a result of improper or insufficient compaction and/or excessive moisture
content and shall be promptly repaired by the contractor at no cost to the City.
Maintain the backfilled trench surface until the following applicable operations have
been completed and approved by the Engineer:
a. Service connections, installed and backfilled.
b. Valves, valve boxes, and hydrants installed.
c. Pressure testing.
d. Cleaning, flushing, and sterilization.
e. Cleanup and restoration of all physical features.
f. Utilities restored to their original condition or better.
g. All work required between the two valves or manholes accomplished, with the
exception of final surfacing.
This maintenance shall include, but not limited to, keeping the surface of backfilled
trenches reasonably smooth, free from ruts and potholes, and suitable for normal
traffic flow, where applicable.
No additional payment will be made for the maintenance of the trench backfill before
completion of the work outlined above, except for cold mix asphalt when directed or
requested by the Engineer.
No final pavement replacement shall be undertaken until all items outlined above have
been completed and approved by the Engineer.
Maintenance of backfilled trenches is considered to be incidental to this item of work,
and payment for such maintenance will be considered as included in payment for class
of backfill.
F. Compaction of Backfill
Mechanical compaction is generally recommended for trenches. Contractor will supply,
operate and maintain the proper equipment to compact the classification of material relative to
the field conditions. Water settlement may be used to compact sand, pit run, and gravel type
backfills. If the contractor desires to use water settling, he shall submit in detail to the
Engineer for approval, the procedure to be used. The contractor, as directed by the Engineer
and at no additional cost, shall excavate test holes to review the effectiveness of compaction.
If, in the opinion of the Engineer, the specified compaction and densities are not being
achieved in accordance with 1-06.2, the contractor shall recompact the backfill material. If
required, water saturated material shall be removed, dried, and placed back in lifts or replaced
with imported backfill material. The contractor shall be responsible for all costs for labor,
materials, and delays resulting from improper compaction and recompaction.
2-5
17
Packet Page 395 of 562
G. Embankments
1. Structural Embankment
Construct embankment to support the pipeline in accordance with the details shown on
the plans. Spread excess excavated trench material in maximum one (1) foot lifts for
the full width of the embankment cross section and compact to a minimum of ninety-
five percent (95%) of maximum density for the full depth of the fill as determined by
ASTM D1557 (see 1-06.2). Compact the embankment to its final cross section before
the trench excavation for the pipe is made.
2. Additional Pipe Cover
In locations where insufficient pipe cover exists, place selected native material over
the pipe as shown or directed to provide a minimum cover of three (3) feet. Slope
pipe cover to prevent blockage of surface runoff. No additional payment will be made
for furnishing additional pipe cover.
H. Drainage Ditch Restoration
Undercrossings of ditches shall be backfilled with imported granular backfill material or as
approved to within the top one (1) foot of the ditch bottom. Place approved rock or rip-rap
material in the top foot. Correct any ditch damage as a result of contractor's operations at no
cost to the City. Payment for ditch restoration will be considered as incidental to the project.
I. Cold Mix Asphalt
Cold mix asphalt used for temporary repair of utility trenches or other small areas shall be
placed by hand, then raked to a smooth and uniformly dense layer before compacting.
On large areas, which have been determined by the Engineer to be temporarily repaired with
cold mix asphalt, the mix shall be spread with mechanical spreading equipment, such as a
"Layton Paver," to a smooth and uniformly dense layer before compacting. In areas
inaccessible to the mechanical spreading equipment, cold mix shall be placed by hand.
J. Resurfacing
Resurfacing, including asphalt patching, graveling, and landscaping shall be performed after
the maintenance of trench backfill.
K. Settlement
Any settlement observed in the backfill, embankment, or in structures, including pipelines and
manholes built over compacted material or embankment within the warranty period will be
considered to be caused by improper compaction methods and/or pumping due to excessive
moisture and shall be corrected and repaired at no cost to the City. Pipelines and structures
which have settled shall be removed and reconstructed to the original condition at time of
acceptance at no cost to the City.
2.09.5 Payment
A. Unit Price
Payment shall be made at the unit prices as stated in the contractor's bid proposal for the
backfill classification using imported materials. Native materials used for base, bedding and
backfill shall be considered incidental to the unit price for pipe. Payment shall be
2-6
18
Packet Page 396 of 562
19
considered full compensation, including all labor, equipment, and materials for excavation,
dewatering, backfill, compaction, hauling, maintenance, and testing, complete. Trench safety
systems shall be at the unit bid price in the bid proposal.
Measurement shall be the length of the centerline of the pipe, fittings, and valves in place.
Extra excavation and backfill at ends of pipes, fittings, and valves shall be considered
incidental to the bid items. Trench excavation and payment for lump sum items shall not be
paid for under this item.
2-7
Packet Page 397 of 562
20
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
CITY OF EDMONDS MODIFICATIONS
DIVISIONS 3 THROUGH 8
The following technical specifications shall be modified, clarified, or superseded as described below.
5-04 ASPHALT CONCRETE PAVEMENT
5-04.3(4) Rollers
Pneumatic tire rollers shall not be used unless specified in the Special Provisions.
5-04.3(17) Paving Under Traffic
Open trenches within the traveled way or auxiliary lane shall have a steel-plate cover placed
over them. A wedge of suitable materials, if required, shall be placed for a smooth transition
between the pavement and the steel plate at the discretion of the Engineer. Warning signs
shall be used to alert motorists of the presence of the steel plates.
5-04.5 Payment
Payment for tack coat shall be incidental to the bid items. Cold patch or temporary patch, as
directed by the Engineer, shall be paid for as a two (2) inch thickness per unit measure as
defined in the proposal.
6-02 CONCRETE STRUCTURES
6-02.3(1) Classification of Structural Concrete
Class 3000 concrete, minimum 5 1/2 sack (94 pound sacks) mix, shall be used for all concrete
work, including sidewalks, curb and gutter, curbs, retaining walls, and small structures.
6-02.3(6)A Weather and Temperature Limitations Protection of Concrete
A clear, not white, curing compound shall be brushed or sprayed on all exposed concrete
immediately after the finishing work. Other protective measures for weather constraints are
still required, including protection from excessive hot and cold temperatures (including wind
chill).
6-02.3(12-13) Construction, Contraction, and Expansion Joints
The following requirements apply to all curb, curb and gutter, and sidewalk work. Full depth
expansion joints, consisting of 1/2 inch thick premolded material (AASHO M213), shall be
placed perpendicularly when abutting to existing improvements at each side of driveway cuts
and at a maximum spacing of thirty (30) feet. Construction joints, consisting of a tooled two
(2) inch cut or slice into the concrete pour, shall be placed at ten (10) foot intervals. Curb and
gutter installations will require an additional two (2) inch cut or the installation of a 1 inch x 4
inch wedge into the heel of the pour. Tooled contraction joints shall be provided at five (5)
foot intervals or as required to match existing improvements. All work shall be perpendicular
and straight.
6-02.3(14) Finish Concrete Surfaces
The finished improvements shall be true to grade, straight with smooth transitions or curves.
Grade checked with a ten (10) foot straight edge placed anywhere on the slab in any direction
and shall not deviate more than one-eighth (1/8) inch, and alignment shall not vary more than
one-fourth (1/4) inch.
M-1
Packet Page 398 of 562
21
The finish shall be a light broom finish as approved by the Engineer in 1-05.6 Inspections.
The City will not accept finishes that are non-uniform, overworked, discolored, spalling,
damaged by weather, or where a cement layer has formed.
7-04 STORM SEWERS
7-04.2 Materials
See approved material list MM-1 through MM-4.
7-04.3(1) Cleaning and Testing
All pipes shall be tested for exfiltration.
7-04.3(3) Add: Backfilling Storm Sewer Trenches
Storm sewer pipes shall be bedded and backfilled as specified in Section 2.09.
7-04.5 Payment
Same as water mains for pipelines. (See Section 7-11.5.)
7-05 MANHOLES, GRATE INLETS, DROP INLETS AND CATCH BASINS
7-05.3(5) Add: Connection to Existing Line, Catch Basin, Curb Inlet or Manhole (New Section)
Where shown on the plans, new sewer and/or stormwater pipes shall be connected to existing
lines, catch basins, curb inlets and/or manholes. The Contractor shall be required to core drill
into the structure, shape the new pipe to fit, and regrout the opening in a workmanlike
manner. Where directed by the Engineer or where shown on the plans, additional structure
channeling will be required.
7-05.4 Measurement
Replace paragraph four with:
Structure excavation Class B and structure excavation Class B, including haul, shall be
included as part of the applicable unit or lump sum bid item.
7-05.5 Payment
Payment shall include adjustments of frames and grates to final grade. See Special
Provisions.
7-08 GENERAL PIPE INSTALLATION REQUIREMENTS
7-08.3(1)C Bedding the Pipe
Pipe bedding for PVC pipe shall be placed to a depth of 6" below the bottom of the pipe and
extending up 6" above the crown on all pipes.
The hand-placed bedding around the pipe and to a point 6 inches above the crown shall be
rammed and tamped by use of shovels or other approved hand held tools so as to provide firm
and uniform support over the full length of all pipes. All other requirements for pipe bedding
shall be per Section 9.03.
Pipe bedding shall be considered incidental to the unit price for all pipe and no further
compensation shall be made.
7-09 WATER MAINS
7-09.2 Materials
See approved material list MM-1 through MM-4.
M-2
Packet Page 399 of 562
22
7-09.3(11) Compaction of Backfill
See 1-06.2(1) Samples and Tests.
7-09.3(23) Hydrostatic Pressure Test
Tests shall be between valves and made after all corporation stops are installed. Test
pressures shall be 200 psig with corps installed, 300 psig without, for eight (8) inch pipelines
and smaller, 200 psig for ten (10) inch pipelines and larger. Tests shall be for fifteen (15)
minutes at 300 psig, two hours at 200 psig. A pressure drop of fifteen (15) psig or failure to
meet loss requirement shall constitute rejection.
7-09.5 Payment
Payment also shall include thrust blocks, couplings, and restrained joints. Special connections
or connection to existing pipelines shall be considered incidental unless a separate bid item is
in the proposal. Separate bid items shall include all materials, equipment, and labor to make
the connections. See Special Provisions.
7-12 VALVES FOR WATER MAINS
See approved material list MM-1 through MM-4
7-14 HYDRANTS
See approved Material List MM-1 through MM-4.
7-15 SERVICE CONNECTIONS
See approved Material List MM-1 through MM-4.
7-17 SANITARY SEWERS
7-17.2 Materials
See approved materials list MM-1 through MM-4.
7-17.3(1) Protection of Existing Sewerage Facilities
Add: When extending an existing sewer, the downstream system shall be protected from
construction debris by placing a screen or trap in the first existing manhole downstream of the
connection. It shall be the Contractor's responsibility to maintain this screen or trap until the
new system is placed in service and then to remove it. Any construction debris which enters
the existing downstream system shall be removed by the Contractor at his expense, and to the
satisfaction of the Engineer. When the first manhole is set, the outlet shall be plugged until
acceptance by the Engineer.
7-17.3(2)A General
See Sections 1-05.4 and 1-05.5
7-17.3(2)I Add: Sewer Line Connections
Add: Unless otherwise approved by the Engineer, all connections of lateral sewers to new
ductile iron pipe or existing mains shall be made through a cast iron saddle secured to the
sewer main with stainless steel bands. The main shall be core drilled.
Concrete manholes shall be core drilled, and shall have either an "O" ring rubber gasket (i.e.
Kore-N-Seal) meeting ASTM C-478, be manufacturer installed, or a sand collar.
M-3
Packet Page 400 of 562
7-17.4 Measurement
Add:
All costs associated with structure excavation Class B and structure excavation Class B,
including haul, shall be included in other contract pay items.
Add:
Measurement of imported granular trench backfill material for Class D material shall be by
the lineal foot of pipe trench as described in Section 2-09.
7-17.5 Payment
Add the following:
See the Special Provisions for a description of pay items utilized for the project.
M-4
23Packet Page 401 of 562
STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS
CITY OF EDMONDS MODIFICATIONS
DIVISIONS 9 - MATERIALS
9.03 AGGREGATES
9.03.16 Bedding Materials
A. Rigid Pipe
Bedding material for rigid pipe shall be free from wood waste, organic material and other
extraneous or objectionable materials. Bedding material shall conform to the following
gradations when tested in accordance with ASTM D422. Maximum particle size for ductile
iron pipe shall be 1-1/2 inches.
1. Base Material
Select: Selected excavated material for pipe base shall not contain particles larger
than 5/8 inches.
Import: Imported base material shall be clean granular sand, or sand and gravel mix
conforming to the following gradation:
Passing 3/4 inch square opening 100%
Passing 3/8 inch square opening 95% - 100%
Passing U.S. #8 sieve 0% - 10%
Passing U.S. #200 sieve 0% - 3%
Sand equivalent 35 min.
2. Pipe Zone
Pipe zone material shall be crushed, partially crushed or naturally occurring granular
material conforming to the following gradation:
Passing 3/4 inch square opening 100%
Passing 3/8 inch square opening 95% - 100%
Passing U.S. #8 sieve 0% - 10%
Passing U.S. #200 sieve 0% - 3%
Sand equivalent 35 min.
B. Thermoplastic Pipe
Bedding material for thermoplastic pipe shall be free from wood waste, organic material and
other extraneous or objectionable materials. Bedding material shall conform to the following
gradations when tested in accordance with ASTM D422.
Pipe zone material shall be crushed, partially crushed or naturally occurring granular material
conforming to the following gradation:
Passing 3/4 inch square opening 100%
Passing 3/8 inch square opening 95% - 100%
Passing U.S. #8 sieve 0% - 10%
Passing U.S. #200 sieve 0% - 3%
Sand equivalent 35 min.
9-1
24Packet Page 402 of 562
9.03.19 Bank Run Gravel for Trench Backfill
All backfill material shall be free from wood waste, organic material and other extraneous
objectionable materials. Material shall be uniformly graded from course to fine and conform
to the following gradation when tested in accordance with ASTM D422:
1. Select
Maximum particle size for this material shall be 4½ inches.
2. Import
Passing 2 ½ inches square opening 100%
Passing 1 inch square opening 40% - 80%
Passing ¼ inch sieve 25% - 60%
Passing #40 sieve 8% - 30%
Passing #200 sieve 0% - 5%
Sand equivalent 50 min.
9-2
25Packet Page 403 of 562
CITY OF EDMONDS
MATERIAL MODIFICATIONS
DIVISIONS 7, 8 AND 9
The following material specifications shall clarify, supplement and supersede where applicable the standard
specifications.
MATERIALS
A. City of Edmonds approved materials:
* approved only when shown in the plan, proposal, or special provisions.
1. WATER SYSTEMS (test pressure 200 psi with corps installed, 300 psi without for 8" and smaller; 200
psi for 10" and larger)
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER
Pipe Class 52 ductile iron (AWWA C151) (or class as noted
on plans)
Fittings Class 250 cement mortar lined cast iron or ductile iron
(AWWA C 153)
Nuts, bolts Ductile iron or alloy steel A 303, grade B
Mechanical couplings Cast iron type for cast iron
or ductile iron pipe, steel type for steel pipe
Rockwell
Dresser
Romac
Restrained joints Flanged
locking type pipe
field lock gaskets
uni-flange
kwik-flange
retainer gland
couplings with anchor pins
US pipe, Clow
US pipe
US pipe
Uni-Flange
Standard Int
Clow F 1058
Romac, Rockwell
Dresser
Joint lubricant U. S. Pharmacopoeia No. P39
*Gate valves (10” and smaller,
AWWA C500)
Clow
Manhole No. 67
Kennedy
Mueller
Clow Corporation
Dresser
Kennedy Valve
Mueller Co.
Gate valves, resilient wedge (10” &
smaller, AWWA C 509)
Clow
Metroseal 250
Series 500
Mueller
Clow Corporation
U. S. Pipe
AFC American Flow Control
Mueller Co.
Butterfly valves (10” & greater,
AWWA C 504)
Groundhog
Adap-Torq
Lineseal III
Pratt
Kennedy
Mueller Co.
Tapping valve CI with MJ joints and tapping valve Mueller, Clow
Valve boxes Seattle Style 940
Fire hydrants (all bronze fitted, 1-
1/4” operating nut, AWWA C 502,
international yellow paint), 4" Storz
Adapter (with two 2-1/2” hose
nozzles and one 4-1/2” NST pumper
nozzle)
Centurion
Guardian, K-81-A
Reliant 929
Medallion
B-62-B
Pacer (WB-67-250)
Mueller Co.
Kennedy Valve
Dresser
Clow
American Darling
Waterous
Combination air relief/vaccum relief
valve (ARV)
Series 140c
Model 202c
Model Ul-20
APCO
Val-Matic
Crispin
MM-1
26Packet Page 404 of 562
Water Services and Connections
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER
Copper pipe (std service) Soft, type K, ASTM B 88
Polyethylene pipe (1-1/2” & larger
services)
Driscopipe 5100, high molecular, high density tubing
IPOD
Phillips
Service clamps (1-1/2” & larger, IP
thread)
Model 313
Model 202S
Model FS202
Model H-16113
Rockwell
Romac
Ford
Mueller Co.
Ball Corp. stops direct tap with
copper service (cc threads)
F600
H-15000, H-15008
4701-Q
Ford
Mueller Co.
A.Y. McDonald
*Corp. stops direct tap with
polyethylene service (cc threads)
H-15005
47013-T
Mueller Co.
A.Y. McDonald
Corp. stops with saddle clamps
(1½” & larger)
FB 500
H-9968
4701-Q
Ford
Mueller Co.
A.Y. McDonald
Curb stops B11 series
Orisel II, H-10283
6101
Ford
Mueller Co.
A.Y. McDonald
Fittings - copper to copper H-15400, H-15403
C22 series
4758-Q
Mueller
Ford
A.Y. McDonald
Polyethylene connections (1½ ” &
larger)
Compression with stainless steel insert
Pack joint with stainless steel insert
4758-3T
Mueller Co.
Ford
A.Y. McDonald
Meter boxes:
• ¾” – 1”
• 1½” – 2”
MS 11x18x12 with MS 11x18 ductile lid & reader
MS 17x30x12 with MS 17x30 ductile lid w/reader
Mid-States
Tracer wire for 1” & greater
polyethylene services
14 gauge, PVC coated copper wire
2. SEWER SYSTEM (sewer pipe)
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER
Pipe Concrete class 2 (non-reinforced)
ASTM C14 or AASHTO M 86
*Concrete (reinforced) ASTM C76 or AASHTO M
170
PVC, SDR 35, ASTM D3034
Fittings and sewer service Same material as pipe
PVC sand collars
Manholes Precast ASTM C478, 48” min. at
bottom, top concentric to 24”
opening
Flat slab, 8” min. thickness, 24”
opening, steps 3/4” galvanized deformed bar
Manhole steps Polypropylene, ASTM D-4101 material over ASTM A-
615, grade 60 steel reinforcing bar, step to comply with
ASTM C-478
Lane, MA Industries
Frames and covers ASTM A48, class 40, cast iron,
bituminous coated, “sewer” embossed in top
East Jordan Ironworks
Model: 00370084
Transition couplings Longitudinally bolted coupling with gasketed joints Romac, Dresser, Rockwell
MM-2
27Packet Page 405 of 562
3. STORM DRAIN SYSTEM
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER
Pipe *Concrete, reinforced, ASTM C76 or AASHTO M 170
Concrete (non-reinforced) ASTM C14 or AASHTO
M86, class 2
*PVC, SDR 35, ASTM D3034
Aluminum CMP, AASHTO M196, 16 ga. or as shown
on plans, gasketed and coupling banded
*Aluminum smooth wall pipe, l6 ga. or as shown on
plans, recorrugated ends with annular bands and
gaskets
Cascade Culvert, Kaiser Aluminum
*PVC, SDR 35, ASTM D3034
Ductile iron, class 50
Perma-loc series 46 by J.M. Manufacturing Co.
HDPE; smooth interior pipe, watertight
AASHTO M252, M294 Type S
ASTM D 2321
ASTM D 1248 Type III Category 4
Grade P33 Class C
ASTM D 3350
(2’ Minimum cover under pavement areas)
ADS
Hancor
Fitting Same as pipe material
PVC sand collars
Manholes Precast ASTM C478, 48” min. at
bottom, top concentric to 24”
opening
Flat slab, 8” min. thickness, 24”
opening, steps 3/4” galvanized deformed bar
Manhole steps Polypropylene, ASTM D-4101 material over ASTM A-
615, grade 60 steel reinforcing bar, step to comply with
ASTM C-478
Lane, MA Industries
Frames and covers ASTM A48, class 40, cast iron,
bituminous coated, “drain” embossed in top
East Jordan Ironworks
Model: 00370082
Transition couplings Longitudinally bolted coupling with gasketed joints Romac, Dresser, Rockwell
SUBSTITUTIONS
B.
MATERIAL DESCRIPTION MANUFACTURER
Provide submittals for substitute materials to the
Engineer for approval in accordance with the
Standard Specifications
MM-3
Packet Page 406 of 562
Packet Page 407 of 562
Packet Page 408 of 562
Packet Page 409 of 562
CITY OF EDMONDS
918 DATE9-0 1 09
REVISIONS
DWG NO.SCALE NTS
STANDARD DETAIL
PIPE BEDDING
FOUNDATION LEVEL
N O T E S :
1. PROVIDE UNIFORM SUPPORT UNDER BARREL
2. HAND TAMP UNDER HAUNCHES
3. COMPACT BEDDING MATERIAL TO 95% MAX. DENSITY
VARIES
LIMIT OF PIPE ZONE
PIPE BASE6"
7/24/01
6"MI
N
.
E4.1
DATEAPPROVED BY
BEDDING MATERIAL REQUIRED PERCITY OF EDMONDS MODIFICATIONS
TO DIVISION 9 OF WSDOT STANDARD
SPECIFICATION FOR ROAD, BRIDGE& MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION AND
TYPE OF PIPE.
4/2/07D. GEBERT
Packet Page 410 of 562
STANDARD DETAIL
CITY OF EDMONDS
81
-90 1 9 9 0 DATE SCALE NTS DWG NO.
PI
P
E
Z
O
N
E
WS
D
O
T
B
A
N
K
R
U
N
MAX. TRENCH PATCH
TRENCH EDGES MUST BE SAW CUT
TRENCH PATCH
CO
M
P
A
C
T
E
D
T
O
9
5
%
MA
X
I
M
U
M
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
4" MIN. DEPTH1-1/4" CSBC
BACKFILL MATERIAL(SEE NOTE BELOW)
TYPICAL TRENCH SECTION
7/24/01
AND TACKED PRIOR TO FINAL
SEE E2.3
N O T E:
REFER TO CITY OF EDMONDS MODIFICATIONS TO
DIVISION 9 OF WSDOT SPECIFICATIONS FOR
PAY WIDTH(SEE TABLE BELOW)
TABLE 1: MAX. TRENCH PATCH PAY WIDTH
TRENCH DEPTH
1'-4'40"4'-10'60"
10'-20'72"
PAY WIDTH
E4.2
APPROVED BY DATE
REVISIONS
(SEE NOTE BELOW)BEDDING MATERIAL
ROAD, BRIDGE & MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION
D. GEBERT 10/6/03
D. GEBERT 07/28/05
2" of 5/8"z CSTC
D. GEBERT 04/02/07
9-
0
3
.
1
9
Packet Page 411 of 562
STANDARD DETAIL
CITY OF EDMONDS
81
-90 1 9 9 0 DATE SCALE NTS DWG NO.
TYPICAL TRENCH SECTION _ FOUNDATION STABILIZATION
7/24/01
MA
X
I
M
U
M
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
CO
M
P
A
C
T
E
D
T
O
9
5
%
SEE PIPE BEDDING
DETAIL
PIPE ZONE
BACKFILL MATERIAL (SEE NOTE BELOW)
1-1/4" WASHED GRAVEL
FO
U
N
D
A
T
I
O
N
ST
A
B
I
L
I
Z
A
T
I
O
N
WRAP FOUNDATION ZONE
ENTIRELY WITH FILTER FABRIC
3'
T
Y
P
I
C
A
L
PAY WIDTH
TABLE 1: MAX. TRENCH PATCH PAY WIDTH
1'-4'
10'-20'
4'-10'
TRENCH DEPTH
40"
72"
60"
REFER TO CITY OF EDMONDS MODIFICATION TO
DIVISION 9 WSDOT STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR
N O T E:
E4.3
APPROVED BY DATE
REVISIONS
ROAD, BRIDGE & MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION.
10/6/03D. GEBERT
D. GEBERT 07/28/05
MAX. TRENCH PATCH
TRENCH EDGES MUST BE SAW CUT
TRENCH PATCH
4" MIN. DEPTH1-1/4" CSBC
AND TACKED PRIOR TO FINAL
SEE E2.3 PAY WIDTH(SEE TABLE BELOW)
2" of 5/8" CSTC
WS
D
O
T
B
A
N
K
R
U
N
9-
0
3
.
1
9
Packet Page 412 of 562
TRENCH EDGES MUST BE SAW CUT
CITY OF EDMONDS
0198 91-09
AND TACKED PRIOR TO FINAL
TRENCH PATCH
SCALEDATE DWG NO.NTS
TYPICAL TRENCH SECTION- CONTROL DENSITY FILL
STANDARD DETAIL
SEE E2.3
CO
N
T
R
O
L
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
F
I
L
L
E4.4
PI
P
E
B
E
D
D
I
N
G
TRENCH WIDTH
APPROVED BY DATE
REVISIONS
RE
F
E
R
T
O
DE
T
A
I
L
LE
A
N
-
3
/
4
S
A
C
K
07/28/05D. GEBERT
PE
R
W
S
D
O
T
S
T
D
S
04/02/07D. GEBERT
7/24/01
Packet Page 413 of 562
CITY OF EDMONDS
TYPICAL WATER LINE TRENCH SECTION
SCALE
STANDARD DETAIL
DATE
7/24/01
DWG NO.NTSEst.
18 9 0
TRENCH EDGES MUST BE SAW CUT
AND TACKED PRIOR TO FINAL TRENCH
PATCH
3'
M
I
N
.
