The URL can be used to link to this page

2016-01-12 City Council - Full Agenda-1068'4- o 0 -c9 AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers — Public Safety Complex 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WORK MEETING JANUARY 12, 2015 7:00 P.M. - CALL TO ORDER / FLAG SALUTE 1. (5 Minutes) Roll Call 2. (5 Minutes) Approval of Agenda 3. (5 Minutes) Approval of Consent Agenda Items A. AM-8219 Approval of draft City Council Meeting minutes of January 5, 2016. B. AM-8231 Approval of claim checks #217894 through #218028 dated January 7, 2016 for $2,504,306.32. (Check #217894 $165,000.00 was voided and re -issued as check #217894 for $165,600.00) Approval of payroll direct deposit and checks #62009 through #62018 for $496,548.94, benefit checks #62019 through #62026 and wire payments of $461,868.55 for the pay period December 16, 2015 through December 31, 2015. C. AM-8222 Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Stephen Millet (amount undetermined). D. AM-8227 Non -Represented Compensation Policy language (updated) 4. Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)* *Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings 5. ACTION ITEMS Packet Page 1 of 456 A. 6. A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. 7. 8. 9. 10. (5 Minutes) Appointment of Committee Representatives for 2016 AM-8236 STUDY ITEMS (15 Minutes) Senior Construction Inspector, IS Manager & Accounting Manager job descriptions AM-8228 (30 Minutes) Presentation and Discussion of Updates to ECC 17.60 and 8.48 Relating to Parking in AM-8237 Residential Zones (Private Property and Public Right -of -Way) (10 Minutes) Summary of 2015 CG and CG2 Development in the Highway 99 Area. AM-8230 (5 Minutes) Authorization for Mayor to sign 2015-2017 Coordinated Prevention Grant Agreement AM-8221 with Department of Ecology. (10 Minutes) Presentation of a Professional Services Agreement with Louis Berger Group for design AM-8238 of the Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station (10 Minutes) Authorization for Mayor to sign the Second Amendment to the Interlocal Agreement AM-8226 with the Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed Forum. (10 Minutes) Authorization for Mayor to sign a sewer easement for an existing sewer main. AM-8225 (10 Minutes) Authorization for Mayor to sign a Professional Services Agreement with BHC AM-8224 Consultants for the Lake Ballinger Sewer Trunk Main Study. (10 Minutes) Authorization for Mayor to sign and accept right of way documents from Edmonds AM-8233 School District for the Madronna Walkway Project. (10 Minutes) Authorization for Mayor to sign the TIB Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement for the AM-8235 238th St. SW Walkway from Highway 99 to SR-104 (30 Minutes) City Attorney Annual Report. AM-8241 (5 Minutes) Mayor's Comments (15 Minutes) Council Comments ADJOURN Convene in executive session regarding pending or potential litigation per RCW 42.3 0.11 0(l)(i). Reconvene in open session. Potential action as a result of meeting in executive session. Packet Page 2 of 456 AM-8219 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2016 Time: Consent Submitted By: Scott Passey Department: City Clerk's Office Type: Action Information Subiect Title Approval of draft City Council Meeting minutes of January 5, 2016. Recommendation Review and approve meeting minutes. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Attachment 1 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes Attachments Attachment 1 - 01-05-16 Draft Council Meeting Minutes Form Review Form Started By: Scott Passey Started On: 01/05/2016 08:20 AM Final Approval Date: 01/05/2016 3. A. Packet Page 3 of 456 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES January 5, 2016 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5ti Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Michael Nelson, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember STAFF PRESENT Al Compaan, Police Chief Jim Lawless, Assistant Police Chief Phil Williams, Public Works Director Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir. Shane Hope, Development Services Director Scott James, Finance Director Mary Ann Hardie, Human Resources Manager Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. ADMINISTRATION OF OATH OF OFFICE TO NEWLY ELECTED OFFICIALS Mayor Earling remarked it was always a thrill to have five Councilmembers and himself sworn in. At the City Attorney's advice, Councilmembers and he were sworn in legally in December. Tonight is largely ceremonial but it is important for the public to see and hear Councilmembers and him sworn in. Pastor Barr Crane administered the oath of office to Mayor Dave Earling. Mayor Earling individually administered the oath of office to Councilmembers Mike Nelson, Diane Buckshnis, Dave Teitzel and Thomas Mesaros. Gary Haakenson administered the oath of office to Councilmember Neil Tibbott. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED; Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 5, 2016 Page 1 Packet Page 4 of 456 COUNCILMEMBERS TEITZEL AND TIBBOTT ABSTAINED FROM ITEM B. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. APPROVAL OF DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF DECEMBER 15, 2015 B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #217612 THROUGH #217704 DATED DECEMBER 17, 2015 FOR $293,146.39, #217705 THROUGH #217803 DATED DECEMBER 23, 2015 FOR $1,077,674.06 AND #217804 THROUGH #217893 DATED DECEMBER 31, 2015 FOR $889,825.41. APPROVAL OF PAYROLL DIRECT DEPOSIT AND CHECKS #61994 THROUGH #62003 FOR $482,409.95, BENEFIT CHECKS #62004 THROUGH #62008 AND WIRE PAYMENTS OF $529,891.72 FOR THE PAY PERIOD DECEMBER 1, 2015 THROUGH DECEMBER 15, 2015 C. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM SCOTT BLOMENKAMP ($100,000.00) D. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY FOR A MUNICIPAL STORMWATER CAPACITY GRANT E. REPORT ON FINAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS FOR THE PHASE 2 ANNUAL SEWER REPLACEMENT PROJECT AND ACCEPT PROJECT F. RESOLUTION THANKING COUNCILMEMBER ADRIENNE FRALEY MONILLAS FOR HER SERVICE AS COUNCIL PRESIDENT G. REAPPOINTMENT OF THE LODGING TAX ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEMBERS FOR 2016 H. 2015 RETIRING BOARD AND COMMISSION MEMBERS I. REAPPOINTMENT OF BRIAN BOROFKA AND LOIS BROADWAY TO THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN BOARD J. REAPPOINTMENT OF BEVERLY SHAW STARKOVICH TO THE EDMONDS ARTS COMMISSION K. REAPPOINTMENT OF FOUR HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSIONERS 5. ACTION ITEMS A. SELECTION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR 2016 City Clerk Scott Passey reviewed the selection process: The Mayor will call for nominations. No Councilmember may nominate more than one person until every member wishing to nominate a candidate has had the opportunity to do so. Nominations do not require a second. The Mayor will repeat each nomination until all nominations have been made. When it appears no one else wishes to make a nomination, the Mayor will ask again for nominations. If none are made, the Mayor will declare the nominations closed. After the nominations are closed, the Mayor will call for a vote in the order that the nominations were made. Councilmembers will be asked to signify their vote by raising their hand. As soon as a nominee receives four votes, the Mayor will declare the Council President elected and no votes will be taken on the remaining nominees. The same process will be repeated for the election of the Council President Pro Tem. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 5, 2016 Page 2 Packet Page 5 of 456 Mayor Earling opened nominations for Council President. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS NOMINATED KRISTIANA JOHNSON FOR THE POSITION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS NOMINATED THOMAS MESAROS FOR THE POSITION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT. There were no further nominations. NOMINATION OF KRISTIAN JOHNSON FOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT FOR 2016 CARRIED (4- 3) COUNCILMEMBERS MESAROS, BUCKSHNIS AND TIBBOTT VOTING NO. B. SELECTION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM FOR 2016 COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS NOMINATED THOMAS MESAROS FOR THE POSITION OF COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM. There were no further nominations. NOMINATION OF THOMAS MESAROS FOR COUNCIL PRESIDENT PRO TEM FOR 2016 CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. C. APPOINTMENT OF COMMITTEE REPRESENTATIVES FOR 2016 Councilmember Fraley-Monillas advised she has gathered all the requests for committee assignments; there are only a few where more than one Councilmembers requested a committee. She will allow Council President Johnson to make a decision regarding those assignments. Council President Johnson advised she will make the committee assignments at the next Council meeting. Mayor Earling advised appointments need to be made to the Snohomish County Health District Board and the Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation. D. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION APPOINTING A COUNCILMEMBER TO THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT BOARD COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO NOMINATE COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS TO THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT BOARD. Council President Johnson commented Councilmember Fraley-Monillas has served on the Health District Board for several years and she would like her to continue in that role. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 1347, APPOINTING COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS TO THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY HEALTH DISTRICT BOARD. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. E. APPROVAL OF RESOLUTION APPOINTING A REPRESENTATIVE AND ALTERNATE TO THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT AREA CORPORATION Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 5, 2016 Page 3 Packet Page 6 of 456 Council President Johnson asked whether the appointment could be made next week. Mayor Earling advised there is a meeting this Thursday. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON, TO APPOINT MAYOR DAVE EARLING AS THE REPRESENTATIVE TO THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT AREA CORPORATION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas relayed a couple Councilmembers expressed interest in being the alternate. Mayor Earling advised the alternate could be appointed next week. [Note: Resolution 1348 was approved at the conclusion of Agenda Item 7A.1 6. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Marlin Phelps, Edmonds, said two years ago he was railroaded by the Police Department. It took 97 hearings to be found not guilty by 2 juries for crimes he did not commit. He was summarily beaten at one point although he was innocent. He was not allowed to drive his car, his water was shut off, and he was tortured beyond belief. Due to the abhorrent behavior in the courtroom, he ordered the court tapes. He described the conduct of the Judge Pro Tem and the prosecutor Rachel Hunter on May 21, 2014, asserting Ms. Hunter lied in open court to have him remanded, a complete set up and Judge Fair was present. He was then taken to the parking lot where his arms were twisted behind his back and the police wrenched so hard on the handcuff that he still feels pain in his elbow. Detective Mills drove him south although he was supposed to go to Snohomish County Jail even though there was no charge and he believed he was being taken to the woods to be killed. He ordered tapes from the May 21, 2014 meeting and received a heavily edited CD with all the incriminating behavior removed and the order of items changed. He reordered the recording eight months later and received the actual CD of the meeting, proof of their terrible, ruthless behavior as well as the cover-up. The Judicial Commission opened an investigation today. He and his family no long have a home because of this. Larry Vogel, Edmonds, Historic Preservation Commission (HPC), expressed the HPC's appreciation for the Council's support and for continuing to include funding for the historic calendar in the budget. The historic calendar is the key information piece published by the HPC and helps to raise awareness and a sense of local heritage. He has been on the HPC since 2007 and has been reappointed to another three year term. The HPC will be actively recruiting new members in 2016 who have an interest in heritage, public service, and historic preservation. He urged Councilmembers to encourage likely candidates to apply. There are currently 18 properties on the register and the HPC hopes to expand the number in a purposeful and strategic way by reviewing survey data. The HPC also plans to work more closely with the Historic Society and the Museum and looks forward to leveraging historic preservation to promote economic development and a healthy business environment in Edmonds. Emily Scott, Edmonds, Historic Preservation Commission, thanked the Council and the Mayor for their support and for keeping the historic town of Edmonds historic. The HPC has a lot of plans for 2016 with regard to educating the public about what the HPC does. She offered calendars to the Council. Dave Page, Edmonds, welcomed Councilmembers and as Paul Harvey said, he can hardly wait to hear the rest of story [from the first speaker]. He commented he knows all the Councilmembers and has had opportunity to meet with them and learn about their values. He believed this Council had the opportunity to be the best Council he had ever witnessed; the right people are in the right places. 7. PRESENTATIONS/REPORTS Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 5, 2016 Page 4 Packet Page 7 of 456 A. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION AND PLAQUE TO COUNCILMEMBER ADRIENNE FRALEY MONILLAS FOR HER SERVICE AS COUNCIL PRESIDENT IN 2015 Mayor Earling said it had been a privilege to work with Councilmember Fraley-Monillas; she has been open and fair in weekly meetings with him and Council President Pro Tern Johnson. He was certain Councilmembers appreciate the great effort being Council President requires and Councilmember Fraley- Monillas has done an extraordinary job. He read a resolution thanking Council President Fraley-Monillas for her service as Council President beginning January 6, 2015 for a one year term. He presented the resolution and plaque to her. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas agreed it has been a great year. She thanked Mayor Earling, agreeing they worked well together; their openness and willingness to communicate helped in that process. She thanked the prior Council for their support of her as Council President; without their efforts little would have been accomplished last year. She acknowledged the last year as Council President was a lot of work and she looked forward to just studying packet instead of shepherding everything. She also thanked staff for their assistance. Mayor Earling relayed the Council did not pass a resolution related to the Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY MESS, TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 1348, APPOINTING MAYOR DAVE EARLING TO THE SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT AREA CORPORATION. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 8. CONTINUED ACTION ITEMS A. 2015 NONREPRESENTED COMPENSATION STUDY Human Resources Manager Mary Ann Hardie explained Human Resources has had a few discussion with Council in the recent past regarding the results of the 2015 Nonrepresented Compensation Study, a study performed by policy every three years. At the September 22, 2015 meeting Council requested further review of the salary and total cost of compensation comparator information. Staff is seeking Council approval for implementation effective January 1, 2016. She reviewed options: • Option 1: Current policy comparator cities (includes: Snohomish, King, Pierce, Kitsap and Thurston Counties). o These are the original comparator cities when the policy was crafted and adopted by Council in 2012. o Includes salary adjustments already approved by Council at the September 22, 2015 meeting: ■ Assistant Police Chief 2.5% of a base wage deferred compensation benefit for this position to bring the position within 4% of the market ■ Adjusting the HR Assistant wage range by 4% to bring this position in line with external market comparators. ■ Total cost for both changes is approximately $8.000 • Option 2: Requested by Council at the September 22, 2015 meeting. Includes current policy comparator cities, excluding Kitsap County (Bremerton). o Salary adjustment the same as Option 1 Ms. Hardie explained the reason there are different options with different labor markets is based on best compensation practices regarding market competitive pay systems as used at the City and appropriate to review the relevant labor market. Reviewing the relevant labor market ensures the City's Nonrepresented Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 5, 2016 Page 5 Packet Page 8 of 456 Pay Policy and compensation surveying process is fair, consistent and equitable. The relevant labor market represents the fields of potentially qualified candidates for particular jobs; companies collect compensation survey data from these markets defined on the basis of occupational classification, geography and product or service market competitors. According to the AWC one of first factors to consider in determining pay levels is looking at the local labor market conditions. Edmonds' relative labor market compares primarily to other public sector cities of comparable population size. There are few if any nonrepresented positions that could not be found within the local geographic labor market (Snohomish, King and Pierce counties) that would require using a wider geographic search area for candidates. Ms. Hardie explained market pricing is also a consideration in determining the labor market. In doing so, the following questions should be considered: from which market do we hire employees, to which do we lose employees and which market would our organization like to compete? For Edmonds, the most relevant labor market includes King, Snohomish and Pierce counties since the benchmark positions surveyed may be found within the local geographic area and since the City has primarily hired employees from and lost employees to and primarily compete with King, Snohomish, and Pierce counties. Additionally, the City's employee base comes from this group. She reviewed a third option: • Option 3: Recommended by Mayor Earling: Includes current policy comparator cities, excluding Kitsap and Thurston counties, leaving Snohomish, King and Pierce counties. Previously recommended by the consultant in 2012 but not adopted by Council at that time. o Salary range adjustments with this option: ■ Assistant Police Chief (previously approved): 2.5% of a base wage deferred compensation benefit for this position. This would bring this position within 4% of the market - Cost: approximately $7,013/year ■ HR Assistant (previously approved): adjusting wage range by 4% to bring position in line with external market comparators. - Cost: approximately $988/year ■ IT Supervisor: decision package already approved in the budget to reclassify this position - Cost: $4,887/year ■ Planning Manager: adjust this position by 3%. - Cost: approximately $5,940/ year ■ Police Chief. adjust this position by 3%. - Cost: $7,956/year o Total approximate cost: $26,784 Ms. Hardie reviewed recommended changes to the Nonrepresented Compensation Policy: 1. Provide clarification that the same eight cities will be used for each surveyed benchmark position. 2. Private sector market data can be challenging to find equivalent benchmark positions and total cost of compensation information for. For this reason, it is recommended that the policy language be updated to reflect that the City may use private sector market data with the study. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she understood removing Kitsap but Thurston County has some cities of comparable size to Edmonds such as Lacey and Olympia. Ms. Hardie answered Olympia is now a little bigger but Lacey would be within comparable population size. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked why the City would not want to consider Thurston Count, noting as the job market and living market have progressed over the past ten years, people are moving out into more rural areas to be able to afford housing and amenities available in a more distant county. Ms. Hardie answered one of the primary considerations in determining which counties to include is the actual cost of living; different geographic areas have different costs of living. Arguably there will be certain areas within counties that are comparable but by and large Olympia is not comparable in terms of assessed valuation, etc. She agreed Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 5, 2016 Page 6 Packet Page 9 of 456 there were people willing to move out further and perhaps commute; however, that is not always an ideal situation for the City or the employee. She summarized the cost of living for the job market and housing market is different; Olympia pays a lower rate than many of the comparator cities. There is cost of living geographical differential calculation that can be used but it is quite complicated. Rather than using that calculation, it seemed to make sense to include cities that are close by. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas pointed out most of the cities in all three options are in the same geographic area along the I-5 corridor. She said using Lacey as a comparator city makes as much sense as using Des Moines or Issaquah. She felt Thurston County should potentially be included particularly since it has gotten bigger and it keeps encompassing other cities on the 1-5 corridor. She noted that is where people are moving, similar to people in this area moving to Skagit County. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to the use of comparator cities that are closely aligned with Edmonds and asked how closely Edmonds was aligned with Seattle or King County's cost of living. Ms. Hardie acknowledged Seattle has a higher cost of living; Seattle uses Edmonds as a comparator for their surveys although Seattle definitely pays at a higher level. Councilmember Mesaros agreed Option 3 was the best option. If the City wants to hire quality people and wants them to stay working for the City, it is desirable to have them live as close to the City as possible. He disagreed with Councilmember Fraley-Monillas about Lacey; the cost of living in Lacey is much lower so they can hire employees at a much lower rate than Edmonds can. Option 3 reflects the economics of paying employees fairly and having them live as close as possible to the Edmonds area to allow them to be part of the City as well as work for the City. Councilmember Buckshnis agreed with Councilmember Fraley-Monillas, pointing out Lacey's salary of $99,000 compared to $72,000 in Edmonds for an IT Supervisor. She recalled the City spent a tremendous amount on this survey as well as a tremendous amount of time in executive session reviewing every step. In her opinion if it is not broken, it should not be changed. She preferred Option 2 because she agreed with excluding Kitsap County. She pointed out Lacey's salary of $130,000 for a Commander compared to $102,000 in Edmonds for the Assistant Police Chief. Ms. Hardie answered there definitely will be some positions that pay either comparably or higher. Certain positions such as engineering and IT are difficult because the City competes with the private sector. She understood Councilmember Buckshnis' desire to keep Thurston County, noting they are growing and at some point they may be a good match. Council President Johnson agreed with the concept if it is not broken, let's not fix it. In the past the City has always used Thurston and Kitsap counties; in fact there is only one comparable city in each of those counties, Lacey in Thurston County and Bremerton in Kitsap County. She noted in the cover memo, Bremerton was included in Option 2, likely just an oversight. She was happy with Option 1 followed by Option 2. Mayor Earling commented he has looked at this long and hard and has had several conversations with staff. There was no question in his mind that there was opportunity for more equity if the comparator cities were narrowed to the three counties in his recommendation. The idea of pay and using the three county comparators really struck home with him Monday when Stormwater Engineering Program Manager Jerry Shuster announced he was leaving the City to go to Bellevue. After looking at a number of studies, there is no question the cost living is higher in Edmonds than in Kitsap or Thurston County. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if Mr. Shuster's position would have been affected by this decision. Mr. Hardie answered it potentially could have been effected. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas pointed out Option 3 would not have increased his salary. Ms. Hardie pointed out one of the salary adjustment that was not brought forward as a recommendation in Option 3 was the Stormwater Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 5, 2016 Page 7 Packet Page 10 of 456 Engineering Manager due to serious internal equity considerations with the other engineering positions. After discussion with the Public Works Director and City Engineer it did not make good sense to bring that recommendation forward. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas noted there is only one other city in Snohomish County in Option 3 and asked if there were no other cities whose population was 10,000 above or below Edmonds. Ms. Hardie answered not in that range; there were some within 15,000-20,000 above or below Edmonds' population. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas inquired about Marysville and Mukilteo. Ms. Hardie said Marysville's population is approximately 60,000 and Mukilteo's is not quite in the 10,000 range. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas did not agree with excluding the other counties and retaining only King, Snohomish and Pierce as there is a big difference between wages in King and Snohomish counties. She preferred Option 2. Councilmember Buckshnis recalled other than Mr. Shuster there have not been many employees leaving to take another position; most have retired. She was sorry to see Mr. Shuster leave but she has not heard complaints that the City is underpaying. Ms. Hardie agreed there may not have been an exodus of employees but the City must be mindful of a potential exodus. Ensuring a fair, equitable and consistent policy and attracting quality employees and talent prevents an exodus. To the point that if something is not broken, don't fit it, she agreed the policy was not broken but it was always a good idea when reviewing this process every three years to ensure it is relevant to the City today. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the City spent a lot of time and money in 2012 and now after just 3 years staff was recommending a change to only Snohomish County, Pierce and King counties. It was too soon for her to consider that change; possibly in three years she may be more open to excluding smaller areas. She was glad the City implemented the steps which raised a lot of salaries. Councilmember Teitzel agreed with Councilmember Mesaros. Option 3 has logic, it is more geographically consistent and there are cost of living consistencies, housing market consistencies, and transit consistencies. He found logic in using geographic cluster cities around Edmonds as comparators. As it appeared the Council was in agreement about excluding Bremerton, he felt Option 3 was the most logical. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE OPTION 2. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas relayed her belief that Thurston County was a comparator to Edmonds, it has cities of similar size and its housing market is similar to north and east Snohomish County. She agreed with excluding Kitsap County. Councilmember Mesaros did not support the motion based on his earlier comments; Edmonds is better served to include just Pierce, King and Snohomish counties because the City wants to hire people who can afford to live in those areas. Including Lacey does not provide comparative information that is beneficial to the City. Council President Johnson commented the difference between Option 2 and 3 is a budget impact of $26,784. She asked how that would be funded. Ms. Hardie answered Option 2 includes only the adjustments for the Assistant Police Chief and the Human Resources Assistant, a total of approximately $14,000. She clarified the consultant's recommendations in 2012 was Snohomish, King and Pierce counties. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 5, 2016 Page 8 Packet Page 11 of 456 UPON ROLL CALL, MOTION CARRIED (4-3), COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON AND COUNCILMEMBERS FRALEY-MONILLAS, BUCKSHNIS, AND TIBBOTT VOTING YES; AND COUNCILMEMBERS NELSON, MESAROS AND TEITZEL VOTING NO. Ms. Hardie requested Council direction regarding the changes to the Nonrepresented Compensation Policy. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked about the change, "Additionally, private sector data will may be gathered and considered where it is a significant factor in the City's competitiveness." She acknowledged there are some job classifications for which a comparable match could not be found. However, the private sector generally pays much higher than public sector; people do not go into public sector jobs for the money, it is for public service most of the time. She asked if would be rare to gather private sector data. Ms. Hardie answered the change was proposed because there is a lot of pay secrecy in the private sector unlike the public sector and it is difficult to find data. Data is often paid -for -data, there is often not an 80% match and it is often difficult to obtain all the compensation data such as health insurance, etc. There are a few positions that would be compared such as engineering and IT. Obtaining private sector data is challenging so the intent is not to state the City will gather that data. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how data is obtained if the private sector is secretive. Ms. Hardie answered it is paid for via surveys like Milliman and it is expensive. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked how many job the City would need to pay for survey data. Ms. Hardie answered engineering and IT are the primary positions; other positions are comparable in other cities. When there are good matches, there may not be a need to look at the private data. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if data would be collected on other civil service jobs first before seeking data on private sector jobs. Ms. Hardie answered yes although King County and Seattle pay more than Edmonds for certain positions. Human Resources Reporting Director Hite pointed out the policy currently states the City will go get data; the City has not been able to get data from the private sector. Thus the proposed change to say the City may get that data but may not depending on whether it's accessible. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked what happened if the City did not get that data. Ms. Hite answered the City just compared to the cities and does not include private sector data. This is a housekeeping change prompted by employees saying the City will get the data and City does not get it due to the cost. This language allows the option to obtain that data but does not require it. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE NONREPRESENTED COMPENSATION POLICY. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Hardie advised in light of the Council's approval of Option 2, staff will bring forward an amendment to the policies to include Option 2. Ms. Hite suggested Council authorize staff to amend the policy to include Option 2 as the comparator cities and not require it come back to Council. COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE A CHANGE TO THE NONREPRESENTED COMPENSATION POLICY TO INCORPORATE OPTION 2. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. B. AMENDMENT TO AND RENEWAL OF ILA WITH CITY OF MILL CREEK FOR DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COORDINATOR Assistant Police Chief Jim Lawless reported since January 2007 Edmonds and Mill Creek have been partners in an Interlocal Agreement (ILA) for the services of domestic violence coordinator. That individual assists with domestic violence victims, processing through the court, an assistance role in facilitating services for the individual. Traditionally that had been 19 hours per week, shared with Mill Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 5, 2016 Page 9 Packet Page 12 of 456 Creek with Edmond have approximately 66% of the hours and Mill Creek having 33% and the cities split the cost. In 2013 the ILA was amended to reduce the hours to a total of 12 and a 50150 share. In the most recent budget, a decision package was approved to put the hours back to the previous amount before they were reduced and the 66%/33% split with Mill Creek This ILA between the City and Mill Creek reflects that change. COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE THE AMENDMENT TO AND RENEWAL OF THE ILA WITH THE CITY OF MILL CREEK FOR THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COORDINATOR. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 9. STUDY ITEMS A. NOVEMBER 2015 MONTHLY BUDGETARY FINANCIAL REPORT Finance Director Scott James displayed a General Fund — Funds Revenue Comparison without 2014 bond proceeds, pointing out General Fund revenues are $1.6 million higher than 2014. He displayed a comparison of General Fund Revenue Budget to Actual, highlighting the following: • Total taxes 5.8% higher than 2014 • Sales tax revenue $837,000 higher than 2014 • 2015 Licenses and Permits down slightly from 2014 • Intergovernmental revenues are 1.9% higher than 2014 • 2015 Fee for Service revenues are 5.9% lower than 2014 • Fines & Forfeitures are just over $18,000 below 2014 amounts • 2015 Miscellaneous revenues are coming in over 20.8% higher than 2014 revenues He reviewed a pie chart of sales tax by category, advising the retail automotive is the largest source followed by contractors. He displayed a graph of sales tax changes by category, pointing out the total is $837,000 over 2014. In November contractors had the largest gain, $506,000 over this time last year. He displayed a General Fund — Funds Expenditure Comparison, advising General Fund expenses are 9.3% higher than they were in 2014 primarily due to paying Fire District 1