C
O
V
E
R
U
N
L
E
S
S
CO
M
P
A
C
T
E
D
T
O
9
5
%
M
A
X
I
M
U
M
D
E
N
S
I
T
Y
SEE SPECIFICATIONS FOR
DOMESTIC SERVICE AND
A.R.V. CONNECTION
DETAILS
CLASS 52 DUCTILE IRON PIPE
UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE
PIPE BASE SHALL BE REQUIRED ONLY
AS DIRECTED BY THE ENGINEER. REFER
45 °
1/4 PIPE O.D. MIN.
4" MIN.
4" MIN.
1-1/4" CSBC
DI
R
E
C
T
E
D
O
T
H
E
R
W
I
S
E
SEE E2.3
E4.5
APPROVED BY DATE
REVISIONS
TO SEC 7.10 OF WSDOT STANDARD
SPECIFICATIONS FOR ROAD, BRIDGE& MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION.
10/6/03D. GEBERT
D. GEBERT 07/28/05
2" of 5/8" CSTC
WSDOT BANK RUN 9-03.19
OR CDF PER ENGR REQTS
D. GEBERT 04/02/07
Packet Page 414 of 562
1/4" RAKE PER FOOT FROM
GROUND LEVEL
1'
-
1
0
"
2"
WEDGE VALVE
CAST IRON ADJUSTABLE
VALVE BOX
RESTRAINED JOINTS
18"x18"x4"CONC. BLK.
UNDISTURBED EARTH
1/2 CY WASHED 1-1/2" ROCK
HYDRANT CONNECTION PIPE TO
BE DUCTILE IRON CLASS 52. ANY
FLANGED CONNECTION
TEE WITH FLANGED
CONNECTION FOR
HYDRANT VALVE
TRAFFIC SAFETY FEATURE.-
BREAK OFF FLANGE, NUTS
AND BOLTS.ACP
BASE COURSE
N O T E S :
HYDRANTS AND ALL MATERIALS TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CITY OF EDMONDS
BARREL. IN ADDITION, THE INSTALLATION OF THE HYDRANT ON PRIVATE
PROPERTY SHALL EQUAL OR EXCEED STANDARDS SET FORTH FOR THE INSTALLATION
OF PUBLIC FIRE HYDRANTS IN THE CITY OF EDMONDS.
3. PROVIDE FOR VEHICULAR TRAFFIC PROTECTION.
4. ALL HYDRANTS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH (2) 2-1/2" HOSE NOZZLES AND
(1) 4-1/2" NST PUMPER NOZZLE WITH 4" STORZ QUICK COUPLING ADAPTER.
5. STEAMER PORT SHALL FACE THE STREET OR ROADWAY FOR FIRE ENGINE ACCESS.
6. THREE FOOT MINIMUM CLEARANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED AROUND HYDRANT
WHEN PLACING LANDSCAPING OR ROCKERIES (ETC).
1.
RESTRAINED
INTERMEDIATE JOINTS TO BE
2. HYDRANTS SET IN CONCRETE REQUIRES AN EXPANSION STRIP AROUND HYDRANT
CITY OF EDMONDS
FIRE HYDRANT ASSEMBLY
918 DATE9-0 1 09
REVISIONS
DWG NO.SCALE NTS7/24/01
STANDARD DETAIL
THRUST BLOCK
APPROVED MATERIAL LISTINGS.
4" STORZ ADAPTER
7. FIRE HYDRANTS SHALL BE PAINTED SAFETY YELLOW
WITH FABRIC CLOTH ABOVE
E7.1
AB
O
V
E
F
I
N
I
S
H
E
D
GR
A
D
E
DATEAPPROVED BY
3' x 3' x 3.5" THICK
CONCRETE PAD AROUND HYDRANT
SIDEWALK
D. GEBERT 6/16/03
8. CONSTRUCT 3' X 3' X 3.5" THICK CONCRETE PAD AROUND HYDRANT PIPE.
MIN. 6" BEHIND BACK OF
SIDEWALK
10 MIL PLASTIC
BETWEEN BLOCK &
HYDRANT
THRUST
BLOCK
10 MIL PLASTIC
BETWEEN
BLOCK & TEE
CONCRETE BRICK
ALIGN VALUE BOX EARS
PARALLEL WITH THE WATER
LINE IT SERVES
RD
CL
DOUBLE SIDED BLUE RAISED
PAVEMENT MARKERS
4/2/07D. GEBERT
Packet Page 415 of 562
DWG NO.
STANDARD DETAIL
CITY OF EDMONDS
DI FL TEE WITH 2" TAPPED FLANGE
DI SPOOL WITH COLLAR(PE X FL) LENGTH TO FIT WITH SHACKLE BOLTS
2" THREADED PRV WITH; VALVE STEM INDICATOR, TEST COCKS, AND
ON THE SIZE OF PIPE INSIDE THE VAULT.
1. VALVES, REDUCER, FLANGED TEE WITHTHREADED REDUCER PLATE SHALL DEPEND
E7.2
6
7
EPOXY LINING.
3 PIECE UNION
5
4
3 1'
-
4
"
2" BRASS 90° BEND
2" THREADED BRASS PIPE
2" BRASS BALL VALVE
FLOOR DRAIN
7/24/01
PRV (PLAN VIEW)
NTS
N O T E:
SCALE
LADDER TO EXTEND TO ACCESS LID
LADDER PER APWA STD PLAN #41
1
3
2
DATE
DATE
3'
-
0
"
M
I
N
.
6'
-
0
"
REVISIONS
APPROVED BY
REDUCERIF REQ'D
WA
T
E
R
S
E
A
L
GR
O
U
T
W
I
T
H
GAUGE
NO
N
S
H
R
I
N
K
MI
N
.
SIGHT GLASS
1
6"(TYP)
2
2
9
9"
4
ACCESS LID- LW HATCH TYPE "D"(H-10 PEDESTRIAN; HD-30 TRAFFIC LOAD)
TYP
18"
0991-0189
1/2 LENGTH
5
10'-0" MIN.
P.R.V. STATION PAY LIMITS
8 12
10 11 67
6
7
FLANGE COUPLING ADAPTER
FL X FL PRV WITH: VALVE STEM INDICATOR, TEST COCKS,
FL X PE SPOOL. LENGTH TO FIT
LINING.
EPOXY LINING.
10
11
9
FL X FL STRAINER EQUAL TO MUESSCO #7518
FL X FL RSGV WITH HAND WHEEL 12
2. INSIDE VAULT HEIGHT: 7' MIN.
3. ACCESS LID BY L.W. HATCH; TYPE "D"(H-10 PEDESTRIAN LOAD; HD-30 TRAFFIC LOAD)VAULT COVER GUTTER DRAIN TO BE CONNECTED TO
SUMP OR STORM LINE.
OPENING TO BE LOCATED WITHIN 18"
OR INSIDE VAULT WALL FOR EASIER
LADDER ACCESS.
REVISED: 4/2/07- ADDED TEXT FOR CLARITY, MODIFIED HIDDEN LINE
4/2/07D. GEBERT
Packet Page 416 of 562
E
7
.
2
.
1
7
/
2
4
/
0
1
N
T
S
9
8
9
0
1
0
9
-
P
R
V
(
P
R
O
F
I
L
E
V
I
E
W
)
FLANGED TEE WITH
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
C
I
T
Y
O
F
E
D
M
O
N
D
S
10" FLR.
GRINNEL PIPE SADDLESTHREADED REDUCER PLATES
D
W
G
N
O
.
TO 95% MAX. DENSITY5/8" MINUS C.S.T.C. COMPACTED
S
C
A
L
E
WASHED DRAIN
2'
GRAVEL
2" PVC
DRAIN
#258 OR EQUAL
1'
PRESSURE GAUGE
DRAIN TO SUMP
1" IPST X FIPT BALL VALVE
PRESSURE GAGE
7'
M
I
N
.
D
E
P
T
H
D
A
T
E
1'
-
0
"
OR CATCH BASIN
TEE
RSGV
1/2" TEE AND
PLAN # 41
SIGHT GLASS
LADDER- A.P.W.A. STD
BALL VALVE
WITH DRAIN SLOTS (MODEL - L.W. HATCH-TYPE D) DOUBLE LEAF TRAFFIC BEARING LID
FINISHED GRADE
1
TO BE DETERMINED BASED ON SIZE OF VAULT
1" COMBINATION A.R.V.
ALL BRASS PIPE
1" x 1/2" TEE1" IPST X FIPT
W/ HAND WHEEL
BALL VALVE
8
14 2" IPT X FIPT BALL VALVE
D
A
T
E
R
E
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
B
Y
13
14
9
10
11
6
2" TAPPED FLANGE13
2'
4
/
2
/
0
7
D
.
G
E
B
E
R
T
R
E
V
I
S
E
D
:
4
/
0
2
/
0
7
-
C
L
E
A
N
E
D
U
P
D
R
A
W
I
N
G
,
A
D
D
E
D
T
E
X
T
,
M
O
D
I
F
I
E
D
C
O
N
C
R
E
T
E
E
N
D
S
18"
Packet Page 417 of 562
4" x 4" CONC. MARKER POST
PAINTED YELLOW WITH BLACK
STENCILED DISTANCE AND DIRECTION
TO VALVE
2" OPEN PATTERN RETURN
BEND
PAINT PIPE ABOVE GROUND
YELLOW
2" BEEHIVE STRAINER
17" x 28" CONC. METER BOX
WITH 3/8" STEEL DIAMOND
PLATE COVER, FOG-TITE
METER SEAL CO. NO. 2
2" x 90° ELL
(GALV)
2" AIR/VACCUM RELEASE
VALVE, "APCO" OR "GRISPIN"
MODELS ONLY
(FIELD LOCATE) NEXT
TO EXIST PROPERTY
LINE
1 2 "
2" BRASS ELL
BRASS PIPE UP TO
INLET OF AIR VAC
2 '-0 "
CAST IRON
VALVE BOX
DUCTILE IRON PIPE
DOUBLE STRAP
SERVICE CLAMP
2" BRASS
STREET ELL
2" BRASS NIPPLE
W
A
T
E
R
FINAL GRADE
FOUNDATION ROCK
2" GALV. IRON PIPE
ARV ASSEMBLY (TYPE 1)
REVISIONS
CITY OF EDMONDS
9 0109819-7/24/01 NTS
STANDARD DETAIL
DATE SCALE DWG NO.E7.3
DATEAPPROVED BY
4"x4"x8" CONCRETE
BRICK SUPPORTS TO
BEARING SOIL
2" GATE
VALVE
(R/W)
AWWA
WITH
OPERATING
VALVE
5/26/06D. GEBERT
Packet Page 418 of 562
WITH 3/8" STEEL DIAMOND
PLATE COVER, FOG-TITE
METER SEAL CO. NO. 2
2" AIR/VACCUM RELEASE
VALVE, "APCO" OR "GRISPIN"
MODELS ONLY
2" BRASS ELL
2" BRASS NIPPLE
ARV ASSEMBLY (TYPE 2)
24" CONC. PIPE OR METER BOX
(1)-2" CURB STOP
2" COPPER
6 "
M I N .
24
" M
I N .
24
"
4" PVC - DRAIN TO CB
WASHED DRAIN ROCK
(1) H14258 ANGLE METER WITH COMPRESSION
INLET OR STD CURB STOP
N O T E:
WILL INTERFERE WITH THE AIR DISCHARGE PIPE, A STAND
PIPE MUST BE INSTALLED ABOVE GROUND WITH A STRAINER
OR A PIPE INSTALLED FROM THE METER BOX TO A CATCH
BASIN.
IF THE ARV ASEMBLY IS LOCATED WHERE GROUND WATER
CITY OF EDMONDS
9 0109819-7/24/01 NTS
STANDARD DETAIL
DATE SCALE DWG NO.E7.4
APPROVED BY
REVISIONS
DATE
10/6/03D. GEBERT
Packet Page 419 of 562
4 "
CITY OF EDMONDS
GATE VALVE FIPT
2" X 3" THREADED
1 980 91-9 0
APPROVED BY
2" RESILIENT SEAT
REVISIONS
DATE
FINAL GRADE
VALVE BOX
CAST IRON
STANDARD DETAIL
BLOW-OFF ASSEMBLY
07/24/01
DATE
NTS
SCALE
2" THREADED BRASS PIPE
E 7.5DWG NO.
6 "
M I N
2" BRASS THREADED PIPE
2" BRASS 45 BEND
2" BRASS 90° BEND
3/16" DRAIN HOLE
(CUT TO LENGTH)
ASSEMBLY
(CUT TO LENGTH)
2" PVC THREADED PLUG
MID STATES PLASTIC BOX MSBCF-1730-12
MID STATES DI LID MSCBC-1730
940 STYLE VALVE BOX ASSY. OR EQUAL
2 CU-FT OF 1-1/2"
WASHED ROCK
BRASS PIPE
DUCTILE IRON PIPE
DOUBLE STRAP
SERVICE CLAMP
2" BRASS
STREET ELL
2" BRASS 90 BEND
2" BRASS CC X MIPT BALL CORP
NOTE: PLACE BLOW-OFF ASSY. WITHIN 3' OF END OF MAIN.
4" x 4" x 8" CONC. BRICK
(TO BEARING SOIL)
10/13/03D. GEBERT
Packet Page 420 of 562
E7.6
H
MID-STATES PLASTIC METER BOX ( MS 11 X 18 X 12) WITH
DOUBLE STRAP SADDLE REQUIRED WHEN TAPPING THIN STEEL
TYPE "K" SOFT COPPER TUBING OR HIGH MOLECULAR POLY PIPE (160 PSI).
STANDARD DETAIL
3/4" and 1" WATER SERVICE INSTALLATION
CITY OF EDMONDS
STEEL
THIN
CEMENT LINED D.I.
WATERMAIN WITH
TYTON TYPE JOINT
0819 NTS9019-7/24/01
NOTE: PVC PIPE SHALL NOT BE USED FOR WATER SERVICES
(FORD OR MUELLER)
BRONZE CURB STOP WITH EIP THREAD.
TRACER WIRE SHALL BE WRAPPED AND TAPED TO POLY PIPE.
DATE
F
B
A
G
F
E
D
C
SCALE DWG NO.
ALL 3/4" OR 1" SERVICE TO BE TYPE "K" SOFT COPPER TUBING.
BRONZE CORP. STOP WITH CC THREAD INLET AND COPPER (CTS) GRIP OUTLET.
3'
-
0
"
M
I
N
.
C
O
V
E
R
SHALL BE INSTALLED IF EXISTING YOKE HAS NO CURB STOP.
FOR VACANT LOT (FUTURE USE) CURB STOP SHALL BE PLACED
B
B
A
A
D
18
"
MATERIAL LIST
A
C
E
G
METER INSTALLED BY CITY
FINISHED
6"
T
O
8
"
PROPERTY
R.O.W.
D
APPROVED BY
REVISIONS
DATE
I
MIPT X CTS GRIPI
PAINTED 2 X 4" WITH "WATER" STENCILED ON ITH
AT PROPERTY LINE AND LOCATION MARKED WITH PAINTED 2" X 4" WITH "WATER" STENCILED ON IT.
DEPTH SHALL BE 18".
CHECK VALVEBALL VALVE
I
I
3/4" METER SETTER EQUAL TO A.Y.M. McDONALD AY20212WCDD3
INLET AND OUTLET: HORIZONTAL WITH DUAL PURPOSE CONNECTIONS
WITH ANGLE BALL VALVE WITH LOCK WINGS, CHECK VALVE, 12" TALL
6/16/03D. GEBERT
J K
BRASS COMPRESSION FITTING
K
J
1" WATER SERVICE TO HOUSE
L
14GA. WIRE TRACER (TAPED L TO POLY PIPE EVERY 10')
M
D. GEBERT 6/19/03
LINE
GRADE
BUILDING CONSTRUCTION ONLY. DELETE CHECK VALVE FOR
INSTALL CHECK VALVE ON METER INSTALLATIONS FOR NEW
OF EXISTING WATER MAINS.
M
METERS INSTALLED WITH REPLACEMENT
MS 11x18 DUCTILE LID WITH 9"x612" READER
REVISED: 6/16/03
REVISED: 04/02/07- EDITED TEXT FOR CLARITY
4/2/07D. GEBERT
Packet Page 421 of 562
CITY OF EDMONDS
REVISIONS
918 901 09-E7.6.1NTS7/24/01
1-1/2"and 2" WATER SERVICE INSTALLATION
STANDARD DETAIL
DATE SCALE DWG NO.
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
GROUND/ROADWAY
24
"
M
I
N
.
1) 2" (IP THREAD) DOUBLE STRAP SADDLE EQUAL TO ROMAC
2) 2: BRASS CORP. CC X MIPT.
3) 2- 2" BRASS STREET ELLS FOR SWING JOINT
8) BACK SIDE OF METER BOX SHALL BE SET AT THE PROPERTY LINE.
NOTE: (METER BOXES SHALL NOT BE PLACED IN DRIVEWAY AREAS).
4) IPS POLY HI-MOL PIPE (160 PSI) OR COPPER TYPE K PIPE
WITH MALE IRON PIPE SIZE. FOR POLY & IPS OR CTS PACK JOINT
FILLING.
5) 12 GAUGE SOLID CORE WIRE (TRACE WIRE). STRIP PLASTIC AND
WRAP AROUND BRASS AT BOTH ENDS.
6) 2" STAINLESS STEEL STIFFENER AND 2" MIPT X IPS PAC JOINT
7) BALL VALVE (IRON PIPE SIZE) CURB STOP.
9) 2" BRASS 90° BEND
10) WATER METER- TO BE SUPPLIED BY THE CITY. CONTACT PUBLIC WORKS
11) 2" METER SETTER WITH HIGH BYPASS PER A.Y. MCDONALD OR FORD
(SEE PART CHART TO THE LEFT) VERT. IN, VERT, OUT. FLANGED BALL
8
4
5
6 7
9
10
STEELTHIN 1
2
3
3'
-
0
"
NOTE: SERVICE TAP TO MAIN SHALL BE ANGLED AND NOT EXCEED 22 DEGREES
C.I. OR D.I.P.
11
12
4
6
5
6"
11 11
VALVE WITH LOCK WINGS.
13
14
15
13) BRASS NIPPLE
14) 2" THREADED BRASS NIPPLE (12" LONG)
15) SCHEDULE 40 2" PVC CAP. REMOVED WHEN CONNECTION MADE
TO CUSTOMER LINE.
16
17
16) 4" X 4" X 8" CONCRETE BLOCK SUPPORTS.
17) 2" RESILIENT WEDGE GATE VALVE (F.I.P. X F.I.P.). ULFM APPROVED,
FUSE BONDED EPOXY COATED BODY AND BONNET, WEDGE FULLY
NOTE: ALL FITTINGS SHALL BE BRASS.
IF USING 1-1/2" METER, ALL PARTS
GROUND/ROADWAY
DATEAPPROVED BY
18
STYLE 202 IS REQUIRED REGARDLESS OF PIPE MATERIAL
ENCAPSULATED WITH RUBBER AND WITH 2" AWWA OPERATING
NUT. EQUAL TO CLOW F-6103.
18) 2-PIECE VALVE BOX. TOP SECTION TO BE RICH 940 STYLE
18" WITH REGULAR BASE SECTION. LENGTH TO FIT.
SHALL BE 1-1/2" EXCEPT THE 2" WEDGE
GATE VALVE WITH BRASS BUSHINGS.
D. GEBERT 6/16/03
D. GEBERT 10/6/03
12) STACK 2 METER BOXES: MID STATE PLASTIC METER BOXES (MS
17x30x12), WITH MS 17x12 DUCTILE LID WITH 9"x6 12" READER. PLACE
BACK OF BOX AT PROPERTY LINE.
PART CHART
1 12" MTR SETTER
A.Y. MCDONALD: M30-F608-WWFF-66
FORD: VBB86-95147-020
2" MTR SETTER
A.Y. MCDONALD: M30-F708-WWFF-77
FORD: VBB87-95147-019 BEFORE INSTALLATION OF THE OUTLET HALF OF THE SETTER.
D. GEBERT 4/2/07
Packet Page 422 of 562
REVISIONS
CITY OF EDMONDS
9 0109819-NTS
STANDARD DETAIL
DATE SCALE DWG NO.
RESIDENTIAL DOUBLE CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY
7/24/01
6"(TYP)
3" (TYP)
TOP VIEW
SIDE VIEW
2 UNIONS REQ'D
3" (TYP)(4 REQ'D)WITH PLUGS
6"
M
I
N
18
"
M
A
X
RESILIENT SEATED SHUTOFFVALVES (2 REQ'D)
6"
M
I
N
.
PLASTIC OR CEMENT METER BOX
EXIST GROUND
GRAVEL (12" MIN)
1. APPROVED DOUBLE CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY TO LAY HORIZONTAL WITH GROUND.
2. DESIGNED FOR BACK SIPHONAGE AND BACK PRESSURE.
3. TEST COCKS TO EITHER FACE OUTWARDS OR UPWARDS FROM ASSEMBLY.
4. ALL TEST COCKS MUST BE PROVIDED WITH PVC PLUGS.
5. THOROUGHLY FLUSH LINES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF BACK FLOW PREVENTER.
6. THE DCVA CAN BE INSTALLED ABOVE OR BELOW THE GROUND PROVIDED ALL CLEARANCES
ARE MET.
7. DO NOT INSTALL IN AN AREA SUBJECT TO FLOODING.
8. MUST BE PROTECTED FROM FREEZING CONDITIONS.
9. THE BACK FLOW PREVENTION ASSEMBLY MUST BE A WASHINGTON STATE APPROVED MODEL.
MUST BE TESTED AFTER INSTALLATION AND YEARLY THEREAFTER BY A WASHINGTON STATE CERTIFIEDBACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TESTER. THE TEST REPORT MUST BE SENT TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS WATERDIVISION
(STANDARD D.C.V.A. 2" AND SMALLER)
E7.7
DATEAPPROVED BY
TEST COCKS
10. IF INSTALLED INSIDE A BUILDING THE DCVA SHALL BE INSTALLED NO HIGHER THAN 5 FEET FROM FLOOR TO C/L OF ASSY
IF INSTALLED IN A VERTICAL CONFIGURATION, ASSY. MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 12 INCHES FROM FLOOR, AND NO HIGHER THAN5 FEET FROM FLOOR TO C/L OF #2 SHUT OFF VALVE. ONLY ASSY. WITH APPROVAL FROM WADOH. *
NO HIGHER THAN
5' TO CENTER OF #2 SHUT OFF VALVE
FLOOR
12" MIN FROMAND A MIN. OF 12 INCHES FROM FLOOR TO BOTTOM OF ASSY.
Vertical Installation
(DCVA)6/16/03D. GEBERT
4/2/07D. GEBERT
Packet Page 423 of 562
R
E
V
I
S
I
O
N
S
C
I
T
Y
O
F
E
D
M
O
N
D
S
9
0
1
0
9
8
1
9
-
N
T
S
S
T
A
N
D
A
R
D
D
E
T
A
I
L
D
A
T
E
S
C
A
L
E
D
W
G
N
O
.
D
O
U
B
L
E
C
H
E
C
K
D
E
T
E
C
T
O
R
A
S
S
E
M
B
L
Y
(
D
C
D
A
)
F
O
R
2
"
-
3
"
SIDE VIEW
EXIST GROUND
5/8" MINUS CSTC GRAVEL (12" MIN)
4. APPROVED DOUBLE CHECK DETECTOR ASSEMBLY TO LAY HORIZONTAL
5. TEST COCKS TO EITHER FACE OUTWARDS OR UPWARDS FROM ASSEMBLY.
6. ALL TEST COCKS MUST BE PROVIDED WITH PVC PLUGS.
7. THOROUGHLY FLUSH LINES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF ASSEMBLY.
8. DO NOT INSTALL IN AN AREA SUBJECT TO FLOODING.
9. MUST BE PROTECTED FROM FREEZING CONDITIONS.
1. THE DCDA SHALL BE A WASHINGTON STATE APPROVED-
MUST BE TESTED AFTER INSTALLATION AND YEARLY THEREAFTER BY A WASHINGTON STATE CERTIFIEDDCDA ASSEMBLY TESTER. THE TEST REPORT MUST BE SENT TO THE CITY OF EDMONDS WATERDIVISION
E
7
.
7
.
1
D
A
T
E
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
B
Y
TOP VIEW
6"
T
Y
P
6"
M
I
N
H-20 DOUBLE LEAF TRAFFIC BEARING LID FOR
CEMENT VAULT BOX
CONNECT TO EXISTING
SERVICE LINE PROVIDE BENDS
& CONNECTIONS AS
REQUIRED
6"
M
I
N
12"MIN
36
"
T
O
4
8
"
*
6" MIN
GRINNEL
SADDLE
2. VAULT MUST BE UTILITY VAULT MODEL OR APPROVED EQUAL.
FOR 2in. DCDA: UTILITY VAULT #644-LA
18
"
T
O
2
5
"
*
*
* SIZE OF PIPE USED DICTATES MINIMUM DEPTH OF BOX
** HEIGHT TO TOP OF STEM BASED ON THE SIZE OF PIPE USED.
4
/
2
/
0
7
6" TYP
MODEL SHALL BE WATTS 007DCDA OR APPROVED EQUAL.
FOR 3in. DCDA: UTILITY VAULT #675-LA
USE H-30 DOUBLE LEAF TRAFFIC RATED
3. LIDS FOR VAULT SHALL BE LW HATCH- WATERTIGHT WITH GUTTER AND SIDE DRAIN. SIZE SHALL BE 3' WIDE X 6' LONG.
INCLUDING REQUIRED CLEARANCES.
24" X 24" WASHED ROCK DRAIN SUMP
FLOOR DRAIN
LID IN HIGH TRAFFIC AREAS
ALL AREAS EXCEPT IN HIGH TRAFFIC AREAS.
WITH THE GROUND.
SIDE DRAIN- DRAIN TO GRAVEL SUMP
OR TO CATCH BASIN
COMPACTED TO 95% MAX. DENSITY
2" PVC
(IE: DRIVEWAY ENTRANCES)
Packet Page 424 of 562
WITH SIDE OUTLET GUTTER DRAIN.
CITY OF EDMONDS
7/24/01
LENGTH
10'-0"
12'-0"
14'-6"
11'-0"
(EXCLUDES SIAMESE CONNECTION)
3. DCDA MUST BE TESTED BY A CERTIFIED BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TESTER.
2. VAULT COVER GUTTER DRAIN SHALL CONNECT TO A DRY WELL OR CATCH BASIN.
5. A CITY APPROVED VALVE IS REQUIRED BETWEEN THE SUPPLY MAIN AND THE VAULT.
981 0-0 1 9 9
REVISIONS
APPROVED BY DATE
DATE
METER SIZE
4" X 3/4"
8" X 3/4"
10" X 1"
6" X 3/4"
AND TYPE
4. ALL TEST COCKS MUST BE PROVIDED WITH PCV PLUGS.
B
1'-1"
1'-4"
1'-8"
1'-2"3'-9"
6'-0"
4'-5"
2'-9"
A
0'-8"5'-6"
0'-11"
0'-9"
8'-6"
6'-4"
0'-6"
C
4'-3"
D
VAULT SIZES
APPROXIMATE EQUIP
DIMENSIONS
E7.8DWG NO.SCALE NTS
STANDARD DETAILDOUBLE CHECK DETECTOR ASSEMBLY (DCDA) PLAN
HEIGHT
6'-6''
6'-6''
6'-6''
6'-6''6'-0"
6'-0"
7'-0"
WIDTH
5'-0"
INDOOR VERTICAL INSTALLATION
THE ECR/WP SHALL BE INSTALLED ON A OUTSIDE WALL FOR EASY METER READING.
SENSOR SR2 WITH ECR/WP REMOTE READ.
MINIMUM INSIDE VAULT
DIMENSIONS
ALIGN WITH HATCH
ADAPTER
FL X FL TEE
FLANGED COUPLING
1. ACCESSES BY L.W. HATCH: TYPE "D" ( HD-10 PEDESTRIAN LOAD; H-30 TRAFFIC LOAD)
GENERAL NOTES:
WA
T
E
R
T
I
G
H
T
U
S
I
N
G
N
O
N
-
S
H
R
I
N
K
AL
L
P
E
N
E
T
R
A
T
I
O
N
S
S
H
A
L
L
B
E
CO
R
E
D
D
R
I
L
L
E
D
A
N
D
M
A
D
E
FLOW
18
"
M
I
N
.
INSTALLED ON HATCH CLOSE TO HINGE
GR
O
U
T
W
I
T
H
W
A
T
E
R
S
E
A
L
EXTERIOR PLAN VIEW
SENSOR SR2 W/TRPLREMOTE READ. THE TRPL SHALL BE
B
C
MIN.
D
A
ME
G
A
L
U
G
F
I
T
T
I
N
G
DOUBLE CHECK DETECTOR VALVE ASSEMBLY
4" HOSE CONNECTION W/ STORZ FITTING
PRE-ASSEMBLED, DOH STATE APPROVED
18"
(AS REQ'D BY FIRE DEPT)
REFER TO CHART
LADDER PER APWA STD PLAN #41
FROM THE FLOOR
6" MINIMUM
MIN.
CHECK VALVE
18"
6"(TYP)
NO HIGHER
THAN 5'
TO CENTER OF#2 SHUT OFFVALVE
(COMMERCIAL/MULTI-FAMILY)D. GEBERT 10/6/03
6. VAULT SHALL BE PLACED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AT PROPERTY LINE.
7. FOR COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS THAT HAVE NO SET BACK REQUIREMENTS, THE DCDA CAN BE MOUNTED ON THE WALL ADJACENT TO THE ROW WHERE THE LINE TIES INTO THE MAIN. (SEE DETAIL E 7.19)
DOUBLE LEAF LID (MODEL-L.W. HATCH) OPENING TO BE LOCATEDWITHIN 18" OF INSIDE VAULT WALL FOR EASIER LADDER ACCESS
18" MAX.
EXTEND LADDER
OUT AS REQUIRED
FOR EASY ACCESS
4/2/07D. GEBERT
PI
V
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
I
O
N
6/16/03D. GEBERT
Packet Page 425 of 562
REVISIONS
CITY OF EDMONDS
9 0109819-7/24/01 NTS
STANDARD DETAIL
DATE SCALE DWG NO.
CONCRETE THRUST BLOCKING
CAPPED CROSS
90° BEND
TEE W/PLUG
TEE CAP
CROSS
45° BEND 22-1/2° BEND 11-1/4° BEND
BLIND FLANGE
PLUG
BLIND FLANGE OR
SMALLER SIZE PIPE
BLIND FLANGE
b
b
b
b
A B
A
B
B
CC
C
C D D
d db
THRUST BLOCK TABLE
MIN. BEARING AREA AGAINST UNDISTURBED SOIL
SQUARE FEET
PIPE SIZE A B C D E
MIN. DIST (IN FEET)
b d
4"3 1 1 1 1 1
1 1
1
16"
8"
10"
12"
16"
11
7
29
16
4 4
4
2
2
2
6
10 6 3
14 9 5 3
25 16 8 4
0.5
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.1
1.4
1.3
1.6
1.9
2.6
NOTES:
1. BEARING AREA OF CONCRETE THRUST BASED ON 200 PSI PRESSURE AND
SAFE SOIL. BEARING LOAD OF 2,000 POUNDS PER SQUARE FOOT.
2. AREAS MUST BE ADJUSTED FOR OTHER PIPE SIZES, PRESSURES, AND
SOIL CONDITIONS.
3. CONCRETE BLOCKING SHALL BE CAST IN PLACE AND HAVE A MINIMUM
OF 1/4 SQUARE FOOT BEARING AGAINST THE FITTING.
4. BLOCK SHALL BEAR AGAINST FITTINGS ONLY AND SHALL BE CLEAR OF
JOINTS TO PERMIT TAKING UP OR DISMANTLING A JOINT.
5. CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL BLOCKING ADEQUATE TO WITHSTAND FULL
TEST PRESSURE AS WELL AS TO CONTINUOUSLY WITHSTAND OPERATIONAL
PRESSURE UNDER ALL CONDITIONS OF SERVICE.
6. BLOCKING MAY BE REDUCED WITH USE OF RESTRAINED JOINTS ADJACENT
TO FITTINGS.
E7.9
DATEAPPROVED BY
Packet Page 426 of 562
REVISIONS
CITY OF EDMONDS
9 0109819-6/16/03 NTS
STANDARD DETAIL
DATE SCALE DWG NO.
REDUCED PRESSURE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY 2" AND SMALLER
DATEAPPROVED BY
1. APPROVED REDUCED PRESSURE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TO LAY HORIZONTAL ONLY.
2. DESIGNED FOR BACK SIPHONAGE AND BACK PRESSURE.
3. THOROUGHLY FLUSH LINES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF BACKFLOW PREVENTER.
4. DO NOT INSTALL IN AN AREA SUBJECT TO FLOODING.
5. MUST BE ACCESSIBLE.
6. MUST BE PROTECTED FROM FREEZING CONDITIONS.
7. THE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY SHALL BE A STATE APPROVED MODEL.
8. A PLUMBING PERMIT IS REQUIRED- PLEASE CONTACT LOCAL PLUMBING PERMIT CENTER.
9. MUST BE TESTED AFTER INSTALLATION AND YEARLY THEREAFTER BY WASHINGTON STATE
CERTIFIED BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TESTER. TEST RESULTS SHALL BE SENT TO THE CITY
OF EDMONDS PUBLIC WORKS.
TOP VIEW
ADEQUATE GRAVITY DRAINAGE
SYSTEM REQUIRED
W/APPROVED
AIR GAP
RESILIENT SEATED
SHUTOFF VALVES
(2 REQ'D)
TEST COCKS WITH PVC PLUGS
(4 REQ'D)
MIN. 12" CLEARANCES AROUND
BACKFLOW PREVENTER-ALL SIDES,
TOP AND BOTTOM
NOTE:SIDE VIEW
GROUND/FLOOR
(RPBA)
12" MIN.
5' MAX.
E 7.10
(ABOVE GROUND INSTALLATION ONLY)
D. GEBERT 10/6/03
5/26/06D. GEBERT
Packet Page 427 of 562
REVISIONS
CITY OF EDMONDS
NTS
STANDARD DETAIL
DATE SCALE DWG NO.
Est.189 0 6/16/03 E 7.11
DATEAPPROVED BY
FINISHED
GRADE
CENTER BACKFLOW
PREVENTER IN
ENCLOSURE
120 VOLT ELECTRICAL OUTLET FOR
HEAT TAPE. INSTALL HEAT TAPE
FOR FREEZE PROTECTION
3" MIN.
CONCRETE SLAB
(2000 PSI MIN.)
FINISHED
GRADE
4 "
M
I N .
3/8" X 4" ANCHOR BOLTS
PER MANUFACTURER
36
" M I N I M U M
12" MIN.ENCLOSURE "HOT
BOX" OR EQUAL
12
"M I N
6 "
UNION
SUPPORTS
2"
DRAIN
SEE NOTE 6
6x6-W2.9xW2.9
WWF (WELDED WIRE
FABRIC)
SLEEVE
(TYP.)
12
"M I N
6" MINIMUM
FREE DRAINING
GRAVEL
CONNECT TO
WATER METER
IMMEDIATELY
ADJACENT TO
RPBA
FLOW
HOT BOX ASSEMBLY FOR REDUCED PRESSURE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY (RPBA)
AND RPDA
TO OWNERS ELECTRICAL PANEL.
DIRECT BURIAL OR IN RIGID
CONDUIT PER ELECTRICAL
PERMIT REQUIREMENTS.
TYPE K COPPER OR
APPROVED EQUAL
(SIZE AS REQ..)
3" MIN.
NOTES:
3" MIN.
IF RPDA USE SENSOR
SR2 METER W/ TRPL
REMOTE READ. TRPL
SHALL BE INSTALLED
ON SIDE OF HOT
BOX WITH EASY
ACCESS FOR METER
READING.
1. PROVIDE CITY APPROVED SUPPORT FOR DEVICES LARGER THAN 1" DIAMETER.
2. OWNER SHALL FURNISH, INSTALL AND MAINTAIN THE RPBA OR RPDA AND ALL PIPING AND
APPURTENANCES SHOWN ON THIS PLAN.
3. CITY WILL PROVIDE INSPECTION. INITIAL TEST OF THE RPBA OR RPDA PRIOR TO
ESTABLISHMENT OF WATER SERVICE WILL BE DONE BY A STATE CERTIFIED BAT TESTER
4. REDUCED PRESSURE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLIES SHALL BE STATE APPROVED DEVICES.
5. ANNUAL TESTING OF RPBA AND RPDA REQUIRED BY OWNER.
6. DRAIN SHALL BE SIZED IN ACCORDANCE WITH AWWA CROSS CONNECTION CONTROL
FIGURE 6-8 (SEE STD DETAIL SHEET E 7.11.1)
7. ENCLOSURES SHALL BE LOCATED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.
PR
O P E R T Y L I N E .
FRONT VIEW
SIDE VIEW
REDUCED PRESSURE
BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY
(RPBA)
METER SIDE
IF RPDA USE SENSOR
SR2 METER W/ TRPL
REMOTE READ.
D. GEBERT 10/6/03
4/2/07D. GEBERT
RO
W
Packet Page 428 of 562
0
0
3/
4
", 1"
, 1 1 /4
"
1 1 /2
", 2
"
2
1 /2
", 3
"
4 ", 6
"
8 ", 1 0 "
100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
REVISIONS
APPROVED BY
CITY OF EDMONDS
Est.18 9 0
STANDARD DETAIL
RPBA DISCHARGE RATES (FIGURE 6-8)
6/16/03
DATE
DATE SCALE
NTS
DWG NO.
FLOW RATE (GPM)
ZO
N
E
P
R
E
S
S
U
R
E
(PS
I)
Figure 6-8
Approximate Relief Valve Discharge Rates
For Reduced Pressure Backflow Assemblies
Care should be taken to ensure that the entire drainage system has adequate
capacity to carry the continuous discharge rates shown above. The following are
typical flow rates as sized by one floor drain manufacturer and represent only the
floor drain capacity:
Size:
Capacity (gpm):
For parallel assemblies, the drainage system should be designed for the discharge
from both assemblies.
2"
55
3"
112
4"
170
6"
450
8"
760
RPBA Discharge Rates
AWWA CROSS CONNECTION
CONTROL MANUAL
E 7.11.1
Packet Page 429 of 562
Est.1 8 9 0
REVISIONS
APPROVED BY
RPBA/RPDA- 2.5" AND LARGER
SEMI-BURIED REDUCED PRESSURE ASSEMBLY
STANDARD DETAIL
NTS6/16/03
DATE
DATE SCALE E 7.11.2DWG NO.
CITY OF EDMONDS
A CITY
APPROVED VALVE IS
REQ'D BETWEEN
THE SUPPLY MAIN
AND THE VAULT (4 REQ'D)
TEST COCKS
MIN.
24"
MIN.
12"TO BE CENTER UNDER DOOR
CHAMBER LADDER W/ EXTENSION.
PROVIDE HEAT OR
INSULATIONVALVE
RELIEFMIN.
18"
L/W HATCH ALUMINUM. HOT DIPPED GALV.
LOADING WITH
PRE-CAST CONC.
SHUTOFF VALVES
RESILIENT SEATED
DIAMOND PLATE DOOR.
18" MIN.
VAULT SHALL BE EQUIPPED W/36" x 36"
IS FULLY OPEN
3' MIN. WHEN VALVE
18" MIN.
36" MIN.
FINISH
GRADE
SIDE VIEW
12" MIN/4' MAX.
SUPPORT STEEL
SCREW JACK
LADDER
VAULT H-10
(2 REQ'D)
NOTE:
DAYLIGHT DRAIN
BORE SIGHTED
(REFER TO STD DETAIL
E 7.11.1 FOR SIZING)
RPBA'S: SEE DETAIL E 7.12 FOR INFORMATION NOT SHOWN
RPDA'S: SEE DETAIL E 7.13 FOR INFORMATION NOT SHOWN
1. SEMI-BURIED PITS MUST BE APPROVED BY CITY OF EDMONDS
ENGINEERING DIVISION AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. AIR VALVE
OR RELIEF VALVES MUST BE INSTALLED ABOVE THE GROUND OR MAXIMUM
FLOOD LEVEL WITH AN APPROVED AIR GAP BETWEEN THE RELIEF VALVE
AND A DAYLIGHT DRAIN. THE DAYLIGHT DRAIN FROM ABOVE GRADE OR
SEMI-BURIED VAULT MUST:
a. DISCHARGE ONTO PRIVATE PROPERTY AND TOWARD ON-SITE DRAINAGE.
b. BE ABLE TO BE BORE SIGHTED TO A DISCHARGE POINT INSTALLED
ABOVE THE GROUND OR MAXIMUM FLOOD LEVEL, WHICH EVER IS GREATER.
c. BE ABLE TO HANDLE THE VOLUME OF WATER THAT POTENTIALLY COULD
BE DISCHARGED FROM THE RELIEF VALVE PORT. REFER TO STD DETAIL
E 7.11.1 FOR SIZING.
D. GEBERT 01/28/04
POLYPROPYLENE WALL MOUNTED
Packet Page 430 of 562
Est.1 8 9 0
STANDARD DETAIL
REDUCED PRESSURE DETECTOR ASSEMBLY (RPDA)
APPROVED BY
REVISIONS
DATE
6/16/03
DATE
2.5" AND LARGER
NTS
SCALE DWG NO.E 7.12
1. APPROVED REDUCED PRESSURE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TO LAY HORIZONTAL ONLY.
3. THE WATER LINE SHALL BE DISINFECTED, FLUSHED, AND PRESSURE TESTED PRIOR TO INSTALLING THE
BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY. THE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM FREEZING AND FLOODING.
4. ALL PIPE, VALVES, AND FITTING JOINTS, FROM SUPPLY MAIN, SHALL BE FLANGED AND RESTRAINED.
7. VAULTS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF 3' CLEARANCE FROM ALL STRUCTURES.
8. THE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY SHALL BE TESTED AFTER INSTALLATION AND PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE AND ALSO
YEARLY THEREAFTER BY A CERTIFIED BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TESTER. TEST RESULTS SHALL BE SENT TO THE
12" MIN/4' MAX.
SIDE VIEW
RELIEF
VALVE
CITY OF EDMONDS
LW HATCH HD-10 PEDESTRIAN LOAD OR
CITY OF EDMONDS PUBLIC WORKS.
2. DESIGNED FOR BACK SIPHONAGE AND BACK PRESSURE.
5. GROUT PIPE ENTRANCE AND EXIT, IN VAULT, WITH WATER-TITE GROUT.
6. VAULTS SHALL BE INSTALLED AT PROPERTY LINE OR EASEMENT LINE.
18" MIN.
NOTE:
VAULT H-10
4" DRAIN- MIN.
DIAMOND PLATE DOOR.
PRE-CAST CONC.
LOADING WITH
LADDER
SUPPORT STEEL
SCREW JACK
VAULT SHALL BE EQUIPPED W/36" x 36"
A CITY
APPROVED VALVE IS
REQ'D BETWEEN
THE SUPPLY MAIN
AND THE VAULT
TEST COCKS
(4 REQ'D)
MIN.
18"
24"
MIN.12"
MIN.
GRADE
FINISH
IS FULLY OPEN
18" MIN.
36" MIN.
3' MIN. WHEN VALVE
PROVIDE HEAT OR
POLYPROPYLENE WALL MOUNTED
CHAMBER LADDER W/EXTENSION.
TO BE CENTER UNDER DOOR
INSULATION
RESILIENT SEATED
SHUTOFF VALVES
(2 REQ'D)
SENSOR SR2
W/TRPL REMOTE
READ. THE TRPL
SHALL BE
INSTALLED ON
SIDE OF VAULT
WITH EASY ACCESS
FOR METER
READING
DRAIN TOWARD ON
SITE DRAINAGE SYSTEM,
NOT TOWARD R.O.W.
(ABOVE GROUND INSTALLATION ONLY)
D. GEBERT 01/28/04
D. GEBERT 5/26/06
Packet Page 431 of 562
Est.1 8 9 0
STANDARD DETAIL
REDUCED PRESSURE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY (RPBA)
APPROVED BY
REVISIONS
DATE
06/16/03
DATE
2.5" AND LARGER
NTS
SCALE DWG NO.E 7.13
1. APPROVED REDUCED PRESSURE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TO LAY HORIZONTAL ONLY.
3. THE WATER LINE SHALL BE DISINFECTED, FLUSHED, AND PRESSURE TESTED PRIOR TO INSTALLING THE
BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY. THE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM FREEZING AND FLOODING.
4. ALL PIPE, VALVES, AND FITTING JOINTS, FROM SUPPLY MAIN SHALL BE FLANGED AND RESTRAINED.
7. VAULTS SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM OF 3' CLEARANCE FROM ALL STRUCTURES.
8. THE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY SHALL BE TESTED AFTER INSTALLATION AND PRIOR TO ACCEPTANCE AND ALSO
YEARLY THEREAFTER BY A CERTIFIED BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TESTER. TEST RESULTS SHALL BE SENT TO THE
12" MIN/4' MAX.
SIDE VIEW
RELIEF
VALVE
CITY OF EDMONDS
LW HATCH HD-10 ALUMINUM HATCH
CITY OF EDMONDS PUBLIC WORKS.
2. DESIGNED FOR BACK SIPHONAGE AND BACK PRESSURE.
5. GROUT PIPE ENTRANCE AND EXIT, IN VAULT, WITH WATER-TITE GROUT.
6. VAULTS SHALL BE INSTALLED AT PROPERTY LINE OR EASEMENT LINE.
18" MIN.
NOTE:
VAULT H-10
4" DRAIN- MIN.
PRE-CAST CONC.
LOADING WITH
LADDER
SUPPORT STEEL
SCREW JACK
VAULT SHALL BE EQUIPPED W/36" x 36"
A CITY
APPROVED VALVE IS
REQ'D BETWEEN
THE SUPPLY MAIN
AND THE VAULT
TEST COCKS
(4 REQ'D)
MIN.
18"
24"
MIN.12"
MIN.
GRADE
FINISH
IS FULLY OPEN
18" MIN.
36" MIN.
3' MIN. WHEN VALVE
PROVIDE HEAT OR
POLYPROPYLENE WALL MOUNTED
CHAMBER LADDER W/EXTENSION.
TO BE CENTER UNDER DOOR
INSULATION
RESILIENT SEATED
SHUTOFF VALVES
(2 REQ'D)
DRAIN TOWARD ON
SITE DRAINAGE SYSTEM,
NOT TOWARD R.O.W.
(ABOVE GROUND INSTALLATION ONLY)
D. GEBERT 01/28/04
5/26/06D. GEBERT
Packet Page 432 of 562
REVISIONS
CITY OF EDMONDS
NTS
STANDARD DETAIL
DATE SCALE DWG NO.
SPILL-RESISTANT PRESSURE VACUUM BREAKER (SVBA)
Est.1 8 9 0 6/16/03
DATEAPPROVED BY
NOTE:
1" MIN. ABOVE FLOOD
LEVEL IF FACTORY
MOUNTED OR
6" MIN. ABOVE FLOOD
LEVEL FOR GENERAL
PLUMBING
MIN. OF 6" CLEARANCE
AROUND BACKFLOW
PREVENTER. ALL SIDES,
TOP AND BOTTOM
FLOOD LEVEL
RESILIENT SEATED SHUTOFF
VALVES (2 REQ'D)
UNIONS
(2 REQ'D)
1. APPROVED PRESSURE VACUUM BREAKER ASSEMBLY MUST BE
INSTALLED VERTICALLY, 1" MIN. ABOVE FLOOD LEVEL IF FACTORY MOUNTED OR
6" MIN. ABOVE FLOOD LEVEL FOR GENERAL PLUMBING.
2. DESIGNED FOR BACK SIPHONAGE ONLY, NOT FOR BACK PRESSURE.
3. THOROUGHLY FLUSH LINES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF BACKFLOW PREVENTER.
4. IF A SVBA IS INSTALLED INDOORS, CONSIDERATION MUST BE GIVEN
TO WATER LEAKAGE IF THE BACKFLOW PREVENTER FAILS (EXCESSIVE WATER SPILLAGE)
5. DO NOT INSTALL IN AN AREA SUBJECT TO FLOODING.
6. MUST BE PROTECTED FROM FREEZING CONDITIONS.
7. THE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY SHALL BE A STATE APPROVED MODEL.
8. A PLUMBING PERMIT IS REQUIRED- PLEASE CONTACT LOCAL PLUMBING PERMIT CENTER.
9. MUST BE TESTED AFTER INSTALLATION AND YEARLY THEREAFTER BY WASHINGTON STATE
CERTIFIED BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TESTER. TEST RESULTS SHALL BE SENT TO THE CITY
OF EDMONDS PUBLIC WORKS.
E 7.14
(ABOVE GROUND INSTALLATION ONLY)
Packet Page 433 of 562
REVISIONS
CITY OF EDMONDS
NTS
STANDARD DETAIL
DATE SCALE DWG NO.
AIR GAP FOR MAKEUP TANK (AG)
Est.1 8 9 0 6/16/03 E 7.15
DATEAPPROVED BY
PUMP
TO NON-POTABLE
WATER SYSTEM
POTABLE WATER SUPPLY
OVERFLOW RIM
D
AIR GAP
2xD - 1" MIN
AN APPROVED AIR GAP IS A PHYSICAL SEPARATION BETWEEN THE FREE FLOWING DISCHARGE
END OF A POTABLE WATER SUPPLY PIPELINE AND THE OVERFLOW RIM OF AN OPEN OR NON-
PRESSURE RECEIVING VESSEL. THESE VERTICAL, PHYSICAL SEPARATIONS MUST BE AT LEAST
TWICE THE DIAMETER OF THE INLET PIPE BUT NEVER LESS THAN ONE INCH. IF SPLASHING
IS A PROBLEM, TUBULAR SCREENS MAY BE ATTACHED OR THE SUPPLY LINE OUTLET MAY BE
CUT AT A 45 DEGREE ANGLE. IF SUPPLY LINE IS CUT AT A 45 DEGREE ANGLE THE AIR
GAP DISTANCE IS MEASURED FROM THE CENTER OF THE ANGLE. HOSES ARE NOT ALLOWED.
BYPASSES ARE NOT ALLOWED. THE INSPECTION OF AIR GAPS SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE
YEARLY TESTING PROGRAM FOR BACKFLOW DEVICES.
APPROVED AIR GAP SEPARATION
Packet Page 434 of 562
1. APPROVED PRESSURE VACUUM BREAKER ASSEMBLY MUST BE
INSTALLED VERTICALLY, 6" MIN. ABOVE THE HIGHEST POINT
OF USE AND ALL DOWN STREAM PIPING.
2. 6" MIN. ABOVE FLOOD LEVEL FOR GENERAL PLUMBING.
3. DESIGNED FOR BACK SIPHONAGE ONLY, NOT FOR BACK PRESSURE.
4. THOROUGHLY FLUSH LINES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF BACKFLOW PREVENTER.
5. IF A AVB IS INSTALLED INDOORS, CONSIDERATION MUST BE GIVEN
TO WATER LEAKAGE IF THE BACKFLOW PREVENTER FAILS (EXCESSIVE WATER SPILLAGE)
6. DO NOT INSTALL IN AN AREA SUBJECT TO FLOODING.
7. MUST BE PROTECTED FROM FREEZING CONDITIONS.
8. THE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY SHALL BE A STATE APPROVED MODEL.
9. A PLUMBING PERMIT IS REQUIRED- OBTAIN PERMIT FROM CITY OF EDMONDS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES.
10. NO DOWNSTREAM VALVES ARE ALLOWED.
11. THIS DEVICE DOES NOT REQUIRE TESTING BY A BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TESTER.
ATMOSPHERIC/ANTI-SIPHON VACUUM BREAKER ASSEMBLY
STANDARD DETAIL
CITY OF EDMONDS
Est.1 8 9 0
APPROVED BY
6/16/03
REVISIONS
DATE
DATE SCALE
NTS
6" MIN.
5' MAX.
NOTE:
GROUND/FLOOR
DWG NO.
NO
DOWNSTREAM
SHUTOFF
2" AND SMALLER (AVB)
6" MIN.
ABOVE HIGHEST
POINT OF USE
& ALL DOWN
STREAM PIPING
(ABOVE GROUND INSTALLATION ONLY)
E 7.16Packet Page 435 of 562
NOTE:
MIN. OF 6" CLEARANCE AROUND
BACKFLOW PREVENTER. ALL
SIDES, TOP AND BOTTOM
PRESSURE VACUUM BREAKER ASSEMBLY (PVBA)
STANDARD DETAIL
CITY OF EDMONDS
Est.1 8 9 0
APPROVED BY
6/16/03
REVISIONS
DATE
DATE SCALE
NTS
DWG NO.
RESILIANT SEATED SHUTOFF
VALVES (2 REQ'D)
(ABOVE GROUND INSTALLATION ONLY)
TEST COCKS
W/PVC PLUGS
(2 REQ'D)
12" MIN.
5' MAX.
ABOVE HIGHEST
POINT OF USE
& ALL DOWN
STREAM PIPING
2" AND SMALLER
UNIONS
(2 REQ'D)
1. APPROVED PRESSURE VACUUM BREAKER ASSEMBLY MUST BE
INSTALLED VERTICALLY, 12" MIN. - 5' MAX. ABOVE THE HIGHEST POINT OF USE
AND ALL DOWN STREAM PIPING.
2. DESIGNED FOR BACK SIPHONAGE ONLY, NOT FOR BACK PRESSURE.
3. THOROUGHLY FLUSH LINES PRIOR TO INSTALLATION OF BACKFLOW PREVENTER.
4. IF A PVBA IS INSTALLED INDOORS, CONSIDERATION MUST BE GIVEN
TO WATER LEAKAGE IF THE BACKFLOW PREVENTER FAILS (EXCESSIVE WATER SPILLAGE)
5. DO NOT INSTALL IN AN AREA SUBJECT TO FLOODING.
6. MUST BE PROTECTED FROM FREEZING CONDITIONS.
7. THE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY SHALL BE A STATE APPROVED MODEL.
8. A PLUMBING PERMIT IS REQUIRED- PLEASE CONTACT LOCAL PLUMBING PERMIT CENTER.
9. MUST BE TESTED AFTER INSTALLATION AND YEARLY THEREAFTER BY WASHINGTON STATE
CERTIFIED BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY TESTER. TEST RESULTS SHALL BE SENT TO THE CITY
OF EDMONDS PUBLIC WORKS.
E 7.17Packet Page 436 of 562
STANDARD DETAIL
CITY OF EDMONDS
0819 9 019-07/12/05
APPROVED BY
REVISIONS
DATE
DATE E7.18NTSSCALEDWG NO.
FL X FL X 4" TEE
FL X MJ RSGV
4" FL X MJ RSGV
4
"
D
.
I
.
P
2"
D
O
M
E
S
T
I
C
BLIND FLANGE WITH 2" FIPT THREAD
1- 3" BRASS NIPPLE MIPT
2" RSGV (F.I.P.T. X F.I.P.T.)
3' MIN.MJ X MJ D.I. LONG BODY COUPLING
2- 2" BRASS STREET ELLS
FIRE LINE AND 2" DOMESTIC SERVICE CONNECTIONS (DETAILS)
CONC. BRICK SUPPORT
CONC. BRICK SUPPORT
BE
D
D
I
N
G
**
C
D
F
FI
L
L
W
I
T
H
S
A
N
D
WHEN USING CDF BACKFILL ONLY
WATER MAIN
**
M
A
J
O
R
C
O
L
L
E
C
T
O
R
OR
A
R
T
E
R
I
A
L
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
FI
R
E
L
I
N
E
ACP SURFACE
MATCH THICKNESS
(3" MINIMUM)
(TYP FOR ALL VALVES)
940 STYLE CAST IRON
VALVE BOX AND EXTENSION
NUMBER OF BRICKS REQUIRED
DEPENDS ON AMOUNT OF OVER EXCAVATION
TO
T
O
P
O
F
P
I
P
E
MAIN
2" STAINLESS STEEL STIFFENER AND
2" MIPT X IPS PAC JOINTS REQUIRED
WITH 2" HI-MOL POLY (160 PSI) A
1-
1
/
4
'
'
C
S
B
C
M
I
N
U
S
MAIN
INSTALL 12" RIBBED PVC PIPE (ASTM D-3034)
(TYPICAL)
COUPLING
MJ
3' MIN.
2" BRASS- MIPT x CTS PAC JOINT (IF COPPER)
-MIPT x IPS PAC JOINT (IF POLY)
(SEE WATER SERVICE STD DETAIL E-7.6.1)
COUPLING
4/2/07D. GEBERT
REVISED: 8/17/06- MOVED DRAWING FOR CLARITY, ADDED TEXT
NOTE:
*CDF SHALL BE 34 SACK MIX
DESIGN PER WSDOT STANDARDS
2" -5/8"
CSTC
Packet Page 437 of 562
STANDARD DETAIL
CITY OF EDMONDS
0819 9 019-8/17/06
APPROVED BY
REVISIONS
DATE
DATE E7.18.1NTS
SCALE DWG NO.
FL X FL TEE
FL X MJ RSGV
FL X MJ RSGV
3' MIN.
MJ X MJ D.I. LONG BODY COUPLING
TYPICAL WATER VALVE CLUSTER CONNECTION DETAIL
CONC. BRICK SUPPORT
CONC. BRICK SUPPORT
BE
D
D
I NG
**
C
D
F
F I LL
W
I TH
S
A
N
D
WHEN USING CDF BACKFILL ONLY
WATER MAIN
**
M
A
J
O
R
C
O
L
L
E
C
T
O
R
OR
A
R
T
E
R
I AL
S
T
R
E
E
T
S
ACP SURFACE
MATCH THICKNESS
(3" MINIMUM)(TYP FOR ALL VALVES)
940 STYLE CAST IRON
VALVE BOX AND EXTENSION
NUMBER OF BRICKS REQUIRED
DEPENDS ON AMOUNT OF OVER EXCAVATION
TO
T
O
P
O
F
P
I PE
MAIN
CO
M
P
A
C
T
E
D
T
O
9
5
%
MAIN
INSTALL RIBBED PVC PIPE (ASTM D-3034)
(TYPICAL)
COUPLING
MJ
(TYP)
(TYPICAL)
M
A
I N
COUPLING MAIN
1 -1 /4
'' C
S
B
C
Packet Page 438 of 562
CITY OF EDMONDS
9810 1 9 9 0-
REVISIONS
APPROVED BY DATE
NTS E7.1903/24/05
STANDARD DETAIL
FIRE LINE AND 2" DOMESTIC SERVICE CONNECTIONS (PLAN VIEW)
DATE SCALE DWG NO.
SHALL THE PIV OR FDC BE LOCATED IN THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK.
LOCATED ON THE EXTERIOR WALL OF THE BUILDING
4. THE SENSUS ECR/WP REMOTE READER SHALL BE
3. THE PIV AND FDC SHALL HAVE A 3' MINIMUM
2. THE DCDA SHALL BE LOCATED ON THE
1. THE PIV AND FDC SHALL BE LOCATED
NOTE (FOR BLDGS WITHOUT SETBACKS)
PLACED ON THE EXTERIOR WALL OF THE BUILDING
CLEARANCE BETWEEN AND AROUND THEM.
OR IN A LANDSCAPED AREA. AT NO TIME
WHERE IT TIES INTO THE CITY MAIN.
INTERIOR WALL OR IN A ROOM ADJACENT TO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY
4' ABOVE GRADE.
ZERO-SETBACK BUSINESS/ COMMERCIAL ZONE
5. THE FDC SHALL BE 4" PIPE AND HAVE A 22° BEND WITH 4" STORZ
ADAPTER ON THE END.
SEE DETAIL E7.8
6. THE WATER METER SHALL BE LOCATED AT THE PROPERTY
LINE WHENEVER POSSIBLE. LOCATION OTHER THAN THE
PROPERTY LINE, SHALL BE DETERMINED BY THE CITY INSPECTOR.
D. GEBERT 07/12/05
4/2/07D. GEBERT
4" FIRE LINE (MIN)
2" DOMESTIC SERVICE
E 7.18
SEE ENLARGED DETAILS
EXIST. WATER MAIN
7'-10' SIDEWALK
CURB
ROW
(COPPER OR HI-MOL POLY)
(D.I.P.)
R
E
M
O
T
E
R
E
A
D
E
R
PROPERTY LINE
DCDA
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
DC
D
A
3'
3'
3'PIV
FDC
REMOTE READER
DEPTH TO MEET CLEARANCE REQTS
Packet Page 439 of 562
CITY OF EDMONDS
FIRE LINE AND 2" DOMESTIC SERVICE CONNECTIONS (PLAN VIEW)
STANDARD DETAIL
09910189-07/12/05
APPROVED BY
REVISIONS
DATE
DATE
E7.20NTSSCALEDWG NO.
BLDG2" DOMESTIC SERVICE
EX
I
S
T
.
W
A
T
E
R
M
A
I
N
4" FIRE LINE (MIN.)
RO
W
CU
R
B
FDC
DC
D
A
PIV
NOTE (BLDGS WITH SETBACKS)
PROPERTY AND NEXT TO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE.
1. THE DCDA AND VAULT SHALL BE LOCATED ON PRIVATE
ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AND SHALL BE
2. THE PIV AND FDC SHALL BE LOCATED
NEAR THE DCDA.
E 7.18
&
V
A
U
L
T
SEE DETAIL
CLEARANCE BETWEEN AND AROUND THEM.
3. THE PIV AND FDC SHALL HAVE A 3' MINIMUM
ALL ZONES EXCEPT ZERO-SETBACK BUSINESS/ COMMERCIAL
ADAPTER ON THE END.
4. THE FDC SHALL HAVE A 22° BEND WITH 4" STORZ
WM
SE
T
B
A
C
K
L
I
N
E
RESILIENT GATE VALVES (TYP)
(COPPER OR HI-MOL POLY)
(D.I.P.)
SE
E
D
E
T
A
I
L
E
7
.
8
&
E
7
.
8
.
1
SI
D
E
W
A
L
K
4/2/07D. GEBERT
PR
O
P
E
R
T
Y
L
I
N
E
Packet Page 440 of 562
APPENDIX H
Packet Page 441 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 442 of 562
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
4
3
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
4
4
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
4
5
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
4
6
o
f
5
6
2
Chapter 7.20
BACKFLOW PREVENTION
Sections:
7.20.010 Definitions.
7.20.020 Cross-connections declared unlawful.
7.20.030 Backflow prevention devices to be installed.
7.20.040 Private water supply systems.
7.20.050 Adoption of state regulations.
7.20.060 Abatement of unlawful cross-connections and installation of backflow prevention
devices – Procedures.
7.20.070 Penalties.
7.20.010 Definitions.
A. “Backflow” means a flow, other than the intended direction of flow, of any foreign liquids,
gases, or substances into the distribution system of a public water supply.
B. “Backflow prevention device” means a device approved by the state of Washington,
Department of Social and Health Services or such other state department as has jurisdiction
over the subject matter and by the American Water Works Association, used to counteract
back pressure or prevent back siphonage into the distribution system of a public water supply.
C. “Cross-connection” means any physical arrangement whereby a public water supply is
connected, directly or indirectly, with any other water supply system, sewer, drain, conduit,
pool, storage reservoir, plumbing fixture or other device which contains or may contain
contaminated water, sewage or other wastes or liquids of unknown or unsafe quality, which
may be capable of imparting contamination to a public water supply as a result of backflow.
[Ord. 1711 § 1, 1974].
7.20.020 Cross-connections declared unlawful.
The installation or maintenance of a cross-connection, which, in the opinion of the director of
public works or his designee, will endanger the water quality of the potable water supply of the
city of Edmonds, is unlawful. [Ord. 1711 § 1, 1974].
7.20.030 Backflow prevention devices to be installed.
Backflow prevention devices, when required to be installed in the opinion of the director of
public works or his designated representative, shall be installed and maintained by the service
customer on any service connection to the city of Edmonds water supply system where the
backflow prevention devices are necessary for the protection of the city of Edmonds' water
supply. [Ord. 1711 § 1, 1974].
7.20.040 Private water supply systems.
Use or operation of a private water supply system, contrary to the provisions of the
ordinances of the city of Edmonds, or the laws of the state of Washington or the rules and
regulations of the State Board of Health regarding public water supplies where the private
system is served by the city public water supply is unlawful. [Ord. 1711 § 1, 1974].
7.20.050 Adoption of state regulations.
The community services director or his/her designee is hereby authorized to develop rules
and regulations based upon and including the requirements of the rules and regulations of the
State Board of Health regarding public water supplies and the protection of such supplies from
contamination entitled “Cross-Connection Control Regulations in Washington State,” the
provisions of WAC 246-290-490, and the American Waterworks Association, Pacific Northwest
Page 1 of 2Chapter 7.20 BACKFLOW PREVENTION
6/12/2009http://muniresearch.net/mc/edmonds/edmonds07/edmonds0720.htmlPacket Page 447 of 562
Second Edition of “Accepted Procedure and Practice in Cross-Connection Manual.” The
provisions of the Washington Administrative Code, the rules and regulations of the Department
of Health set forth in the Cross-Connection Control Regulations in Washington State and the
previously referenced Accepted Procedure and Practice in Cross-Connection Manual are
hereby adopted by this reference as fully as if herein set forth in full. Any additional rules and
procedures necessary to implement such regulations shall be developed by the community
services director or his/her designee as appropriate. Such rules and regulations shall be kept
on file along with copies of the above referenced regulations and manuals in the office of the
city engineer of the city of Edmonds. [Ord. 2956 § 1, 1993; Ord. 1711 § 1, 1974].
7.20.060 Abatement of unlawful cross-connections and installation of backflow
prevention devices – Procedures.
Cross-connections declared in this chapter to be unlawful whether presently existing or
hereinafter installed and/or services requiring backflow prevention devices and/or unlawful use
or operation of a private water supply system served by the city public water supply are public
nuisances and, in addition to any other provisions of this code or the ordinances of the city of
Edmonds on abatement of public nuisances, shall be subject to abatement in accordance with
the following procedure:
A. In the event that the director of public works or his designee determines that a nuisance
as herein provided does exist, written notice shall be sent to the person in whose name the
water service is established under the records of the city of Edmonds water division, or
alternatively, a copy of such written notice shall be posted on the premises served.
B. The notice shall provide that the nuisance described herein shall be corrected within 30
days of the date the notice is mailed or posted on the premises.
C. In the event the nuisance is not abated within the prescribed time, water service to the
premises shall be discontinued.
D. In the event that the nuisance, in the opinion of the director of public works or his
designated representative, presents an immediate danger of contamination to the public water
supply, service from the city water supply system to the premises may be terminated without
prior notice; provided, however, notice will be posted on the premises in the manner heretofore
provided at the time the service is terminated. [Ord. 1711 § 1, 1974].
7.20.070 Penalties.
In addition to the remedies set forth herein, any person found guilty of violating any of the
provisions of this chapter shall be subject to the penalties as set forth in ECC 5.50.020. [Ord.
1711 § 1, 1974].
www.ci.edmonds.wa.us Code Publishing Company
Voice: (206) 527-6831
Fax: (206) 527-8411
Email: CPC@codepublishing.com
Page 2 of 2Chapter 7.20 BACKFLOW PREVENTION
6/12/2009http://muniresearch.net/mc/edmonds/edmonds07/edmonds0720.htmlPacket Page 448 of 562
City of Edmonds
Water Production and Distribution
Cross-Connection and Backflow
What is a Cross-Connection?
A cross connection is any actual or potential physical connection between a “potable water” line
and any pipe, vessel, or machine containing non-potable fluid, solid or gas allowing possible entry
to the water system by backflow. This would include, but is not limited to, sewers, drains, conduits,
pools, storage reservoirs, plumbing fixtures, or any other device. The non-potable or unproved
water supply system may contain contaminated liquids, solids, or gases, of unknown or unsafe
quality. Bypass arrangements such as jumper connections, removable sections, swivel or
changeover devices are considered to be a cross connection.
What is Backflow?
Backflow is a flow in reverse from the normal direction of flow in a piping system. It occurs due to a
differential pressure existing between two different points within a continuous fluid system: a fluid
of higher pressures flowing to a fluid of lower pressure. Backflow may occur due to either
“backsiphonage” or “backpressure.”
Irrigation Systems
If you have or are planning on installing an irrigation system, you must first comply with
Washington State Law (WAC 245-290), and the City of Edmonds Ordinance Chapter 7-20. These
Laws require that all irrigation systems have approved backflow protection. A plumbing
permit is also required when installing an irrigation system.
Without proper backflow protection, your irrigation system could endanger the health of your family,
neighbors, and others in the community who are using the public water system.
The following state approved backflow assemblies are required to be installed per the City of
Edmonds Standards, and must be tested by a Washington State Certified Backflow Assembly
Tester upon installation, repairs, relocation, and annually thereafter:
• Pressure Vacuum Breaker Assemblies (PVBA)
• Double Check Valve Assemblies (DCVA)
• Reduced Pressure Backflow Assemblies (RPBA)
The atmospheric vacuum breaker is the only backflow prevention device that does not require
annual testing.
Improper installations of a State Approved Backflow Prevention Assembly or failure to have the
backflow prevention assembly tested are grounds for termination of the water service.
Packet Page 449 of 562
On-site water wells
If you have an on-site well and would like the City of Edmonds water service, you must first comply
to Washington State Law (WAC 173-160 and WAC 246-290), and the City of Edmonds Ordinance
(Chapter 7-20), before the city can install the water service.
• Installation of a State Approved Reduced Pressure Backflow Assembly: If you elect to
keep your well, you will need to install a State Approved Reduced Pressure Principle
Backflow Assembly (RPBA) per City of Edmonds Standards above must be completed
before the water can be turned on.
• Abandonment of Your Well: If you elect to abandon your well, it must be properly
abandoned using a licensed well driller. The licensed well driller will abandon the well per
Washington State Law (WAC 173-160).
Capping the well or pulling the pump is NOT proper abandonment; therefore the installation of
a State Approve Reduced Pressure Backflow Prevention Assembly is required.
Improper installation of the State Approved Backflow Prevention Assembly or the improper
abandonment of the well is grounds for termination of the water service.
If you have any questions concerning backflow installations, certified testers, or approved backflow
prevention assembly, please call the Public Works Department at 425-771-0235, extension 1644
or by email mcmurphy@ci.edmonds.wa.us .
Wordata/Water/Cross Connection/Info for Web Site
Packet Page 450 of 562
APPENDIX I
Packet Page 451 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 452 of 562
City of Edmonds Fire Code Chapter 19.25
An update to the City of Edmonds Fire Code is currently underway and scheduled
for a public hearing in June 2010. Upon approval by the City Council, the updated
code will replace the current code that follows.
Packet Page 453 of 562
Chapter 19.25
FIRE CODE
Sections:
19.25.000 Adoption of life safety and maintenance codes.
19.25.005 Section amendments.
19.25.010 Department of fire prevention.
19.25.015 Definitions.
19.25.020 Permits.
19.25.025 Charges for water mains and hydrants.
19.25.030 Charges for fire review and inspection.
19.25.035 Fire extinguishers and systems service.
19.25.040 Automatic sprinkler systems.
19.25.045 Modifications, interpretations and appeals.
19.25.050 Fire protection water supplies.
19.25.055 Location of public hydrants.
19.25.060 Location of private hydrants.
19.25.065 Mains and service lines.
19.25.070 Hydrant specifications.
19.25.075 Penalties.
19.25.000 Adoption of life safety and maintenance codes.
Under the statutory authority of RCW 19.27.031 and 19.27.074, the 2006 Edition of the International Fire
Code (IFC) as published by the International Code Council including the state amendments set forth in
Chapter 51-54 WAC, including reference standards of the National Fire Protection Association and the
following Appendices: B (Fire-Flow Requirements for Buildings), C (Fire Hydrant Locations and
Distribution), E (Hazard Categories) and F (Hazard Ranking) are adopted by reference as if fully set forth
as the fire code of the city of Edmonds. The International Existing Building Code is not adopted and all
references to that code shall be disregarded. [Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
19.25.005 Section amendments.
The following sections of the IFC have been added, amended, deleted or replaced as follows:
A. Chapter 1, Administration.
1. Section 104.10.1 Assistance from other agencies. Police and other enforcement agencies
shall have authority to render necessary assistance in the investigation of fires and
enforcement of the life safety provisions of this code when requested to do so by the fire
code official.
2. Section 104.11.2 Obstructing operations. No person shall obstruct the operations of the fire
department in connection with extinguishment control or investigation of any fire, or actions
relative to other emergencies, or disobey any lawful command of the fire chief or officer of the
fire department in charge of the emergency, or any part thereof, or any lawful order of a police
officer assisting the fire department.
3. Section 108 Board of appeals. Replaced by Chapter 19.80 ECDC.
B. Chapter 5, Fire Service Features (Fire Apparatus Access Roads). The following sections
are adopted as originally set forth in the IFC:
1. Section 503.1 Where required.
2. Section 503.1.1 Buildings and facilities.
Chapter 19.25 http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/edmonds19/edmonds1925.html
1 of 7 6/8/2010 3:51 PMPacket Page 454 of 562
3. Section 503.1.2 Additional access.
4. Section 503.1.3 High-piled storage.
5. Section 503.2 Specifications.
6. Section 503.3 Marking.
7. Section 503.4 Obstruction of fire apparatus access roads.
C. Chapter 9, Fire Protection Systems.
1. Section 901.6.1 Standards. Fire protection systems shall be inspected, tested and
maintained in accordance with the referenced standards listed in Table 901.6.1 and this
chapter. For the sole purpose of inspecting, testing and maintenance of water-based fire
protection systems in accordance with NFPA 25, all existing water-based fire protection
systems shall be considered new as of July 1, 2004.
2. Section 904.11.7 Existing commercial cooking systems. Existing fire suppression systems
not in compliance with Underwriters Laboratory Standard 300 shall be replaced with a
conforming system by July 1, 2005.
D. Chapter 33, Explosives and Fireworks.
1. Section 3301.1.3 Fireworks. Exceptions No. 3 and No. 4 replaced by Chapter 5.27 ECC.
[Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
19.25.010 Department of fire prevention.
A. There is established in the city fire department a department of fire prevention, to be supervised by the
fire code official.
B. The IFC shall be enforced by the department of fire prevention.
C. The fire code official shall be the fire marshal who shall be in charge of the department of fire
prevention and who shall be appointed by the mayor on the basis of applicable civil service rules and
regulations for the city.
D. The fire marshal may recommend to the fire chief the employment of technical officers, inspectors
and other employees. If approved, technical officers and inspectors shall be hired or assigned for that
purpose.
E. An annual report shall be provided to the mayor. It shall contain all proceedings under this code, with
other statistics as the fire marshal of the city fire department may wish to include. The fire marshal may
also recommend any changes to the code. [Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
19.25.015 Definitions.
A. Whenever the term “fire code official” is used in the IFC, it shall mean the fire marshal.
B. Whenever the term “chief administrative officer” or “fire chief” is used in the IFC, it shall mean the fire
chief.
C. Whenever the term “legal representative of the jurisdiction” is used in the IFC, it shall mean the city
attorney.
D. Whenever the word “jurisdiction” is used in the IFC, it shall mean the city of Edmonds. [Ord. 3651 § 1,
2007].
Chapter 19.25 http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/edmonds19/edmonds1925.html
2 of 7 6/8/2010 3:51 PMPacket Page 455 of 562
19.25.020 Permits.
A. Whenever the IFC requires a permit, the application for the permit shall be accompanied by the full
application fee in order to vest rights under the permit and to constitute a complete permit application.
The permit fee shall be set by the city council annually by resolution or on such review cycle as the
council, in its discretion, shall determine. All permits shall be renewed annually unless the specific time
period is set forth when the permit is granted. No permit shall be transferable and each permit shall be
issued on a single job, transaction, owner, or occupancy basis, except that the fire marshal is authorized
to consolidate permits for a single location, building, or unit.
B. In the event that the activity, location or risk associated with the activity requires a fire safety
inspection in excess of the time estimated within the permit fee (one hour) an inspection fee equal to the
actual cost to the city of providing the inspection shall be charged pursuant to ECDC 19.25.030.
C. The following activities regulated pursuant to the IFC shall not require a permit to be issued under this
section. Nothing herein shall be interpreted, however, to exempt these activities from other permits or
licenses required by law or ordinance. The accepted activities are:
1. Carnivals and fairs;
2. Open flames and candles;
3. Open burning (see ECC 5.22.030);
4. Fire hydrants and water control valves;
5. Private fire hydrants;
6. Roof-top heliports;
7. Waste handling. [Ord. 3705 § 1, 2008; Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
19.25.025 Charges for water mains and hydrants.
A. Water main replacement to city standards, plans and specifications will be accomplished by the city in
accordance with the city's water comprehensive plan and adopted capital improvement program. For
private development, owners shall be responsible for the replacement (upgrade) of the existing public
main (including fire hydrants and appurtenances) to city standard when identified by the city engineer as a
condition of development approval. The city will pay the difference in material costs only between six
inches and the size that is required to be installed only when the existing system is a looped system.
B. A hydrant use permit issued by the public works director is required in order for any person or entity
other than fire department personnel to draw water from any fire hydrant.
C. The installation of water mains, fire hydrants and appurtenances to properties not previously served
shall be sized in accordance with the city's water comprehensive plan, built to city standard and shall be at
the benefited property owner's or developer's expense.
D. Oversized water mains required for special use demands relating to a particular property or
development shall be installed at the developer's or property owner's expense.
E. If the water mains installed pursuant to subsections (C) and (D) of this section provide service or
benefits to properties other than owned by the water main installer, latecomer agreements may be
arranged between the city and the installer for the construction and dedication of the water facilities
pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 35.91 RCW. [Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
19.25.030 Charges for fire review and inspection.
A. Certain licenses and permits issued by the city include a fire department inspection. The cost of the
Chapter 19.25 http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/edmonds19/edmonds1925.html
3 of 7 6/8/2010 3:51 PMPacket Page 456 of 562
permit may include an estimate of the normal time associated with the fire inspection. Where the permit
does not include such an estimate, or when the estimate of time established within the ordinance is
exceeded by the actual time spent inspecting a premises, location or activity, the actual cost of
conducting the inspection shall be charged. The administrative services director is authorized to establish
on an annual basis, in conjunction with or immediately following the budget process, a fee for the hourly
charge associated with the provision of services by reasonable classifications of city employees.
B. The permittee shall pay the actual charges of inspection, in addition to the permit fee associated with
such activity. Licenses and permits requiring the actual payment of inspection charges include, but are not
limited to, public amusement licenses issued pursuant to Chapter 4.32 ECC, cabaret dance licenses
issued pursuant to Chapter 4.48 ECC, adult entertainment facility licenses issued pursuant to Chapter
4.52 ECC, and aircraft landing licenses issued pursuant to Chapter 4.80 ECC.
C. No charge shall be levied against any department or agency of the city of Edmonds operating within
the city's general fund. [Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
19.25.035 Fire extinguishers and systems service.
A. A permit or a current license/certification by an approved testing authority shall be required for the
servicing of fire extinguishers and fire extinguishing systems.
B. Applicants for a permit to service fire extinguishers and fire extinguishing systems shall be required to
take and pass an examination to be established by the fire marshal. Permit fees are set forth in Chapter
19.70 ECDC. If the permit is not issued, because the examination is not held or the applicant fails to
complete the examination, a refund of the permit fee will be made to the applicant.
C. Service permits shall be issued by the fire marshal. The permit may be revoked at any time the
permittee fails to comply with city, state or federal regulations. The permit is not transferable and shall be
void if the permit holder changes business address or employers.
D. The permit shall expire after five years. The permittee shall then obtain a new permit if he wishes to
continue servicing fire extinguishers or fire extinguishing systems.
E. The fire marshal may waive permit requirements for applicant when provided with proof of current
license or current certification by an approved testing authority. The fire marshal may, as often as
necessary, inquire with licensing authority regarding licensing and certification testing methods,
requirements and dates of effectiveness, prior to approval for work performed.
F. A certificate of inspection for every system test, maintenance, activation and repair shall be forwarded
to the fire marshal upon completion of service. One copy of that record shall be maintained on the
premises.
G. Appeals regarding the administration of the fire extinguisher and fire-extinguishing system service
permit and license approval process shall file their appeal with the fire chief and be heard before the
board of appeals pursuant to Chapter 19.80 ECDC. [Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
19.25.040 Automatic sprinkler systems.
An automatic sprinkler system shall be installed and maintained throughout every building constructed
under the International Residential Code containing five or more attached dwelling units. Residential or
quick response standard sprinkler heads shall be used in accordance with their approved listing in the
dwelling. [Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
19.25.045 Modifications, interpretations and appeals.
A. The fire marshal may modify any of the provisions of the IFC or this chapter on written application by
the owner or lessee when there are practical difficulties in carrying out the strict letter of the code.
Approved modifications, including alternative materials and methods, shall observe the spirit of the code,
secure the public safety and do substantial justice. The particulars of an approved modification shall be
Chapter 19.25 http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/edmonds19/edmonds1925.html
4 of 7 6/8/2010 3:51 PMPacket Page 457 of 562
written by the fire marshal and kept in the records of the department. A signed copy shall be promptly
given to the applicant.
B. Fire department modifications and code interpretations shall be maintained in writing so as to aid in
conformance and uniform application to the intent of ruling fire and life safety related codes, ordinances,
and standards.
C. Whenever the fire marshal disapproves an application or refuses to grant a permit applied for, or when
it is claimed that the provisions of the code do not apply or that the true intent and meaning of the code
have been misconstrued or wrongly interpreted, the applicant may appeal from the decision of the fire
marshal to the fire chief. Such appeals shall be governed by the procedures set forth in Chapter 19.80
ECDC. [Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
19.25.050 Fire protection water supplies.
All fire hydrant, water main and appurtenance installations shall meet the provisions of this chapter as well
as other applicable plans, standards and codes adopted by the city of Edmonds, as a condition of
approval of subdivisions and building permits. [Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
19.25.055 Location of public hydrants.
A. Public hydrants are those owned by the city.
B. All public fire hydrants shall be installed at street intersections where possible. Public hydrant spacing
shall be measured along vehicle access routes.
C. In areas zoned for single-family residential use, public hydrants shall be spaced no more than 600 feet
apart. If dead-end streets, or driveways, singly or in combination, are over 300 feet long, additional public
hydrants shall be installed so that the public hydrant spacing is not over 600 feet.
D. In areas other than single-family residential, public fire hydrants shall be spaced an average of 300
feet apart. If dead-end streets or driveways, singly or in combination, are over 150 feet long, additional
public hydrants shall be installed so that the public hydrant spacing is not over 300 feet. [Ord. 3651 § 1,
2007].
19.25.060 Location of private hydrants.
A. A private hydrant is privately owned, but is subject to the use of the city for inspection and testing at
reasonable times, and for fire suppression at any time. All private hydrants shall be connected to the city
water main through a privately owned and maintained double detector check valve assembly.
B. All buildings except single-family dwellings that are located so that a portion is more than 200 feet from
a street, as measured along vehicle access routes, shall have private fire hydrants located at the building.
Single-family dwellings with a fire-flow calculation area greater than 4,800 square feet may require a
private hydrant.
C. Buildings having required fire flows of 3,000 gallons per minute may have fire hydrants on one side of
the building only. There shall never be fewer than two fire hydrants for any building larger than 5,000
square feet in the first floor area including covered parking and storage. When the required fire flow is
3,000 gallons per minute or greater, the fire hydrants shall be served by a looped main around the
building or complex of buildings.
D. Fire hydrants shall be spaced on an average 300 feet around the perimeter line, 50 feet out of the
buildings. All hydrants shall be placed in locations accessible to fire department vehicles adjacent to fire
apparatus access roads. The fire marshal shall determine the location of fire hydrants depending on
utility, topography and building location for maximum fire protection. [Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
19.25.065 Mains and service lines.
A. All public hydrants in single-family areas shall be supplied by not less than six-inch looped water mains.
Chapter 19.25 http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/edmonds19/edmonds1925.html
5 of 7 6/8/2010 3:51 PMPacket Page 458 of 562
All hydrants in areas other than single-family residential shall be supplied by not less than eight-inch
looped water mains. Dead-end water mains to hydrants shall be at least eight inches in diameter, with the
exception of mains up to 50 feet long which may be no less than six inches in diameter.
B. The service line from the water main to the hydrant shall be no less than six inches in diameter. Any
service lines over 50 feet in length from water main to hydrant shall be no less than eight inches in
diameter.
C. When city streets, or state highways having water mains in the public right-of-way, are improved to
permanent street or highway improvement standards, any water mains in the public right-of-way of said
streets or highways that are substandard as to size or material according to applicable city standards
shall be replaced with ductile iron water mains conforming to applicable city standards and plans. [Ord.
3651 § 1, 2007].
19.25.070 Hydrant specifications.
A. The installation of flush type hydrants (hydrants entirely below grade) is prohibited.
B. Fire hydrants shall have two two-and-one-half-inch hose outlets and one four-and-one-half-inch pumper
outlet. All outlets' ports shall have national standard thread. Additionally, the pumper outlet shall be
provided with a four-inch Storz adapter. Fire hydrants shall meet the American Water Works Association,
Standard No. C-502 and current city standards.
C. Fire hydrants and appurtenances shall be installed in accordance with generally accepted engineering
practices and city standards, and to the approval of the city engineer, who shall also approve the
selection and use of all pipe fittings and valves. There shall be a foot valve installed between the service
main and the hydrant sufficient to permit the repair and replacement of the hydrant without disruption of
water service. The foot valve shall be installed to city standards. The location of all such valves installed
shall be properly and accurately marked on as-built plans or drawings with generally acceptable
engineering detail, two copies of which shall be furnished to the public works department. Valves shall be
furnished with a standard valve box.
D. Hydrants shall stand plumb, be set to established street grade with the lowest outlet of the hydrant at
least 18 inches above the adjacent finished grade and at least 36 inches of clear area around the hydrant
for clearance of hydrant wrench on both outlets and on the control valve. The pumper port shall face the
street, as determined by the fire marshal.
E. Where reasonably necessary to protect a hydrant from damage, the fire marshal may require hydrants
to be protected by two or more posts, eight inches in diameter by five feet long, made either of
reinforced concrete or steel.
F. If there presently exist fire hydrants which do not conform to these requirements, they shall be replaced
with conforming hydrants upon redevelopment or the timetable established by the city's comprehensive
plan.
G. No person shall plant any vegetation, erect any structure or perform any action which results in the
obstruction of a fire hydrant for a distance of 50 feet along the immediate route of approach. The owner-
occupant of any area in which a hydrant is located shall be responsible for removing weed and tree
growth from around the hydrant for a distance of not less than five feet. The purpose of this section is to
maintain clear approach and visual area around the hydrant.
H. The installation of the fire hydrants and mains may be accomplished by city capital contract,
developers (as a condition of development) or public works department employees. All installations are
to be approved by the city engineer.
I. Following the installation of fire hydrants, all pipes, valves and hydrants shall be pressure tested,
purified, flushed and sampled to meet the requirements of the American Water Works Association,
Chapter 19.25 http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/edmonds19/edmonds1925.html
6 of 7 6/8/2010 3:51 PMPacket Page 459 of 562
Standard No. C 502. [Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
19.25.075 Penalties.
A. Any person who violates any of the provisions of the IFC including those standards of the National
Fire Protection Association specifically referenced in the IFC as adopted and amended herein or fails to
comply therewith, or who violates or fails to comply with any order made thereunder, or who builds in
violation of any detailed statement of specifications or plans submitted and approved thereunder, and
from which no appeal has been taken, or who fails to comply with such an order as affirmed or modified
by decision of the city's board of appeals or by a court of competent jurisdiction, within the required time,
shall severally for each and every such violation and noncompliance, respectively, be guilty of a gross
misdemeanor, punishable as provided in ECC 5.50.020.
B. The imposition of one penalty for any violation shall not excuse the violation nor permit it to continue;
and all such persons shall be required to correct or remedy such violations or defects within a reasonable
time; and when not otherwise specified, each day that prohibited conditions exist or are maintained shall
constitute a separate offense. The application of the above penalty shall not be held to prevent the
enforced removal of prohibited conditions. [Ord. 3651 § 1, 2007].
Chapter 19.25 http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/edmonds19/edmonds1925.html
7 of 7 6/8/2010 3:51 PMPacket Page 460 of 562
APPENDIX J
Packet Page 461 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 462 of 562
A
20
1
0
An
n
u
a
l
W
a
t
e
r
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
R
e
p
o
r
t
City of Edmonds
Public Works Department
Ed
m
o
n
d
s
W
a
t
e
r
S
o
u
r
c
e
:
W
h
e
r
e
ou
r
d
r
i
n
k
i
n
g
w
a
t
e
r
c
o
m
e
s
f
r
o
m
Ev
e
r
e
t
t
W
a
t
e
r
S
o
u
r
c
e
Ed
m
o
n
d
s
D
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
s
y
s
t
e
m
:
C I T Y O F E D M O N D S
A
20
0
9
W
a
t
e
r
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
Dr
i
n
k
i
n
g
W
a
t
e
r
T
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
N
o
t
i
c
e
Ma
n
a
g
i
n
g
t
h
e
D
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
S
y
s
t
e
m
Pa
c
k
e
t
Pa
g
e
46
3
of
56
2
Po
s
s
i
b
l
e
W
a
t
e
r
Q
u
a
l
i
t
y
C
o
n
c
e
r
n
s
Cr
y
p
t
o
s
p
o
r
i
d
i
u
m
Ra
d
o
n
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
f
r
o
m
E
P
A
Le
a
d
a
n
d
C
o
p
p
e
r
Pa
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
Le
a
d
Co
p
p
e
r
Units ppb ppmMCLGActionLevel90thpercentile# Homes Exceeding Action Level Source 0 1.315 1.3.3 0.1883 out of 134 (2.2%)NoneCorrosion of household plumbing systemsEverett Regional Monitoring
AL
=
A
c
t
i
o
n
L
e
v
e
l
:
T
h
e
c
o
n
c
e
n
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
o
f
a
c
o
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t
w
h
i
c
h
,
i
f
e
x
c
e
e
d
e
d
,
tr
i
g
g
e
r
s
t
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
o
r
o
t
h
e
r
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
w
h
i
c
h
a
w
a
t
e
r
s
y
s
t
e
m
m
u
s
t
fo
l
l
o
w
(
f
o
r
l
e
a
d
a
n
d
c
o
p
p
e
r
m
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
)
.
NA
-
N
o
t
A
p
p
l
i
c
a
b
l
e
(
E
P
A
h
a
s
n
o
t
e
s
t
a
b
l
i
s
h
e
d
t
h
e
s
e
g
o
a
l
s
)
.
ND
-
N
o
t
D
e
t
e
c
t
e
d
.
NR
-
N
o
t
R
e
g
u
l
a
t
e
d
(
t
h
e
s
e
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
c
e
s
a
r
e
n
o
t
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
e
d
b
y
E
P
A
)
.
pp
m
=
P
a
r
t
s
p
e
r
M
i
l
l
i
o
n
:
(
O
n
e
p
a
r
t
o
f
a
p
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
r
c
o
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t
i
s
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
fo
r
e
v
e
r
y
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
p
a
r
t
s
o
f
w
a
t
e
r
)
.
pp
b
=
P
a
r
t
s
p
e
r
B
i
l
l
i
o
n
:
(
O
n
e
p
a
r
t
o
f
a
p
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
r
c
o
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t
i
s
p
r
e
s
e
n
t
fo
r
e
v
e
r
y
b
i
l
l
i
o
n
p
a
r
t
s
o
f
w
a
t
e
r
)
.
Co
n
v
e
r
s
i
o
n
s
:
1
p
a
r
t
p
e
r
m
i
l
l
i
o
n
(
p
p
m
)
=
1
m
g
/
L
1
p
a
r
t
p
e
r
b
i
l
l
i
o
n
(
p
p
b
)
=
1 ug
/
L
1
p
p
m
=
1
0
0
0
p
p
b
1
m
g
/
L
=
1
0
0
0
u
g
/
L
Tu
r
b
i
d
i
t
y
i
s
a
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
o
f
t
h
e
a
m
o
u
n
t
o
f
p
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
t
e
s
i
n
w
a
t
e
r
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
d
in
N
e
p
h
e
l
o
m
e
t
r
i
c
T
u
r
b
i
d
i
t
y
U
n
i
t
s
(
N
T
U
)
.
P
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
t
e
s
i
n
w
a
t
e
r
c
a
n
in
c
l
u
d
e
b
a
c
t
e
r
i
a
,
v
i
r
u
s
e
s
a
n
d
p
r
o
t
o
z
o
a
n
s
th
a
t
c
a
n
c
a
u
s
e
d
i
s
e
a
s
e
.
T
u
r
b
i
d
i
t
y
me
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
s
a
r
e
u
s
e
d
t
o
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
t
h
e
e
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
n
e
s
s
o
f
t
h
e
tr
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
pr
o
c
e
s
s
e
s
u
s
e
d
t
o
r
e
m
o
v
e
t
h
e
s
e
p
a
r
t
i
c
u
l
a
t
e
s
.
V
a
l
u
e
s
r
e
p
o
r
t
e
d
a
r
e
t
h
e
lo
w
e
s
t
m
o
n
t
h
l
y
p
e
r
c
e
n
t
a
g
e
o
f
s
a
m
p
l
e
s
t
h
a
t
m
e
t
t
h
e
t
u
r
b
i
d
i
t
y
l
i
m
i
t
(
0
.
3
N
T
U
fo
r
E
P
A
a
n
d
0
.
1
N
T
U
f
o
r
t
h
e
s
t
a
t
e
)
a
n
d
t
h
e
h
i
g
h
e
s
t
fi
l
t
e
r
e
d
w
a
t
e
r
t
u
r
b
i
d
i
t
y
me
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
o
b
t
a
i
n
e
d
i
n
2
0
0
8
.
MC
L
=
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
C
o
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t
L
e
v
e
l
:
T
h
e
h
i
g
h
e
s
t
l
e
v
e
l
o
f
a
c
o
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t
th
a
t
i
s
a
l
l
o
w
e
d
i
n
d
r
i
n
k
i
n
g
w
a
t
e
r
.
M
C
L
s
a
r
e
s
e
t
a
s
c
l
o
s
e
t
o
t
h
e
M
C
L
G
s
a
s
fe
a
s
i
b
l
e
u
s
i
n
g
t
h
e
b
e
s
t
a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
t
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
t
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
y
.
MC
L
G
=
M
a
x
i
m
u
m
C
o
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t
L
e
v
e
l
G
o
a
l
:
T
h
e
l
e
v
e
l
o
f
a
c
o
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t
i
n
dr
i
n
k
i
n
g
w
a
t
e
r
b
e
l
o
w
w
h
i
c
h
t
h
e
r
e
i
s
n
o
k
n
o
w
n
o
r
e
x
p
e
c
t
e
d
r
i
s
k
t
o
h
e
a
l
t
h
.
MC
L
G
s
a
l
l
o
w
f
o
r
a
m
a
r
g
i
n
o
f
s
a
f
e
t
y
.
NT
U
=
N
e
p
h
e
l
o
m
e
t
r
i
c
T
u
r
b
i
d
i
t
y
U
n
i
t
:
T
h
e
u
n
i
t
o
f
m
e
a
s
u
r
e
m
e
n
t
f
o
r
t
u
r
b
i
d
i
t
y
.
TT
=
T
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
T
e
c
h
n
i
q
u
e
:
A
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
p
r
o
c
e
s
s
i
n
t
e
n
d
e
d
t
o
r
e
d
u
c
e
t
h
e
l
e
v
e
l
of
a
c
o
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t
i
n
d
r
i
n
k
i
n
g
w
a
t
e
r
.
T
h
e
t
u
r
b
i
d
i
t
y
M
C
L
t
h
a
t
a
p
p
l
i
e
s
t
o
t
h
e
To
l
t
w
a
t
e
r
s
u
p
p
l
y
i
s
5
N
T
U
.
1T
h
e
s
e
s
u
b
s
t
a
n
c
e
s
a
r
e
d
i
s
i
n
f
e
c
t
i
o
n
b
y
-
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
s
w
h
i
c
h
m
u
s
t
b
e
m
o
n
i
t
o
r
e
d
t
o
d
e
t
e
r
m
i
n
e
co
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
t
h
e
U
S
E
P
A
S
t
a
g
e
1
a
n
d
S
t
a
g
e
2
D
i
s
i
n
f
e
c
t
a
n
t
s
/
D
i
s
i
n
f
e
c
t
i
o
n
B
y
-
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
s
Ru
l
e
s
(
S
t
a
g
e
2
D
/
D
B
P
R
)
.
2 I
n
c
l
u
d
e
s
r
e
s
u
l
t
s
f
o
r
1
6
s
t
u
d
y
s
i
t
e
s
a
n
d
f
o
u
r
a
d
d
i
t
i
o
n
a
l
s
i
t
e
s
t
h
a
t
a
r
e
m
o
n
i
t
o
r
e
d
f
o
r
co
m
p
l
i
a
n
c
e
w
i
t
h
c
u
r
r
e
n
t
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
T
h
e
s
t
u
d
y
s
i
t
e
s
w
e
r
e
m
o
n
i
t
o
r
e
d
d
u
r
i
n
g
O
c
t
o
b
e
r
a
n
d
De
c
e
m
b
e
r
2
0
0
7
a
s
p
a
r
t
o
f
a
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
s
t
u
d
y
t
o
i
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
n
e
w
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
s
y
s
t
e
m
m
o
n
i
t
o
r
i
n
g
si
t
e
s
.
T
h
i
s
s
t
u
d
y
k
n
o
w
n
a
s
t
h
e
i
n
i
t
i
a
l
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
s
y
s
t
e
m
e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
,
o
r
I
D
S
E
,
a
n
d
w
i
l
l
co
n
t
i
n
u
e
t
h
r
o
u
g
h
A
u
g
u
s
t
2
0
0
8
.
T
h
e
I
D
S
E
i
s
r
e
q
u
i
r
e
d
b
y
t
h
e
S
t
a
g
e
2
D
/
D
B
P
R
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
i
o
n
s
.
3 Th
e
M
C
L
f
o
r
T
T
H
M
i
s
8
0
p
p
b
.
4 Th
e
M
C
L
f
o
r
H
A
A
5
i
s
6
0
p
p
b
.
De
t
e
c
t
e
d
U
n
r
e
g
u
l
a
t
e
d
C
o
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t
s
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
Un
i
t
s
E
v
e
r
e
t
t
W
a
t
e
r
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
R
a
n
g
e
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
D
e
t
e
c
t
e
d
V
a
l
u
e
Al
k
a
l
i
n
i
t
y
2,
3
pp
m
2
1
2
.
2
-
2
9
.
0
1
7
.
1
Al
u
m
i
n
u
m
3
pp
b
0.
0
0
8
-
0
.
0
5
0
0
.
0
1
6
Ar
s
e
n
i
c
4
p
p
b
N
D
1
N
D
1
Ca
l
c
i
u
m
H
a
r
d
n
e
s
s
3
p
p
m
2
7
.
1
-
1
2
.
0
8
.
9
pH
3
s
.
u
.
6
.
8
-
9
.
1
8
.
1
So
d
i
u
m
4
p
p
m
6
.
2
-
7
.
1
6
.
3
To
t
a
l
H
a
r
d
n
e
s
s
2,
3
p
p
m
2
9
.
1
-
1
3
.
3
1
1
.
3
1 ND
=
N
o
t
D
e
t
e
c
t
e
d
2 Ha
r
d
n
e
s
s
a
n
d
a
l
k
a
l
i
n
i
t
y
u
n
i
t
s
a
r
e
i
n
p
p
m
a
s
C
a
C
O
3 (
c
a
l
c
i
u
m
ca
r
b
o
n
a
t
e
e
q
u
i
v
a
l
e
n
t
u
n
i
t
s
)
.
3 Re
s
u
l
t
s
a
r
e
f
r
o
m
s
a
m
p
l
e
s
c
o
l
l
e
c
t
e
d
f
r
o
m
2
6
l
o
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
i
n
Ev
e
r
e
t
t
’
s
d
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
s
y
s
t
e
m
.
4
So
d
i
u
m
a
n
d
A
r
s
e
n
i
c
a
r
e
m
o
n
i
t
o
r
e
d
a
t
t
h
e
t
r
e
a
t
m
e
n
t
p
l
a
n
t
ef
fl
u
e
n
t
.
Vo
l
u
n
t
a
r
y
I
n
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Pa
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
Un
i
t
s
I
d
e
a
l
L
e
v
e
l
/
G
o
a
l
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
W
a
t
e
r
Ty
p
i
c
a
l
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
(M
C
L
G
)
Ra
n
g
e
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
Br
o
m
o
d
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
m
e
t
h
a
n
e
1,
2
p
p
b
0
1
.
1
-
2
.
0
1
.
5
Ch
l
o
r
o
f
o
r
m
(
t
r
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
m
e
t
h
a
n
e
)1,
2
p
p
b
3
0
0
2
3
.
3
-
3
6
.
0
3
2
.
1
Di
s
i
n
f
e
c
t
i
o
n
To
t
a
l
T
r
i
h
a
l
a
m
e
t
h
a
n
e
s
(
T
T
H
M
)
2
p
p
b
S
e
e
N
o
t
e
3
2
7
.
6
-
3
9
.
2
3
3
.
7
by
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
Di
c
h
l
o
r
o
a
c
e
t
i
c
A
c
i
d
1,
2
p
p
b
0
2
.
4
-
1
9
.
2
8
.
6
fr
o
m
c
h
l
o
r
i
n
e
Tr
i
c
h
l
o
r
o
a
c
e
t
i
c
A
c
i
d
1,
2
p
p
b
3
0
0
1
0
.
0
-
2
4
.
5
1
8
.
6
Ha
l
o
a
c
e
t
i
c
A
c
i
d
s
(
H
A
A
5
)
2
p
p
b
S
e
e
N
o
t
e
4
1
4
.
5
-
4
7
.
4
2
8
.
9
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
Un
i
t
s
E
P
A
’
s
A
l
l
o
w
a
b
l
e
L
i
m
i
t
s
A
l
d
e
r
w
o
o
d
W
a
t
e
r
Ty
p
i
c
a
l
S
o
u
r
c
e
s
C
o
m
p
l
y
M
C
L
G
M
C
L
R
A
N
G
E
O
R
A
V
E
R
A
G
E
OT
H
E
R
O
T
H
E
R
Fl
u
o
r
i
d
e
pp
m
2
4
0.
7
8
-
1
.
1
0
.
9
4
D
e
n
t
a
l
a
d
d
i
t
i
v
e
Y
e
s
Ni
t
r
a
t
e
pp
m
1
0
10
0
.
0
4
9
-
0
.
1
2
0
0
.
0
8
7
E
r
o
s
i
o
n
f
r
o
m
Ye
s
na
t
u
r
a
l
d
e
p
o
s
i
t
s
%
o
f
p
o
s
i
t
i
v
e
s
a
m
p
l
e
s
%
0
5%
0
0
Na
t
u
r
a
l
l
y
fo
r
T
o
t
a
l
C
o
l
i
f
o
r
m
p
e
r
m
o
n
t
h
pr
e
s
e
n
t
i
n
Y
e
s
th
e
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
Mi
c
r
o
b
i
a
l
P
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
(
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
d
i
n
E
d
m
o
n
d
s
D
i
s
t
r
i
b
u
t
i
o
n
S
y
s
t
e
m
)
%
o
f
p
o
s
i
t
i
v
e
s
a
m
p
l
e
s
%
0
5%
0
0
Na
t
u
r
a
l
l
y
fo
r
T
o
t
a
l
C
o
l
i
f
o
r
m
p
e
r
m
o
n
t
h
pr
e
s
e
n
t
i
n
Y
e
s
th
e
e
n
v
i
r
o
n
m
e
n
t
Tu
r
b
i
d
i
t
y
,
i
n
o
r
g
a
n
i
c
s
,
a
n
d
M
i
c
r
o
b
i
a
l
C
o
n
t
a
m
i
n
a
n
t
s
Tu
r
b
i
d
i
t
y
NT
U
N
/
A
TT
10
0
%
0
.
0
8
So
i
l
E
r
o
s
i
o
n
Y
e
s
20
0
9
W
A
T
E
R
Q
U
A
L
I
T
Y
D
A
T
A
Pa
c
k
e
t
Pa
g
e
46
4
of
56
2
APPENDIX K
Packet Page 465 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 466 of 562
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
6
7
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
4
6
8
o
f
5
6
2
Packet Page 469 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 470 of 562
APPENDIX L
Packet Page 471 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 472 of 562
Chapter 7.10
WATER SERVICE
Sections:
7.10.010 Application for water use.
7.10.020 Accounts – Payments.
7.10.025 Delinquency charge.
7.10.030 Suspension of water use – Procedure.
7.10.040 Access to buildings.
7.10.050 Access to curb cocks and meter covers.
7.10.060 Limitation on water use.
7.10.061 Water restrictions – Powers of the city.
7.10.062 Water restrictions – Surcharge.
7.10.063 Enforcement.
7.10.065 Suspension of service – Failure to comply with sewer connection notice.
7.10.070 Turn on and turn off charges.
7.10.080 Request for inspection of meters.
7.10.110 Charge and bill adjustments.
7.10.120 Service connections.
7.10.130 Service pipe – Depth and size – Work left uncovered until inspected.
7.10.140 Dormant services – Connections.
7.10.150 Service pressure corrections.
7.10.160 Stop and waste valves.
7.10.170 Water shut-off – Temperature relief valve, pressure relief valve, and check valve required.
7.10.180 Unlawful acts.
7.10.010 Application for water use.
All applications for the use of water shall be made at the development services department by the owner, or by the
owner’s authorized agent, on printed forms furnished by said department for that purpose, and shall contain the name
and description of the lot, block and addition. The applicant shall state the purposes for which the water is to be used
and shall agree to conform to the ordinances, rules, and regulations, with modification which may be adopted, as a
condition for use of water. [Ord. 3629 § 2, 2007; Ord. 2214 § 1, 1981; Ord. 2139 § 3, 1980; Ord. 413 § 9, 1929].
7.10.020 Accounts – Payments.
A. All accounts shall be kept in the name of the owner, and all charges shall be made against the property as well as
the owner thereof. No change of ownership or occupancy shall affect the application of this section. All bills are
payable within 25 days from the billing date. If water bills are not paid within a stated period, the water will be shut off.
Water will be turned on after payment of the fees as set forth in ECC 7.10.070, in addition to the amount of delinquent
charges.
B. At least 10 days before water is scheduled to be shut off, the administrative services director, or a designated city
official, shall notify the owner and the occupant of the property. The owner shall be notified by mail at the address on
the account, and the occupant shall be notified by mail, door hanger or other form at the property. Mailed notices shall
be deemed received three business days after mailing. All notices shall contain the following:
1. Reason for water shut off;
2. Delinquent amount that needs to be paid to avert interruption in water service;
3. Instructions on scheduling a hearing to show that the account is not delinquent; and
4. The day on or after which water will be shut off.
C. After notification, the owner and the occupant shall be afforded the opportunity to present to the administrative
services director, or a designated official, evidence that the delinquent charges have been paid. Such opportunity shall
be afforded before the water is shut off; provided, that the owner or the occupant make a request for the same to the
administrative services director, or a designated official, within three days of presumptive receipt of the notice. The
burden shall be on the owner and/or occupant to prove that the delinquent charges have been paid.
D. After reviewing the evidence by the owner and/or occupant, the administrative services director, or the designated
official to whom the evidence was presented, shall decide whether or not the account remains delinquent. The owner
Chapter 7.10 WATER SERVICE http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0710.html#7.10
1 of 5 5/11/2010 5:25 PMPacket Page 473 of 562
and the occupant shall be notified of the decision, and this decision shall not be subject to further appeal. If the account
is found to be delinquent and water has not been shut off, water will be shut off as previously scheduled or three days
after final decision, whichever date is later. If the account is not found to be delinquent and water has been shut off,
water will be turned on without being subject to turn on and turn off charges in ECC 7.10.070. [Ord. 3629 § 3, 2007;
Ord. 2214 § 2, 1981; Ord. 2139 § 4, 1980; Ord. 1942 § 1, 1977; Ord. 1385 § 1, 1968; Ord. 1082 § 1, 1965; Ord. 821,
1960; Ord. 413 § 10, 1929].
7.10.025 Delinquency charge.
A charge equal to 10 percent of the outstanding balance of the delinquent utility bill shall be added as a fee, except in
cases of extraordinary hardship as determined by the administrative services director or his/her designee. The
decision of the administrative services director can be appealed to the finance committee of the Edmonds city council.
The account shall be considered delinquent 35 days after the sending of the regular billing. Such delinquency notice
and billing will be provided 35 days following the mailing of a regular utility bill. This charge shall be applicable to all
delinquent utility billing accounts. In order to be considered delinquent an account must total $21.00 or more of
delinquency, and no delinquency charge shall be levied against any delinquent account under $21.00. This delinquency
charge shall be paid prior to the application of any payment against the fee or charge initially assessed and nothing
herein shall be interpreted to limit the city’s collection of its attorneys’ fees and other reasonable costs and charges in
the event it is forced to seek judicial remedy for collection. [Ord. 3629 § 4, 2007].
7.10.030 Suspension of water use – Procedure.
Should a customer desire to discontinue the use of water for a period of time, notice thereof must be given in writing
to the utility billing department. The water will then be shut off and turned on again upon notice to the utility billing
department. The customer shall be required to pay charges as set forth in ECC 7.10.070. [Ord. 3629 § 5, 2007; Ord.
1942 § 2, 1977; Ord. 1448, 1969; Ord. 413 § 17, 1929].
7.10.040 Access to buildings.
Employees of the water division shall have access during business hours to all parts of buildings to which water may
be delivered from the city mains for the purpose of ascertaining the number of rooms and families in the house or
inspecting the conditions of the pipes and fixtures and the manner in which water is used. [Ord. 413 § 19, 1929].
7.10.050 Access to curb cocks and meter covers.
The water division shall have free access to curb cocks and water meter covers. All persons are prohibited from piling
rubbish, building, or other materials thereon. [Ord. 413 § 20, 1929].
7.10.060 Limitation on water use.
In the event that a supplier notifies the city of a shortage of water or the director reasonably determines such a
shortage to be imminent, the community services director or his/her designee is authorized to implement the water
shortage response plan in order to efficiently safeguard the safety and health of the general public or to provide for the
public convenience. The use of water in the city, or in any portion thereof, for irrigation, cooling, sprinkling or other
uses may be forbidden, restricted, or regulated and such regulations may be made effective as to all customers or as
to particular classes of customers. Rationing may be imposed during any shortage of water, either in lieu of or in
addition to other measures hereby authorized.
A. Upon receiving notification from a water supplier of an impending water emergency, the community services
director will notify the mayor and city council within 24 hours or on the next business day that a water emergency will
be or has been declared.
B. The mayor or community services director will issue a public notification of the declaration of water emergency and
imposition of restrictions.
C. Restrictions will be in effect immediately upon issuance of the public notification. Restrictions and the amount of
surcharge for violations of mandatory restrictions will be posted and published within seven days of declaration at
least one time in a daily newspaper of general circulation. Notification will be delivered to television and radio stations
to provide public information coverage.
D. For emergencies when restrictions may extend beyond 21 days, public hearing before the city council will be
scheduled by the community services director within seven days following the declaration of emergency. [Ord. 2774 §
1, 1990].
7.10.061 Water restrictions – Powers of the city.
The community services director or his/her designee shall conduct public education efforts regarding the benefits and
necessity of conservation by the public, and is authorized to promulgate such rules and regulations as may be
necessary to implement water use restriction. The regulations will be on file with the city clerk, and the regulations and
Chapter 7.10 WATER SERVICE http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0710.html#7.10
2 of 5 5/11/2010 5:25 PMPacket Page 474 of 562
any amendment thereto shall be effective 30 days after said filing with the city clerk. The community services director
o r his/her designee is further authorized to make exceptions to such restrictions in specific cases as he/she finds
reasonable which may in the director’s discretion include, but are not limited to, watering newly seeded or sodded
lawns, food sources, landscape ornamental plantings required by the architectural design board, when necessary to
alleviate unnecessary economic hardship to commercial or industrial activities, or to prevent possible damage to
health, safety or welfare. [Ord. 2774 § 2, 1990].
7.10.062 Water restrictions – Surcharge.
It is unlawful for any person to violate water use and restrictions and violation of these provisions shall be a
misdemeanor punishable under the general penalty provisions of this code. In addition to other lawful remedies, the
community services director or his/her designee is authorized to impose a surcharge for the first occurrence after a
documented warning notice and each subsequent violation in which a customer’s water usage practices exceed water
conservation restrictions as provided for in this chapter. Said surcharge will be added to and become a part of the
water bill for the customer in addition to any service rate amounts as set forth in Chapter 7.10 ECC. Prior to the
imposition of the first surcharge, a public works division representative shall deliver in person or post a notice at the
service address advising of the customer’s water usage practices in excess of mandatory water shortage restrictions
and advising that a surcharge may be imposed for any further violations. A copy of the violation notice shall also be
mailed to the owner and/or occupant. The community services director shall promulgate regulations providing for
appeal of any notice of violation. Appeals must be received within five working days of delivery of notice of violation.
A. Surcharges for violations of water restrictions in effect for the balance of 1990 and until thereafter adjusted shall be:
$25.00 for first violation;
$50.00 for each violation thereafter.
B. Surcharges for all customer classes will be reviewed annually based on actual or projected expenses of the water
division necessary to maintain a water supply during an emergency. [Ord. 2774 § 3, 1990].
7.10.063 Enforcement.
A. The community services director, or his/her designee, including any employee of the city of Edmonds public works
division, or field personnel of the community services department, or police officer of the city, shall have the authority
to enforce the provisions of this chapter.
B. In addition to the surcharges provided in ECC 7.10.062, the community services director or his/her designee is
authorized to install a water restricting device on the waterline or lines serving any person who commits a second or
subsequent violation of any of the provisions of this chapter. Alternatively, after such notice of a violation as may
reasonably be given based on the circumstances, the community services director or his/her designee may cause
water service to be terminated for subsequent or continuing violation of water conservation restrictions. [Ord. 2774 §
4, 1990; Ord. 2214 § 3, 1981; Ord. 1942 § 3, 1977; Ord. 547, 1943; Ord. 413 § 21A, 1929].
7.10.065 Suspension of service – Failure to comply with sewer connection notice.
A. There exists within the city of Edmonds certain earth subsidence and landslide hazard areas, and other
environmentally sensitive areas in which the discharge of sanitary waste from private septic tanks constitutes a hazard
to the public health, safety and welfare of the city. Such areas may be designated by the city council or by order of the
public works director. The Meadowdale landslide hazard area, as defined and described in documents on file with the
city of Edmonds and available for inspection at the request of any individual, is hereby declared to be such an area.
Failure of any owner or owners of residential or commercial structures located within such a designated area to
connect with available sanitary sewers following notice given in accordance with RCW 35.67.190 is hereby declared to
be a public hazard and nuisance.
B. When any owner or owners of property have failed to connect within the period established by written notification,
the community services director or his designee shall cause a notification of shut-off of water service to be delivered
to the owners of such properties by registered mail. The notice shall specify that water service shall be terminated by
the city within 10 days of the date of notice unless:
1. The owner or owners shall cause the property to be connected to the public sewer within such period; or
2. The owner or owners shall apply for a building permit within said 10-day period and connect to the sewer line,
present a written contract or adequate assurance between the owner and a licensed plumber evidencing an
enforceable obligation and intent to connect to such line and provide a bond in an amount sufficient to fulfill the
terms of such agreement in the event that the owner defaults thereon.
Chapter 7.10 WATER SERVICE http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0710.html#7.10
3 of 5 5/11/2010 5:25 PMPacket Page 475 of 562
C. In the event the owner fails to connect to the sewer line within the 10-day period or to provide the adequate
assurances required by subsection (B)(2) of this section, water service to such residential or commercial structures
and to the property on which they are located shall be discontinued. Service shall not again be instituted until such time
as the owner has connected to the sewer system, paid the actual costs of the city including, but not limited to,
disconnecting, reconnecting, notifying the owner and otherwise taking action with respect to the requirements of this
section. The actual cost thereof may vary, but the city council hereby establishes such reconnection fee to be $250.00;
provided, however, that in the event the actual costs are greater, they may be imposed by written order of the
community services director or his designee and the reconnection shall not be completed until such time such
assessed costs are paid. In the event that the owner or owners believe that the reconnection charges are in excess of
the amount actually incurred or which reasonably may be incurred the city, the owner or owners may appeal the set fee
or additionally designated fee to the hearing examiner in the same manner as if it were a Type II decision (see Chapter
20.01 ECDC). [Ord. 3736 § 6, 2009; Ord. 2676 § 1, 1988].
7.10.070 Turn on and turn off charges.
The charge for turning on or off the water other than at the main shall be $20.00 if done during regular working hours. If
the water is turned on or off at any time other than during regular working hours, the charge shall be $75.00. [Ord. 3629
§ 6, 2007; Ord. 2880 § 2, 1992; Ord. 2214 § 4, 1981; Ord. 2179 § 2, 1980; Ord. 2139 § 5, 1980; Ord. 1942 § 5, 1977].
7.10.080 Request for inspection of meters.
The water division, upon the request of any water user, shall inspect the water meter on the user’s premises. A deposit
of $20.00 shall be made with such request to cover the cost of such inspection. In the event such meter is found to be
overregistering, such deposit shall be returned to the depositor; otherwise, said deposit shall be retained by the city.
[Ord. 3629 § 7, 2007; Ord. 821, 1960; Ord. 413 § 22, 1929].
7.10.110 Charge and bill adjustments.
The administrative services director, or such authorized representative as he may designate, is authorized to make
adjustments or corrections to billings for any charge for water service, including but not limited to connection charges,
minimum monthly billings, meter charges, penalty and special charges, improperly charged rates, and, subject to the
city council’s approval, the cancellation of uncollectible bills and accounts. [Ord. 3629 § 8, 2007; Ord. 2179 § 2, 1980].
7.10.120 Service connections.
A. All tapping of mains, installation of corporation cock, service pipe leading from the mains to the property line, as
well as the turning on and off of the water shall be performed by the water division. All connections inside of the
premises shall be made by the owner and at his expense.
B. In case of application for water service on premises not abutting upon a street upon which there is a city water
main, the city will lay its connection from the main toward the premises for a distance equal to the distance from the
main to the curbline, the distance in no case to exceed 40 feet, and permit connection therewith by means of a union,
or may, at the discretion of the director of public works, upon advance payment of the estimated cost thereof, extend
the service to the premises of the applicant, but shall not cross or enter private property. [Ord. 413 § 12, 1929].
7.10.130 Service pipe – Depth and size – Work left uncovered until inspected.
All pipes leading from the city’s service connection shall be laid not less than 24 inches below the surface of the
ground and no work shall be covered up until it has been inspected and accepted by the water division. No such pipes
smaller than three-fourths of an inch shall be used. [Ord. 413 § 13, 1929].
7.10.140 Dormant services – Connections.
Any service connection which shall have been inactive, unused or abandoned for a period of 60 days or the house
removed from the lot for at least one day shall be considered a dormant service and the meter shall be removed by
the water division. If a service connection is subsequently desired for all or a portion of the premises or property
previously supplied by a dormant service, the owner of the premises or property or his authorized agent shall make
application and pay a service charge in the amount shown in ECC 7.10.090.
7.10.150 Service pressure corrections.
A. Where the water pressure at the main is 80 PSI or greater, the customer may install an approved type strainer and
pressure regulator on his own premises in an accessible location. All costs of installation, operation, and maintenance
shall be borne by the customer.
B. In services where the water pressure at the main is considered by the customer to be lower than the desired
pressure, such customer may, after first requesting and receiving approval of the director of public works, install a
pump and pneumatic tank, or by other approved means provide increased pressure to the premises. The location of
such installation shall be on the customer’s premises and he shall bear all costs of installation, operation, and
Chapter 7.10 WATER SERVICE http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0710.html#7.10
4 of 5 5/11/2010 5:25 PMPacket Page 476 of 562
maintenance thereof.
7.10.160 Stop and waste valves.
Customers shall, at their own expense, install and maintain all pipes, connections and fixtures from the meter placed by
the city. All pipes must be provided with stop and waste valves, protected from freezing and accessible at all times to
the customer. The valves shall be located in such manner that said pipes may be drained to prevent freezing and the
water may be shut off to repair pipes, fixtures, and appliances, and also to safeguard premises from water damage in
case the meter is accidentally turned on. Additional stop and waste valves shall also be placed at all low points in the
pipes when they cannot be otherwise drained. The city shall refuse to turn on the water until the provisions of this
section are complied with. The city shall not be responsible for freezing, accident or damage of any kind beyond the
property line. [Ord. 2179 § 1, 1980; Ord. 413 § 14, 1929].
7.10.170 Water shut-off – Temperature relief valve, pressure relief valve, and check valve required.
A. The city may shut off water from the main at any time for the purpose of making repairs without giving advance
notice to the property owner. The city shall not be responsible for any damage proximately caused by said shut-off or
failure to give notice of said shut-off.
B. All persons having boilers on their premises for the purpose of heating with hot water or radiant heat are required to
have installed, at their expense, a temperature relief valve, pressure relief valve, and a check valve. The owner of the
premises shall be responsible to the city for any damages to city water meters caused by water from the owner’s
premises. The city shall not be responsible for the safety of boilers, hot water tanks, piping or other similar apparatus
on the premises of any water customer.
C. The provisions of subsection B shall apply to all boilers presently existing in the city and those installed in the future.
All boilers not in compliance at the effective date of this section shall be brought into compliance within six months of
the effective date of this section. [Ord. 2009 § 1, 1978; Ord. 413 § 15, 1929].
7.10.180 Unlawful acts.
It is unlawful for any person, corporation, or association to break, damage, or injure in any way any pipe, gate, meter
or other water system appliance, or to interfere in any manner with the proper operation of any part of the water
system of the city of Edmonds, or to make connection to or alterations in any pipe whereby water may be drawn from
the city mains or to take water from any fire hydrant, bibb, pipe, or fixture of any kind, without first having secured a
permit from the water division or proper city official. [Ord. 821, 1960; Ord. 413 § 16, 1929].
Chapter 7.10 WATER SERVICE http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0710.html#7.10
5 of 5 5/11/2010 5:25 PMPacket Page 477 of 562
Chapter 7.20
BACKFLOW PREVENTION
Sections:
7.20.010 Definitions.
7.20.020 Cross-connections declared unlawful.
7.20.030 Backflow prevention devices to be installed.
7.20.040 Private water supply systems.
7.20.050 Adoption of state regulations.
7.20.060 Abatement of unlawful cross-connections and installation of backflow prevention devices – Procedures.
7.20.070 Penalties.
7.20.010 Definitions.
A. “Backflow” means a flow, other than the intended direction of flow, of any foreign liquids, gases, or substances into
the distribution system of a public water supply.
B. “Backflow prevention device” means a device approved by the state of Washington, Department of Social and
Health Services or such other state department as has jurisdiction over the subject matter and by the American Water
Works Association, used to counteract back pressure or prevent back siphonage into the distribution system of a
public water supply.
C. “Cross-connection” means any physical arrangement whereby a public water supply is connected, directly or
indirectly, with any other water supply system, sewer, drain, conduit, pool, storage reservoir, plumbing fixture or other
device which contains or may contain contaminated water, sewage or other wastes or liquids of unknown or unsafe
quality, which may be capable of imparting contamination to a public water supply as a result of backflow. [Ord. 1711 §
1, 1974].
7.20.020 Cross-connections declared unlawful.
The installation or maintenance of a cross-connection, which, in the opinion of the director of public works or his
designee, will endanger the water quality of the potable water supply of the city of Edmonds, is unlawful. [Ord. 1711 §
1, 1974].
7.20.030 Backflow prevention devices to be installed.
Backflow prevention devices, when required to be installed in the opinion of the director of public works or his
designated representative, shall be installed and maintained by the service customer on any service connection to the
city of Edmonds water supply system where the backflow prevention devices are necessary for the protection of the
city of Edmonds' water supply. [Ord. 1711 § 1, 1974].
7.20.040 Private water supply systems.
Use or operation of a private water supply system, contrary to the provisions of the ordinances of the city of
Edmonds, or the laws of the state of Washington or the rules and regulations of the State Board of Health regarding
public water supplies where the private system is served by the city public water supply is unlawful. [Ord. 1711 § 1,
1974].
7.20.050 Adoption of state regulations.
The community services director or his/her designee is hereby authorized to develop rules and regulations based upon
and including the requirements of the rules and regulations of the State Board of Health regarding public water supplies
and the protection of such supplies from contamination entitled “Cross-Connection Control Regulations in Washington
State,” the provisions of WAC 246-290-490, and the American Waterworks Association, Pacific Northwest Second
Edition of “Accepted Procedure and Practice in Cross-Connection Manual.” The provisions of the Washington
Administrative Code, the rules and regulations of the Department of Health set forth in the Cross-Connection Control
Regulations in Washington State and the previously referenced Accepted Procedure and Practice in Cross-
Connection Manual are hereby adopted by this reference as fully as if herein set forth in full. Any additional rules and
procedures necessary to implement such regulations shall be developed by the community services director or his/her
designee as appropriate. Such rules and regulations shall be kept on file along with copies of the above referenced
regulations and manuals in the office of the city engineer of the city of Edmonds. [Ord. 2956 § 1, 1993; Ord. 1711 § 1,
1974].
7.20.060 Abatement of unlawful cross-connections and installation of backflow prevention devices –
Procedures.
Cross-connections declared in this chapter to be unlawful whether presently existing or hereinafter installed and/or
Chapter 7.20 BACKFLOW PREVENTION http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0720.html#7.20
1 of 2 5/11/2010 5:27 PMPacket Page 478 of 562
services requiring backflow prevention devices and/or unlawful use or operation of a private water supply system
served by the city public water supply are public nuisances and, in addition to any other provisions of this code or the
ordinances of the city of Edmonds on abatement of public nuisances, shall be subject to abatement in accordance with
the following procedure:
A. In the event that the director of public works or his designee determines that a nuisance as herein provided does
exist, written notice shall be sent to the person in whose name the water service is established under the records of the
city of Edmonds water division, or alternatively, a copy of such written notice shall be posted on the premises served.
B. The notice shall provide that the nuisance described herein shall be corrected within 30 days of the date the notice
is mailed or posted on the premises.
C. In the event the nuisance is not abated within the prescribed time, water service to the premises shall be
discontinued.
D. In the event that the nuisance, in the opinion of the director of public works or his designated representative,
presents an immediate danger of contamination to the public water supply, service from the city water supply system
to the premises may be terminated without prior notice; provided, however, notice will be posted on the premises in
the manner heretofore provided at the time the service is terminated. [Ord. 1711 § 1, 1974].
7.20.070 Penalties.
In addition to the remedies set forth herein, any person found guilty of violating any of the provisions of this chapter
shall be subject to the penalties as set forth in ECC 5.50.020. [Ord. 1711 § 1, 1974].
Chapter 7.20 BACKFLOW PREVENTION http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0720.html#7.20
2 of 2 5/11/2010 5:27 PMPacket Page 479 of 562
Chapter 7.30
WATER RATES AND
SEWER CHARGES
Sections:
7.30.010 Definitions.
7.30.020 Separate single-family residence meters.
7.30.030 Water rates – Meter installation charges.
7.30.035 Water and sewer utility connection charges.
7.30.036 Sewer special connection districts.
7.30.040 Utility charges – Sanitary sewer.
7.30.045 Special connection charge.
7.30.050 Unauthorized use of water.
7.30.060 Severability.
7.30.070 Water, sewer and stormwater rate reductions for low income citizens.
7.30.080 Reserved.
7.30.090 Penalties.
7.30.010 Definitions.
A. “Dwelling unit” means a building or portion thereof providing complete housekeeping facilities for one family.
B. “Single-family residence” means a detached building containing one dwelling unit only.
C. “Duplex” means a building, occupying a lot, containing two dwelling units.
D. “Apartment houses” and other “multiple units” (except hotels, tourist courts, trailer parks, and motels) means a
building or buildings used for and containing three or more dwelling units occupied on a weekly or monthly basis. Units
rented on a weekly or monthly basis shall not be deemed to be tourist courts or motels.
E. “Hotels” means any place with individual rooms rented on a daily or weekly basis.
F. “Tourist courts” and “motels” means detached multiple units, occupied and paid for on a daily basis.
G. “Office buildings” includes all types of professional and business offices, including but not limited to architects,
engineers, lawyers, doctors, dentists, real estate offices, etc.
H. “Commercial” and “retail buildings” mean all types of retail and commercial business establishments other than
office buildings and other than industrial or manufacturing, and each such business shall be considered as a separate
unit even though two or more may be in the same building.
I. In the event there is more than one type of operation in the same building, i.e., a professional office, a retail store, a
restaurant, or an apartment, then in that case each separate category or type shall pay at the rate fixed under that
particular category or type.
J. “Equivalent residential unit” or “ERU” means a sewer connection charge based upon the winter standard water
consumption of a single-family residence of 7.07 per 100 cubic feet of water. [Ord. 3339 § 1, 2000; Ord. 786 § 1,
1959].
7.30.020 Separate single-family residence meters.
Each single-family residence building or structure served by water shall be provided with its own separate water meter.
Prior to the time when such additional separate meters can be installed, water rates shall be applicable on the same
basis as if the separate meters were actually installed. [Ord. 1449, 1969].
7.30.030 Water rates – Meter installation charges.
A. The bimonthly rates of water supplied through meters shall be fixed at the following levels:
Effective Dates
Existing 1/1/07 1/1/08
1. Single-family
residence (per unit) $15.63 $16.10 $16.58
Chapter 7.30 WATER RATES AND SEWER CHARGES http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0730.html#7.30
1 of 6 5/11/2010 5:27 PMPacket Page 480 of 562
2. Duplex, apartment
houses, condominiums
and other multi-unit
residences (per unit) $13.76 $14.17 $14.60
3. All other customers:
Existing 1/1/2007 1/1/2008
3/4" $18.90 $19.47 $20.05
1" $38.48 $39.63 $40.82
1.5" $71.16 $73.29 $75.49
2" $108.48 $111.73 $115.09
3" $234.02 $241.04 $248.27
4" $331.49 $341.43 $351.68
6" $657.13 $676.84 $697.15
B. Variable Rate. In addition to the base rate set forth above, the customer shall be charged the following rate per 100
cubic feet of water consumed:
Existing 1/1/07 1/1/08
$1.62 $1.67 $1.72
All water rate charges on water utility bills mailed between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2007, shall be based on
rates as reflected in this section corresponding with said time period. Thereafter, all water rate charges on water utility
bills mailed on or after January 1, 2008, shall be based on rates as reflected in this section corresponding with said
time period until a new ordinance is adopted amending the same.
C. Meter Installation Charges.
1. New service line and meter installation charges are fixed as follows:
a. 3/4" $550.00
b. 1" $800.00
2. The actual cost of street restoration (with regard to all surface streets) shall be added to any meter installation
charge, if applicable.
3. When approved by the city engineer, new service lines installed by a developer on a plat shall be credited as
follows:
a. 3/4" $175.00
b. 1" $200.00
D. All rates set forth in this section shall be exclusive of any applicable taxes.
E. Repealed by Ord. 3618. [Ord. 3618 § 2, 2006; Ord. 3616 §§ 1 – 3, 2006; Ord. 3400 § 1, 2002; Ord. 3339 § 2, 2000;
Ord. 2974 §§ 1 and 2, 1994; Ord. 2898 § 1, 1992; Ord. 2880 § 1, 1992; Ord. 2657 § 1, 1988; Ord. 2361 § 1, 1983;
Ord. 2339 § 2, 1982; Ord. 2305 § 2, 1982; Ord. 2255 § 1, 1981; Ord. 2211 § 1, 1981; Ord. 2197 § 1, 1981; Ord. 2139,
1980; Ord. 1963 § 1, 1977; Ord. 1898 § 1, 1977; Ord. 1709 § 1, 1974; Ord. 1457 § 1, 1970; Ord. 1385 § 2, 1968; Ord.
1263 § 1, 1967; Ord. 901, 1961; Ord. 786 § 2, 1959].
7.30.035 Water and sewer utility connection charges.
A connection charge shall be paid by each new customer connecting to the city's water or sewer system in accordance
with the following requirements:
A. Sewer System. The sanitary sewer connection charge shall be equivalent to $730.00 per ERU added as a result of
the connection of the development.
Chapter 7.30 WATER RATES AND SEWER CHARGES http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0730.html#7.30
2 of 6 5/11/2010 5:27 PMPacket Page 481 of 562
A multifamily residential unit shall be considered equivalent to 0.67 of an ERU and the development services director
shall estimate the average winter water consumption for connections of buildings, structures or uses other than
residences and prorate the connection rate according to the equivalent number of ERUs such building, structure or use
represents and establish an appropriate connection charge.
B. Water Connection Charge. The connection charge shall be based upon the size of the meter installed:
Meter Size
(inches):Flow Factor Proposed
Charge
5/8 & 3/4" 1 $908
1"2.5 $2,270
1.5"5 $4,540
2"8 $7,264
3"16 $14,528
4"25 $22,700
6"50 $45,400
8"80 $72,640
C. No water connection charge shall be levied for connections to water mains installed pursuant to Local Improvement
District Nos. 115, 146 and 152 by properties which participated in the establishment of said local improvement
districts. [Ord. 3339 § 3, 2000].
7.30.036 Sewer special connection districts.
A. A connection charge shall be paid by each new customer connecting to the city's sewer system within the following
described district(s). This special connection charge is based upon the actual cost of constructing improvements which
relate directly and exclusively to homes within the district(s) and which are, because of the special nature of the
construction, separate and distinct from the overall costs of the system paid by a customer pursuant to ECC 7.30.035.
These charges shall be in addition to the charges paid by a new customer pursuant to ECC 7.30.035 and do not
duplicate any costs contained in the underlying sewer utility connection charge.
B. 88th Avenue West Sewer Special Connection District.
1. Properties addressed as 21903, 21904, and 21911 88th Avenue West shown on Exhibit A attached to the
ordinance codified in this section maintained on file in the city clerk's office and any subdivision, lot line
adjustment or reconfiguration of the lots or the property represented by such addresses shall pay a special
connection fee, to be paid in full at the time of connection to the sewer system, of $2,941.39 per lot.
2. Due to the significant additional sewer system construction that will be required at the property owners'
expense to connect these properties to the sewer system after completion of the sewer project by the city, these
properties may defer connection and shall not be required to connect to the sewer system within the time limit
requirements of ECDC 18.10.010 and ECC 7.30.040.
3. The owner of any of these properties that does not connect to the sewer system within the time limits in
accordance with ECDC 18.10.010 shall, upon connection to the sewer system, pay the above established special
connection fee, increased based upon the Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price
Index for construction for the Seattle-Bellevue-Everett area from the effective date of the ordinance codified in
this section to the time of connection to the sewer system. [Ord. 3657 § 1, 2007].
7.30.040 Utility charges – Sanitary sewer.
The utility charges for sanitary sewer service set forth in this section shall be added to and made a part of the
bimonthly or monthly rates for water supplied through the meters as set forth in ECC 7.30.030:
A. The following rates shall be charged on all billings after the effective date shown with respect to the following
customers and/or service:
Effective
Dates Connected Unconnected
1. Single-family residences (bimonthly)
Chapter 7.30 WATER RATES AND SEWER CHARGES http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0730.html#7.30
3 of 6 5/11/2010 5:27 PMPacket Page 482 of 562
1/1/2004 $51.80 $8.35
1/1/2006 $50.64 $8.16
2. Duplexes, apartment houses, condominiums and
other multi-unit residences (bimonthly)
1/1/2004 $41.62/unit $8.35/unit
1/1/2006 $40.69/unit $8.16/unit
3. Duplexes, apartment houses, condominiums and
other multi-unit residences (monthly)
1/1/2004 $20.81/unit $4.18/unit
1/1/2006 $20.34/unit $4.09/unit
4. All other customers (monthly)
Fixed Rate:
1/1/2004 $2.95 N/A
1/1/2006 $2.88 N/A
Volume Charge:
1/1/2004 $3.34/ccf* N/A
1/1/2006 $3.26/ccf* N/A
*Per 100 cubic feet of metered water consumption.
B. For customers who are not served by city waterlines but who are connected to city sewers, the charges shall be the
same as set forth in subsection A of this section and its subparagraphs.
C. These rates do not apply to industries or manufacturing concerns which have industrial wastes. These, together with
other activities not covered in this chapter, shall be dealt with on a special basis and have special rates set for the
particular business by the water/utility administrative staff, subject to review and approval by the city council.
D. All property owners within an area served by a sanitary sewer system in the city of Edmonds are hereby directed
and compelled to connect their private drains and sewers to the city system. Failure to do so within 30 days of written
notice to connect by the city shall subject the property owner to a monthly penalty equal to that charge imposed by
subsections A, B, and/or C above. Said penalty shall be billed to the property owner, and they shall be subject to
payment, collection and enforcement in all respects as though they were utility customers of the city. All penalties
collected shall be considered revenues of the sewer utility system. [Ord. 3570 § 2, 2005; Ord. 3400 § 2, 2002; Ord.
3339 § 4, 2000; Ord. 3195 § 1, 1998; Ord. 2823, 1991; Ord. 2657 § 2, 1988; Ord. 2551, 1986; Ord. 2361 § 2, 1983;
Ord. 2255 § 2, 1981; Ord. 2197 § 2, 1981; Ord. 2181 § 1, 1980; Ord. 2147, 1980; Ord. 2139, 1980; Ord. 1898 § 2,
1977; Ord. 1465, 1970; Ord. 1458 § 1, 1970; Ord. 1264 § 1, 1967; Ord. 1051, 1964; Ord. 786 § 3, 1959].
7.30.045 Special connection charge.
In addition to any other charges prescribed by this chapter, a special connection charge shall be paid by the owner of
any property, residential dwelling unit, or other structure that may hereafter connect to the sanitary sewer
improvements constructed by any local improvement district formed by the city and for which no assessment was
imposed or charged under the said LID. The special connection charge for each property, residential dwelling unit, or
other structure so connected shall be equal to the amount of the assessment that would have been levied against such
property, residential dwelling unit, or structure under the final assessment roll of the appropriate LID if the said
property, residential dwelling unit, or other structure had been so assessed, together with interest thereon at the rate
established by the ordinance authorizing issuance of the bonds for said LID, from the time of such authorization until
the time of connection. The special connection charge shall be paid in a lump sum prior to connection to the sanitary
sewer. The special connection charge provided for in this section shall apply only where the debt used to finance the
local improvements has not yet been fully retired through assessment payments. If such debt has been fully retired
through payment of such assessments, the special connection charge shall not apply. [Ord. 3332 § 1, 2000].
7.30.050 Unauthorized use of water.
It is unlawful for any person, firm, corporation, or other organization of any type whatsoever to take, or allow to be
taken, water from the Edmonds water system without a valid permit issued by the Edmonds water division. Any
person, including the officers and/or directors of any firm, corporation or other organization of any type, who shall take
water from the Edmonds water system without such permit shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to the
penalties set forth in ECC 5.50.020. In addition to such penalties there shall be a charge by the water division for the
taking of such water at a minimum of $100.00 plus $1.00 per 100 cubic feet of water taken. Said water charge may be
Chapter 7.30 WATER RATES AND SEWER CHARGES http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0730.html#7.30
4 of 6 5/11/2010 5:27 PMPacket Page 483 of 562
charged against the premises from which the water was taken and enforced by available liens or, where applicable,
against the individual, firm, corporation or other organization of any type, including the officers and directors thereof,
who took or caused to be taken said unauthorized water. References herein to water permits shall include all permits
required for water usage within the city of Edmonds, or from the Edmonds water system, as required by the Edmonds
City Code. [Ord. 1562, 1971].
7.30.060 Severability.
Should any section, clause or provision of this chapter be declared by the courts to be invalid, the same shall not
affect the validity of the chapter as a whole or any part thereof, other than the part so declared to be invalid. [Ord. 786
§ 6, 1959].
7.30.070 Water, sewer and stormwater rate reductions for low income citizens.
A. Definitions. For the purposes of implementing water, sewer and stormwater rate reductions under the provisions of
this section, the following words or phrases shall have the following definitions:
1. “Low income citizen” shall mean a person who has established Edmonds as their residence and whose total
disposable income including that of his or her spouse or cotenant does not exceed the amount specified in RCW
84.36.381(5)(b) as the same exists or is hereafter amended.
2. The definition of terms such as “residence,” “total disposable income,” “combined disposable income,” and
other such terms used in this section shall be given those meanings established by RCW 84.36.383 as the same
exists or is hereafter amended. In the event that any provision of the Revised Code of Washington incorporated
by reference or implication in this definitional section shall be amended, such amendment shall be deemed to be
incorporated within or utilized in interpretation of this section.
B. Low income citizens shall be given reductions in the water, sewer and stormwater rates as those rates are
established from time to time by the city council:
1. A rate reduction of 30 percent shall be afforded those low income citizens who meet the qualifying income and
asset levels established by RCW 84.36.381(5)(b)(i) as the same exists or shall hereafter be amended.
2. A 50 percent rate reduction shall be afforded those low income citizens qualifying under the provisions of
RCW 84.36.381 (5)(b)(ii).
3. No rate reduction shall be afforded to any person shown as a dependent on the income tax return of any other
individual, whether or not such person resides at the location for which the rate reduction is sought, unless the
total combined disposable income of the applicant, along with their spouse, cotenant and all family members
shown on the income tax return in which the applicant is shown as a dependent, meets the standards established
by this section.
C. The administrative services director is authorized to establish an application for low income citizens rate reduction
applications. The application shall be provided without cost by the utility billing division of the city and shall include such
information as may reasonably be required by the administrative services director to verify eligibility. [Ord. 3629 § 9,
2007; Ord. 2807 § 1, 1990; Ord. 2805 § 2, 1990; Ord. 2777 § 1, 1990].
7.30.080 Reserved.
[Ord. 2777 § 2, 1990; Ord. 2773 § 1, 1990; Ord. 2440, 1984; Ord. 2198 § 2, 1981].
7.30.090 Penalties.
A. Any person knowingly making any false or misleading statement in any application and/or renewal for rate reduction
to any city employee with intent to secure the rate reduction authorized herein shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and
punished as set forth in ECC 5.50.020.
B. Further, in the event of any such misrepresentation, the water rate may be increased retroactively and assessed
against the applicant and/or premises as may be allowable by law including but not limited to lien procedures. [Ord.
2198 § 3, 1981].
Chapter 7.30 WATER RATES AND SEWER CHARGES http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0730.html#7.30
5 of 6 5/11/2010 5:27 PMPacket Page 484 of 562
Chapter 7.30 WATER RATES AND SEWER CHARGES http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0730.html#7.30
6 of 6 5/11/2010 5:27 PMPacket Page 485 of 562
Chapter 7.40
FIRE PROTECTION WATER SERVICE
Sections:
7.40.010 Application – Information.
7.40.020 Ownership and costs.
7.40.030 Fire service to be metered – Second service to premises.
7.40.040 Fire service monthly service charges.
7.40.050 Violation – Penalty.
7.40.010 Application – Information.
Water shall be supplied for fire protection purposes only after application has been made by the customer or his agent
and approved by the water division and fire department. Sufficient information shall be supplied at the time of making
application for service to enable the water division to fully determine the nature and extent of the proposed system.
Detailed drawings of the proposed system shall be provided, which shall contain adequate information showing the
locations and sizes of the system's piping and appurtenances. [Ord. 1561, 1971].
7.40.020 Ownership and costs.
All fire service connections shall be installed by and remain the property of the water division. The expense for all
labor, materials and equipment rental, including street restoration required for tapping mains, making connections,
placing valves, meters, or any other protective device deemed necessary by the water division to prevent the
unauthorized use of water, including the testing of completed work, meter pits and/or vaults, shall be paid for by the
customer. [Ord. 1561, 1971].
7.40.030 Fire service to be metered – Second service to premises.
Fire service connections shall be supplied only through an approved fire service meter or a detector check meter. In
the case of premises for which both fire protection and other water service for such uses as domestic, commercial,
industrial, or manufacturing purposes is supplied, there may be two service installations made to the premises: one for
fire service only and one for other water service. These service functions may also be combined in a single service
connection with the approval of the water division.
In the event two separate service connections are installed, the fire protection system so served shall consist of an
automatic sprinkler system only, without additional outlets which could normally be used for other than fire suppression
purposes. [Ord. 1561, 1971].
7.40.040 Fire service monthly service charges.
A. The monthly rates for inspection and maintenance of detector check systems are fixed as follows:
Fire Service or
Detector Meter Size
Bimonthly
Service Charge
Up to 4"$12.34
6"$21.59
8"$30.81
Water used through the fire service line for fire suppression purposes and limited testing of the system will normally be
furnished without any charge in addition to the bimonthly minimum charge set forth for fire service meter or detector
check meter.
B. If a detector check meter proves, or proof is otherwise provided, leakage or unauthorized usage of water which is
not for fire suppression purposes, the customer shall pay for all water used at the applicable metered rate. The rates
for water so used are fixed as follows: at the time of first written notice from the city water division the applicable rate
shall be the same as the domestic rate for comparable size of domestic water meter for unauthorized use over 100
cubic feet per month; in the event the unauthorized use again occurs after the period of time specified in the written
notice from the water division, the rate shall be double the domestic rate for a comparable size domestic water for
such unauthorized use over 100 cubic feet per month.
C. References made by this chapter as to existing metered rates shall be to Chapter 7.30 ECC. [Ord. 3629 § 10,
2007; Ord. 3457 § 1, 2003; Ord. 1561, 1971].
7.40.050 Violation – Penalty.
Chapter 7.40 FIRE PROTECTION WATER SERVICE http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0740.html#7.40
1 of 2 5/11/2010 5:28 PMPacket Page 486 of 562
In addition to all civil rights of collection, liens, shut-offs and other remedies available to the city of Edmonds as
prescribed by statute and ordinance for unauthorized use and/or nonpayment of charges, any person, firm,
corporation or other organization, including any officers, directors and managers thereof, who violate any provision of
this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to penalties as set forth in ECC 5.50.020. [Ord. 1561, 1971].
Chapter 7.40 FIRE PROTECTION WATER SERVICE http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0740.html#7.40
2 of 2 5/11/2010 5:28 PMPacket Page 487 of 562
Chapter 7.60
COMBINED UTILITY
Sections:
7.60.010 Combination of combined water and sewer utility and stormwater management utility.
7.60.020 Separate rates – Accountability.
7.60.030 Utility assistance fund.
7.60.010 Combination of combined water and sewer utility and stormwater management utility.
The city is maintaining and operating a combined water supply and distribution system and sanitary sewage disposal
system and, by Chapter 7.50 ECC, has created a stormwater management utility. Pursuant to the provisions of RCW
35.67.331, the present combined water and sewer utility, and the stormwater management utility, together with all
additions, extensions and betterments thereof at any time made, are hereby combined into a single utility; provided,
that the accounting procedure for each system shall be kept separate as required by RCW 35.37.010. The combined
water, sewer and stormwater management utility of the city, together with all additions, extensions and betterments
thereof at any time made, shall hereinafter be called the “combined utility.”
7.60.020 Separate rates – Accountability.
The council declares its intent to establish rates for the combined water and sewer utility and stormwater management
utility. In order to better account for the costs of the respective components of the combined utility, the administrative
services director is directed to maintain such separate funds and accounting structures as may be necessary to
discretely account for the costs, expenses and revenues of each component utility. When the staff makes
recommendations for the establishment, increase or decrease in any rate, it is directed to provide supporting data
which separately reflects such costs, expenses and revenues for each component utility.
7.60.030 Utility assistance fund.
A. Purpose. The city council establishes the utility assistance fund in order to accept, hold and dispense funds
contributed either from the city's general fund, from charitable and civic organizations or from individual rate-payers
who have made donations for the assistance of a category of citizens known under Article 8, Section 7 of the
Washington State Constitution as the “poor and infirm” and under other provisions of other state statutes and local
ordinance as the low-income, elderly and disabled.
B. Disbursement. Such monies as are contributed shall be held and disbursed to persons qualifying for the assistance
programs established by ECC 7.30.070 and the provisions of state law incorporated in that section. Disbursements
may be made, to the extent of monies held within the fund, for utility charges, connection fees, and other exactments
levied by the utilities which, taken as whole, constitute the combined utility. The monies may be expended for purposes
which generally benefit the public health, safety and welfare or are designated by the donor of the fund.
C. The administrative services director or his/her designee is hereby authorized to adopt forms and procedures for the
acceptance of contributions to the fund and for the disbursement of monies from the fund. [Ord. 3393 § 1, 2002].
Chapter 7.60 COMBINED UTILITY http://www.mrsc.org/mc/edmonds/Edmonds07/Edmonds0760.html#7.60
1 of 1 5/11/2010 5:29 PMPacket Page 488 of 562
APPENDIX M
Packet Page 489 of 562
DRAFT
09-1030.103 Comprehensive Water System Plan
5.14.2010 Murray, Smith & Associates, Inc. City of Edmonds
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 490 of 562
AM-3255 7.
Public Hearing on a proposed ordinance to expand the authorities of the Edmonds
Transportation District
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:08/03/2010
Submitted By:Phil Williams
Submitted For:Phil Williams Time:15 Minutes
Department:Public Works Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Public hearing and second reading of a proposed Ordinance to amend the provisions of
Chapter 3.65 of the Edmonds City Code relating to the Transportation Benefit District in
order to expand the functions and authority of the District to include the construction of
thirty-seven (37) transportation improvements, including street overlays to extend the life of
city streets, construction of key pedestrian connections, intersection improvements to relieve
congestion, traffic calming measures, corridor improvements, pedestrian lighting,
signalization installation and replacement, and bicycle loop signage with the proceeds of a
Forty Dollar ($40) vehicle fee increase, if approved by the voters.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Following the Public Hearing and after considering all comments take action to approve or modify
the ordinance.
Previous Council Action
On November 18th, 2008 the Edmonds City Council passed Ordinance 3707 creating the Edmonds
Transportation Benefit District under Chapter 3.65 of the Edmonds City Code and setting its
purpose as providing resources for the preservation and maintenance of the City's transportation
system. First reading of the ordinance occured at the July 27th, 2010 Council Meeting. The City
Council set a public hearing for this matter with the Transportation Benefit District on August 3,
2010.
Narrative
The Edmonds Transportation Benefit District (ETBD) was created in November, 2008. ETBD
authorities were limited to the pursuit of funding and use of that funding for the preservation and
maintenance of Edmonds transportation system including all existing transportation improvements
within City Rights-of-Way. The board of the ETBD now recommends their authorities be
expanded to include the ability to pursue voter approval to increase the local user fee (local license
fee) by $40 to pursue 37 separate transportation capital projects to address key system deficiencies
related to safety, congestion, and important pedestrian connections. These projects are specifically
described in Attachment 1.
Fiscal Impact
Packet Page 491 of 562
Attachments
Link: Attachment 1
Link: Attachment 2
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Linda Hynd 07/30/2010 08:14 AM APRV
2 Community Services/Economic Dev. Stephen Clifton 07/30/2010 08:16 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Linda Hynd 07/30/2010 08:21 AM APRV
Form Started By: Phil Williams Started On: 07/30/2010 07:42
AM
Final Approval Date: 07/30/2010
Packet Page 492 of 562
Project priority list with additional TBD funding
Rank Project Name Project Type Total Project Cost TOTAL
1 Street Overlay / Resurfacing (~ $500,000/year)Overlay $5,519,064 $5,519,064
2 Main St. @ 3rd Signal Upgrade Safety $164,039 $5,683,103
3 Main St. @ 9th Av. W Intersection Improvement (Interim solution)Concurrency 2009 $10,000 $5,693,103
4 Walnut St. @ 9th Av. W Intersection Improvement (Interim solution)Concurrency 2009 $10,000 $5,703,103
5 212th @ 84th / Five Corners Intersection Improvements Concurrency 2009 $2,270,390 $7,973,493
6 234th St. SW / 236th St. SW (#1 Long Walkway)Walkway $2,210,956 $10,184,448
7 Bicycle Loop signing Bicycle $29,717 $10,214,166
8 Walnut St. (#5 Short Walkway)Walkway $109,900 $10,324,065
9 Walnut St. (#4 Short Walkway)Walkway $218,551 $10,542,616
10 Maple St. (#3 Short Walkway)Walkway $62,443 $10,605,060
11 Dayton St. (#2 Short Walkway)Walkway $78,678 $10,683,738
12 2nd Av. S (#1 Short Walkway)Walkway $31,222 $10,714,960
13 City Wide Traffic Calming Program Maintenance $124,886 $10,839,846
14 212th @ 76th Av. W Intersection Improvements Concurrency 2015 $2,888,620 $13,728,466
15 100th @ 238th Upgrades Maintenance $294,732 $14,023,198
16 Maplewood Dr. (#2 Long Walkway)Walkway $674,386 $14,697,584
17 220th St. SW @ 76th Av. W Intersection Improvement Concurrency 2015 $172,718 $14,870,301
18 228th St. SW Corridor Imp. / Hwy. 99 @ 76th Intersection Impr.Safety $4,930,761 $19,801,062
19 Meadowdale Beach Rd. (#4 Long Walkway)Walkway $949,136 $20,750,198
20 Main St. Pedestrian Lighting Walkway $624,431 $21,374,629
21 80th Av. W / 180th St. SW Walkway (#7 Long Walkway)Walkway $999,090 $22,373,720
22 Olympic View Dr. @ 76th Av. W Intersection Improvement Concurrency 2015 $1,431,197 $23,804,917
23 Caspers @ 9th Av. W Concurrency 2025 $1,021,570 $24,826,487
24 238th St. SW (#9 Long Walkway)Walkway $811,761 $25,638,248
25 84th Av. W (212th St. SW to 238th St. SW)Safety / Walkway $10,211,953 $35,850,200
26 4th Avenue Corridor Enhancement Enhancement $6,868,746 $42,718,946
27 Olympic Av. (Long Walkway #3)Walkway $1,248,863 $43,967,809
28 Hwy. 99 @ 220th St. SW Intersection Improvement Concurrency 2025 $3,931,421 $47,899,230
29 238th St SW (#8 Long Walkway)Walkway $1,049,045 $48,948,275
30 Hwy 99 @ 212th St. SW Intersection Improvement Concurrency 2025 $4,078,786 $53,027,061
31 189th Pl. SW (#7 Short Walkway)Walkway $174,841 $53,201,902
32 84th Av. W (#9 Short Walkway)Walkway $174,841 $53,376,743
33 Puget Dr. @ Olympic View Dr. Signal Rebuild Preservation $247,275 $53,624,018
34 ADA Transition Plan Walkway $5,245,224 $58,869,242
35 Olympic View Dr @ 174th Av. W Concurrency 2025 $905,426 $59,774,668
36 Main St. @ 9th Av. W Signal Installation Concurrency 2009 $1,092,006 $60,866,674
37 Walnut St. @ 9th Av. W Signal Installation Concurrency 2009 $1,092,006 $61,958,680
TOTAL Cost $61,958,680
Annual Overlay / Resurfacing project
Pedestrian and bicycle project
Roadway Project
Maintenance / Preservation / Programs / Enhancement
Packet Page 493 of 562
Packet Page 494 of 562
Packet Page 495 of 562
Packet Page 496 of 562
Packet Page 497 of 562
Packet Page 498 of 562
Packet Page 499 of 562
Packet Page 500 of 562
Packet Page 501 of 562
Packet Page 502 of 562
Packet Page 503 of 562
Packet Page 504 of 562
Packet Page 505 of 562
AM-3246 8.
Update to Sign Code Section ECDC 20.60.025.A
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:08/03/2010
Submitted By:Michael Clugston
Submitted For:Michael Clugston Time:30 Minutes
Department:Planning Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:Recommend Review by Full Council
Information
Subject Title
Public Hearing on the Planning Board's recommendation regarding updating the number of
permitted permanent signs per site in business and commercial zones. (Edmonds
Community Development Code 20.60.025) (File Number AMD20100014).
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
Approve the changes as proposed and recommended by the Planning Board.
Previous Council Action
None.
Narrative
Two specific changes are proposed to the total number of permanent permitted signs in business
and commercial zones as regulated in ECDC 20.60.025.A.4:
1) Increasing the maximum number of signs allowed on multi-tenant business sites from one to
three per subtenant business while allowing one group directory sign per multi-tenant site, and
2) Exempting window signs from the total number of permanent permitted signs.
These changes are detailed in a mark-up of ECDC 20.60.025.A (Exhibit 1) and described below.
Background
ECDC 20.60.025.A(1) describes how the maximum permanent sign area is calculated in business
and commercial zones – one square foot of sign area of each lineal foot of wall containing the
main public entrance. ECDC 20.60.025.A(3) identifies how the total sign square footage may be
divided amongst wall, projecting and freestanding signs and that window signs do not count
against the total permanent sign area (they do currently count against the total number of signs,
however). ECDC 20.60.025.A(4) regulates the total number of signs allowed for a given
commercial site:
"(4) The maximum number of permitted permanent signs is three per site, or one per physically
enclosed business space on commercial sites with multiple business tenants, whichever is greater.
Packet Page 506 of 562
The total sign area of all signs permitted on-site must also comply with the maximum total
permanent sign area specified in this chapter."
For a single business on site by itself, the maximum sign provision has been workable. Such a
business would be allowed three total signs of whatever types are permitted in that area – a
freestanding sign, a wall sign, and a window sign, for example. The maximum area allowed for
the site is defined by ECDC 20.60.025.A(1) and the individual sign types are further restricted as
to size, height and location in ECDC 20.60.030 through 20.60.045. These provisions will remain
unchanged.
For multi-tenant sites, on the other hand, the code states that each subtenant is allowed only one
sign. This has proven difficult to implement in many instances on sites with multiple tenants,
particularly those on a corner or with more than one entrance. The Planning Board considered
different alternatives in reviewing this issue (Exhibits 2 and 3). The proposed changes were felt to
provide additional flexibility for the multi-tenant sites while still limiting the overall number of
signs possible on a business or commercial site. The existing design standards for commercial
signs in the ECDC and Comprehensive Plan which control the appearance of individual signs and
the size, height and location requirements of ECDC 20.60 will remain unchanged.
The proposed language for ECDC 20.60.025.A(4) reads:
"4. The maximum number of permitted permanent signs is three per site, or three per physically
enclosed business space on commercial sites with multiple business tenants. Window signs
meeting the requirements of ECDC 20.60.035 do not count against the total number of permitted
permanent signs. Multi-tenant sites are allowed one additional group sign identifying the
individual subtenants at the site. The total sign area of all signs permitted on-site must also
comply with the maximum total permanent sign area specified in this chapter."
Fiscal Impact
Attachments
Link: Exhibit 1 - ECDC 20.60.025 marked up
Link: Exhibit 2 - Planning Board minutes 6/23/10
Link: Exhibit 3 - Planning Board agenda memo 6/23/10
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Linda Hynd 07/27/2010 12:09 PM APRV
2 Community Services/Economic Dev. Stephen Clifton 07/28/2010 11:02 AM APRV
3 Final Approval Linda Hynd 07/28/2010 11:06 AM APRV
Form Started By: Michael Clugston Started On: 07/26/2010 10:56
AM
Final Approval Date: 07/28/2010
Packet Page 507 of 562
20.60.025 Total maximum permanent sign area.
A. Business and Commercial Zone Districts (BN, BC, BD, CW and CG).
1. The maximum total permanent sign area for allowed or permitted uses in
the BN, BC, BD and CW zones shall be one square foot of sign area for
each lineal foot of wall containing the main public entrance to the primary
building or structure located upon a separate legal lot.
2. The maximum total permanent sign area for allowed or permitted uses in
the CG zone shall be one square foot of sign area for each lineal foot of
building frontage along a public street and/or along a side of the building
containing the primary public entrance to a maximum of 200 square feet.
The allowable sign area shall be computed separately for each qualifying
building frontage, and only the sign area derived from that frontage may
be oriented along that frontage. Sign areas for wall-mounted signs may
not be accumulated to yield a total allowable sign area greater than that
permitted upon such frontage, except that businesses choosing not to
erect a freestanding sign may use up to 50 percent of their allowable
freestanding sign area for additional attached sign area. Use of the
additional area shall be subject to the review of the architectural design
board.
3. The maximum total permanent sign area may be divided between wall,
projecting, and freestanding signs, in accordance with regulations and
maximum sign area and height for each type of sign, as provided in ECDC
20.60.030 through 20.60.050. Window signs meeting the requirements of
ECDC 20.60.035 do not count against the total permanent sign area
permitted.
4.The maximum number of permitted permanent signs is three per
site, or one per physically enclosed business space on
commercial sites with multiple business tenants, whichever is
greater. The total sign area of all signs permitted on-site must
also comply with the maximum total permanent sign area
specified in this chapter.
4. The maximum number of permitted permanent signs is three per site,
or three per physically enclosed business space on commercial sites
with multiple business tenants. Window signs meeting the
requirements of ECDC 20.60.035 do not count against the total
number of permitted permanent signs. Multi-tenant sites are allowed
one additional group sign identifying the individual subtenants at the
site. The total sign area of all signs permitted on-site must also
comply with the maximum total permanent sign area specified in this
chapter.
Packet Page 508 of 562
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
June 23, 2010 Page 2
west of 76th Avenue West.” She expressed her belief that changing the Comprehensive Plan and zoning to allow mixed-use
commercial development in the block mentioned would completely contravene this goal and allow development to spread
well beyond the targeted corridor. It would change the character of the neighborhood irreparably. She pointed out that the
proposed change would go directly against what is already in the Comprehensive Plan. She referred to Policy A.5, which
states “support a mix of uses without encroaching into single-family neighborhoods.”
Ms. McDonald said that while it is possible to say the proposed change would have no immediate impact, in this case it
would. Mr. Shapiro’s client is interested in two vacant lots located within the block, with the intent of constructing a 35,000
to 40,000 square foot medical facility with 150 parking spaces if the change is approved. She observed that traffic on 220th
is already substantial and the proposed building would only increase traffic. In addition, the area in question is an existing
single-family neighborhood, which would be significantly and negatively affected. As a homeowner in the impacted area,
she emphasized that she lives in a neighborhood and not a business zone. She pointed out that several lots are available for
purchase further north in the 212th area that are already zoned for this kind of use. She suggested it would be more
appropriate to contain development in these targeted areas rather than changing the Comprehensive Plan and rezoning to
accommodate a single business and allow commercial development to spread into existing single-family areas. She urged
the Planning Board to reject the proposed changes and retain the existing zoning and Comprehensive Plan designation for the
two lots in question.
Mr. Chave clarified that Mr. Shapiro has not submitted an application for a Comprehensive Plan amendment and/or rezone
for the property in question. If Mr. Shapiro does submit an application at some point in the future, a public hearing would be
conducted and everyone living with 300 feet of the subject property would be notified. He noted that Mr. Shapiro cannot
apply for a Comprehensive Plan change this year unless the City Council waives the deadline, which they chose not to do.
Al Rutledge, Edmonds, said he cannot move forward with his proposal to place additional signs at Hickman Park until
Board Member Clarke is present to answer his questions. He said Mr. McIntosh, Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services
Manager, informed him that he reviewed the recording from the City Council meeting at which the issue was discussed, but
he is still waiting to receive transcripts of the City Council’s discussion. He also recalled that at the last meeting he raised a
concern that, as currently proposed, all appeals must be filed in person or by mail. He suggested the Board consider
changing this requirement to allow appeals to be faxed to the City, as well.
Joe St. Laurent, Edmonds, said he was present to represent his client, James Plute, a major land owner in the 220th Block,
who is opposed to the potential Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone proposal that is being put forth by Mr. Shapiro.
He thanked the City Council for voting against modifying the deadline to allow the proposed Comprehensive Plan
amendment to move forward in 2010. He said his client agrees with the statements provided by Ms. McDonald. The
neighborhood is very upset with the proposed change. He noted that a creek runs through the property where the Kruger
Clinic is proposed to be constructed, and his client is opposed to any changes to the State Environmental Protection Act
(SEPA) rules at this time. He emphasized that the waterway is a creek and not a drainage ditch. It runs under the
condominium project on the north side of 218th and is open the entire block of 220th before going into a pipe and then
another creek before being discharged into Lake Ballinger. He emphasized that numerous wildlife use this creek, and the
SEPA laws should be applied to protect this valuable habitat. He summarized that his client is not opposed to development
on 220th, and he supports economic development if it is done in the proper place, at the proper time and after a proper public
process.
PRESENTATION BY MAYOR HAAKENSON
Mayor Haakenson presented a plaque to outgoing Board Member Cary Guenther and thanked him for his years of service.
He thanked the other Board Members, as well. He observed that theirs is not an easy job, and they have had to make some
difficult decisions that impact everyone in the City. He also announced that Board Member Bowman has submitted his
resignation effective July 14th.
PUBLIC HEARING ON UPDATING THE NUMBER OF PERMITTED PERMANENT SIGNS PER SITE IN
BUSINESS AND COMMERCIAL ZONES (EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC)
20.60.025) (FILE NUMBER AMD20100014)
Packet Page 509 of 562
APPROVED
Planning Board Minutes
June 23, 2010 Page 3
Mr. Clugston recalled that the Board discussed the proposed amendment to the sign code at their April 14th and April 28th
meetings. He explained that the proposed amendments would change the total number of permitted signs allowed in
business and commercial zones to provide more flexibility for businesses on multi-tenant sites. He emphasized that all other
requirements related to height, area, location, etc. would remain the same. He reminded the Board, that at the end of their
last discussion, they directed staff to prepare code amendment language that would:
1. Increase the maximum number of signs allowed on multi-tenant business sites from one to three per subtenant business
while allowing one group directory sign per multi-tenant site.
2. Exempt window signs from the total number of permanent permitted signs.
Board Member Johnson recalled that at their April 28th meeting, Mr. Chave noted that some businesses use incidental
information signs, which would be inconsistent with Option 2. He suggested the language include a provision that while
incidental signs would count against the total sign area, they would not count against the number of signs allowed. Mr.
Clugston explained that the proposed amendments are intended to deal strictly with the number of permitted signs in business
and commercial zones. However, he suggested it would be entirely appropriate for the Board to address the issue of
incidental signs when they conduct a more comprehensive review of the sign code at some point in the future. Board
Member Johnson agreed that would be a good approach.
Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, said that he has participated in many sign code changes over the years, and he has witnessed
that businesses tend to place as many signs as possible in their windows. He said he lives across the street from a deli that
had so many window signs it was unsightly. He complained to the City and the owner was required to comply with the sign
code. The situation is much better now. He cautioned against approving any amendment that would make it easier for
businesses to use window signs.
Al Rutledge, Edmonds, recommended the Board maintain the existing sign code, which only allows three signs per
commercial lot. This will require the person who owns the property to work with tenants to ensure that each business has
adequate opportunity for signage. He concluded that signage should be addressed as part of the lease agreement.
THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Mr. Chave explained that the proposed language would not change the current code provisions for window signs, which are
based on area and not number of signs. Mr. Clugston added that the current code limits the area of window signs to one
square foot per linear foot of window frontage, and this would not be changed by the proposed amendments. Board Member
Stewart said she can appreciate Mr. Hertrich’s concern about window signs. She felt the current code provision could result
in a lot of visual obstruction, particularly on large windows. Mr. Chave expressed his belief that the current formula works
well, and he recalled Mr. Hertrich’s earlier statement that when the code provisions were enforced, the situation at the deli
across from his home was improved. He emphasized that the linier length of a window does not take into account the height
of a window, so the amount of window sign area actually adds up to a fairly small percentage of total sign area on windows
with more vertical height.
BOARD MEMBER CLOUTIER MOVED THE COMMISSION FORWARD THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO
ECDC 20.60.025 (FILE NUMBER AMD20100014) TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF
APPROVAL AS PROPOSED BY STAFF. BOARD MEMBER GUENTHER SECONDED THE MOTION. THE
MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED UPDATES TO EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE (ECDC)
20.15A ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW (SEPA) (FILE NUMBER AMD20090006)
Mr. Lien advised that potential updates to ECDC 20.15A were presented to the Planning Board on July 22, 2009, and the
Board directed staff to propose new flexible thresholds for categorical exemptions under the State Environmental Protection
Act (SEPA). The proposed new flexible thresholds were presented to the Board on February 24th, and the Board agreed they
would like to consider changes to the thresholds, but only for limited areas. Four flexible thresholds alternatives were
Packet Page 510 of 562
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
1
1
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
1
2
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
1
3
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
1
4
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
1
5
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
1
6
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
1
7
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
1
8
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
1
9
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
2
0
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
2
1
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
2
2
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
2
3
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
2
4
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
2
5
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
2
6
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
2
7
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
2
8
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
2
9
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
3
0
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
3
1
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
3
2
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
3
3
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
3
4
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
3
5
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
3
6
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
3
7
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
3
8
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
3
9
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
4
0
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
4
1
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
4
2
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
4
3
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
4
4
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
4
5
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
4
6
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
4
7
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
4
8
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
4
9
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
5
0
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
5
1
o
f
5
6
2
P
a
c
k
e
t
P
a
g
e
5
5
2
o
f
5
6
2
AM-3252 9.
Presentation and potential action on a project with the UW Green Futures Lab to
develop special district plans for Five Corners and Westgate.
Edmonds City Council Meeting
Date:08/03/2010
Submitted By:Rob Chave
Submitted For:Rob Chave Time:15 Minutes
Department:Planning Type:Action
Review Committee:
Committee Action:
Information
Subject Title
Presentation and potential action on a recommendation from the Economic Development
Commission to proceed with a partnership with the University of Washington Green
Futures Lab for development of special district plans for the Five Corners and Westgate
commercial centers.
Recommendation from Mayor and Staff
1) Authorize staff to initiate the necessary agreements with the University of Washington to
proceed on the study, with funding as indicated; and,
2) Decide on the level of effort to be done on a supporting market study, with funding to be
provided by the City Council.
Previous Council Action
Following recommendations from the Economic Development Commission, the City Council
approved Resolution 1224 on March 16, 2010, which identified neighborhood business center
planning as being one of seven priority items that the City Council was committed to act on.
Resolution 1224 is contained in Exhibit 2.
Narrative
The Economic Development Commission, working with staff, has put together a proposal with the
University of Washington Green Futures Lab and the Cascade Land Conservancy to undertake a
project to develop plans and implementing regulations for the Five Corners and Westgate
commercial centers. The scope of work for the project is contained in Exhibit 1 and details a
three-phase project involving two UW faculty members (Jill Sterrett and Nancy Rottle) and
student teams of both undergraduate and graduate students. Cascade Land Conservancy would be
involved primarily during Phase 2, which focuses on public involvement and alternatives
development, areas in which CLC has substantial experience and resources. The results of the
project would include plans and implementing zoning for both commercial centers.
Page 5 of the scope (Exhibit 1) lists cost estimates for the UW portion of the work. The base cost
is $39,430. Several 'optional adds' are also listed. Staff feels that Add #1 (web site work) can be
accomplished by city staff as part of the city's website. However, we recommend reserving an
Packet Page 553 of 562
amount to cover Optional Add #4 ($1,620) since public reporting of the study results is very
important. Optional Add #4 is included in the proposed budget of $41,050.
The CLC contribution to the project is funded through their contract with the City, wherein 25
hours of CLC staff time is to be contributed to a mutually agreed upon project. CLC is willing to
devote that time to this project.
Funding for the base portion of the project (the work by UW and CLC) can be funded by savings
in the Planning Division's Professional Services Budget. A total of $20,000 was originally
included in the budget to complete the code rewrite project, but that project was re-oriented by the
previous Development Services Director from a consultant-driven project to an in-house project so
that the remaining consultant money is not being spent. An additional $21,050 is available from
Planning's professional services budget; $10,000 is normally reserved for special studies such as
this, and the additional $11,050 will otherwise be unspent due to the slow development
environment (this is money originally budgeted for the minute taker -- who is needed for fewer
ADB meetings, for example -- along with a reduced need for critical areas and other studies related
to development or city projects. (Note that the project will start in 2010 but will not finish until
2011, so there will be some budget carryover that will need to be re-allocated to 2011;
nonetheless, this is already budgeted money so no additional funding is being called for.)
In addition to the base budget with the UW and CLC, it is desirable to have some form of market
analysis done to help support the land use and design work. Two levels of market analysis have
been identified (see page 6 of Exhibit 1 for an example), with a more thorough effort ranging in
cost up to $30,000 and a less ambitious market 'overview' probably more likely to run about
$10,000. Funding for this aspect of the project would have to come from the City Council, most
likely the Council Contingency fund. In general, the more thorough the analysis, the more
information is available to the study to 'test' the reasonableness of the land use and regulatory
alternatives.
The Economic Development Commission unanimously endorsed the proposal at its July 21, 2010,
meeting.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal Year:2010
Revenue:
Expenditure:$41,050
Fiscal Impact:
-0- Planning Prof Services
Fiscal Year:2010
Revenue:
Expenditure:$10,000 - $30,000
Fiscal Impact:
Council Contingency
Attachments
Packet Page 554 of 562
Attachments
Link: U.W. Scope of Work
Link: Resolution No. 1224
Form Routing/Status
Route Seq Inbox Approved By Date Status
1 City Clerk Linda Hynd 07/29/2010 01:53 PM APRV
2 Community Services/Economic Dev. Stephen Clifton 07/29/2010 02:29 PM APRV
3 Final Approval Linda Hynd 07/30/2010 08:14 AM APRV
Form Started By: Rob Chave Started On: 07/29/2010 11:47
AM
Final Approval Date: 07/30/2010
Packet Page 555 of 562
1
University of Washington Green Futures Lab
Scope of Work for 3‐Phase Approach
Edmonds Special Districts Plans for the
Five Corners and Westgate Commercial Centers
July 19, 2010
1. Phase 1: Fall Quarter (October to December) – Focus on Environmental Scan
Work by: undergrad students as part of CEP 460 class.
a. Meet with City staff to discuss current activities at each site, opportunities/interests for
future development and tour the city with staff
b. Conduct overview research on existing form‐based codes and hybrid approaches in
similar neighborhood and commercial center projects, including successes, challenges,
and lessons learned both in recent Washington projects and older projects from other
states.
c. Gather data on site conditions and current use of the two neighborhood centers, using
the Gehl Architects analysis framework for evaluating urban spaces. This task to include
recorded observations of public activities and circulation on each site and gathering
informal interviews with participants and shop keepers.
d. Using GIS base files provided by the City, develop inventory and analysis maps showing
i. Site boundaries
ii. Current uses and parcel data
iii. Public activities and circulation patterns
iv. Contextual features: community resources, parks, habitat, views, public transit
connections, etc.
v. Opportunities and challenges with the current physical setting
e. Meet with Economic Development Commission to discuss the preliminary findings and
facilitate a dialog to elicit their ideas on strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and
threats affecting each of the two neighborhood centers.
f. Optional Add #1: Prepare a citizen survey, using city website announcement and Survey
Monkey technology to elicit people's ideas, concepts, hopes and dreams, as a means to
attract interest in the public involvement program to follow. Depending on the level of
public input desired (e.g. interactive/ map‐based, etc.) a sub‐consultant may be needed
to help with the technology.
Note: Market research should be done during this period via a separate contract, if
feasible
Packet Page 556 of 562
2
Products:
Summary report of information collected on form‐based codes and hybrid approaches
as a basis for adapting that approach to Edmonds
Inventory maps in GIS, showing
i. Site boundaries
ii. Current uses and parcel data
iii. Public activities and circulation
iv. Contextual features: community resources, parks, habitat, views, public transit
connections, etc.
v. Opportunities and challenges with the current physical setting
Tabulated results of citizen survey
Summary of comments from EDC meeting, and recommendations for next steps
Format: team of 4 undergrad students from CEP 460 directed by Jill Sterrett
2. Phase 2: Winter Quarter (January to March) – Focus on Public Involvement, Visioning and
Analysis, and Development of Conceptual Alternatives
Work by: graduate students in planning or landscape architecture hired for this process,
possibly supplemented by graduate students in Abramson’s Public Involvement class
a. Review relevant previous studies and existing City plans, policies, controls and
aspirations for the site including codes, height limits, desire for TOD, and city
sustainability goals.
b. Review of Phase 1 data collected on site conditions, conduct additional site visits, and
analyze Phase 1 results.
c. Review market study prepared during Phase 1 by the economic consultant and current
literature on developing thriving walkable neighborhood centers.
d. Coordinate with Cascade Land Conservancy (CLC) to define an approach to public
meetings and their role in the preparation and facilitation of public meetings (based on
the 26 hours of CLC work available to the city).
e. In coordination with CLC, develop displays and materials for use in the public
involvement process
f. Meet with the Steering Committee to be established by city staff, consisting of the EDC
subcommittee, and representatives of the City Council, Planning Board, and Mayors’
Climate Protection Committee. Planned meeting with the Steering Committee would
include:
a. Meeting #A – to establish the committee direction, review the public meeting
process, and to define issues, understand priorities, and lead the direction of
policy formation
Packet Page 557 of 562
3
b. Meeting #B– to discuss the outcomes of the public meetings and define
opportunities for furthering sustainability or other core goals identified in the
visioning process.
c. Meeting #C– to discuss the preliminary conceptual alternatives and discuss
criteria and process for selecting a preferred alternative for each neighborhood
center.
g. Conduct public meetings or workshops (in conjunction with Cascade Land Conservancy)
to educate local citizens, generate interest & define priorities, including presentations of
the results of the citizen survey. We may also discuss using hand‐held polling devices
(available from the Association of Washington Cities) to engage the citizens and provide
feedback in real‐time. Another option is to create a web‐based survey to provide input
from a broader range of citizens than those who attend the meetings (see Optional Add
#1). This web‐based survey could be done during Phase 1 (to gather general input) or
Phase 2 (to gather specific responses to conceptual alternatives). Planned public
meetings would include:
a. Meeting #1 – general public meeting to show the initial analysis maps, discuss
the current uses of the site, and solicit input on existing conditions, future uses,
community needs and interests, etc.
b. Meeting #2 – design charrette organized by Nancy Rottle and the UW Student
Team involving the Architectural Design Board. This would likely be a Friday
afternoon or Saturday half‐day workshop. This may be a good use of CLC time
in the public involvement process
c. Meeting #3 (Optional Add #2) – follow up meeting to show citizens the
alternative concepts resulting from the planning process and the concepts for
development.
h. Synthesis – Evaluate the results of the design charrette as well as the needs of the city
and the priorities defined in Phase 2 to synthesize the opportunities presented and
define alternative approaches suited to each neighborhood center.
i. Develop draft and illustrate conceptual alternatives for each of the two neighborhoods:
Five Corners and the Westgate Commercial Center.
Note: This scope assumes that students from the Dan Abramson Public Involvement
class would have a limited role as assistants in public meetings, as we have not been
able to reach him in China to discuss a more substantial role. We can amend this scope
further, if desired, when he is available to discuss those options.
Products:
a. Opportunities analysis, display boards, and presentation materials for public meetings
#1 and #2
b. Summary of the results of visioning with EDC and public meetings, including the design
charrette/alternatives forum.
Packet Page 558 of 562
4
c. Conceptual alternatives for each neighborhood commercial center
Format: team of 4‐5 grad & undergrad students hired as the Edmonds UW Student Team and
directed by Jill Sterrett and Nancy Rottle
Note: We assume that the Steering Committee and City staff will assist with, and participate in,
the public meetings – including conducting citizen outreach/advertising for the meetings, and all
logistics for meeting rooms and facilities.
2. Phase 3: Portion of Spring Quarter (April/May) Focus on developing and refining the Form‐
based Code (or hybrid code) and Special District Plans
Work by: graduate students in planning or landscape architecture hired for this process
a. Hold meeting(s) with staff and Steering Committee to select preferred alternatives that
will incorporate public feedback and the priorities established by the city in other
planning documents.
b. Develop and refine policies and planning tools (such as codes) for each focus area.
c. Report Preparation & Assessment – Create draft Special District report and a toolbox of
planning mechanisms, including Form‐Based Codes (or hybrid codes) for both the Five
Corners and the Westgate Commercial Centers
d. Meet with staff or designated Steering Committee to review and refine the draft
documents.
e. Develop implementation strategies, such as
i. Specific recommendations for changes to the comp plan, zoning, etc.
ii. Development of incentive programs,
f. Optional Add #2: Prepare and present the final development concepts and
implementation strategies in a public meeting.
g. Optional Add #3 or #4: Prepare and present materials to the EDC, Planning Board and/or
City Council on the draft report.
Products:
a. Draft and final reports with Form Based Code (or hybrid code) and other tools, including
the implementation strategies.
b. Presentation materials for Planning Board and/or City Council (part of Optional Task
#3/#4.
Format: Continuation of the Edmonds UW Student Team of 4 grad students as directed by Jill
Sterrett and Nancy Rottle
Packet Page 559 of 562
5
Cost Estimate for Edmonds Neighborhood Center Plans and Form‐based Codes
Costs Rates and hours Notes
CEP Student labor
(Fall Quarter)
$300.00 4 students averaging 8
hours/week, over a period of 10
weeks no labor costs, but $300
available for travel and expenses
Faculty oversight provided,
but not specific direction.
Graduate student
labor (Dec to May)
$15,600.00 4 graduate students at $15.00/hr
averaging 10 hours/week, 26 wks
Faculty Director –
Jill Sterrett
$9,828.00 Average of 6 hours/week for 26
weeks at $60/hr. + 5% allowance
for expenses
Requires a separate
contract with Sterrett
Consulting, LLC
Faculty Advisor –
Nancy Rottle
$6,000.00 Course buy‐out rate for 1 quarter,
for full‐time faculty
Overhead $6,221.00 Includes 11% overhead on
student labor and 16% overhead
on the full UW contract for
facilities and UW administration
Nancy is still confirming the
specifics of these overhead
amounts
Expenses $1,481.00 Calculated at 5% of UW fee.
Covers, mileage & copies, printing
review copies, display plots, etc.
Does not include printed
copies of the final product,
digital files to be provided
Total costs $39,430.00 UW contract = $29,602.00
Sterrett contract = $9,828.00
Optional Add # 1 $2,000.00 Web consultant for developing
interactive web site for public
input
This could be during Phase
1 for general input or Phase
2 for specific preferences
on the alternative concepts
Optional Add # 2 $1,063.00 Additional final public meeting to
show results of the process
Assumes Jill Sterrett & 4
students at 8 hours each +
5% expenses and 11%
overhead on student fee
Optional add # 3 $1,080.00 Added final meetings before EDC,
Planning Board and City Council
to show results of the process
Jill Sterrett (only) preparing
a presentation and
attending 3 meetings @ 6
hours each
Optional Add # 4 $1,620.00 Added final meetings before EDC,
Planning Board and City Council
to show results of the process
Jill Sterrett and 2 students
providing a presentation
and attending 3 meetings
@ 6 hours each
Packet Page 560 of 562
Edmonds Neighborhood Centers
Potential Economic Analysis
Property Counselors
July 15, 2010
Comprehensive Market and Feasibility Assessment
Scope:
1. Market analysis for alternative uses.
2. Identification of catalyst sites and projects.
3. Proforma feasibility analysis for catalyst projects.
Schedule and Fee
2 to 3 months
$20,000 to $30,000.
Overview of Economic Potential
Scope:
1. Review of economic conditions and trends (rents and land prices).
2. Discussion of key feasibility factors (rents, land prices, construction type, existing
improvements, etc.)
3. Discussion of supportable uses.
Schedule and Fee
2 to 3 weeks
$7,000 to $10,000.
Packet Page 561 of 562
Packet Page 562 of 562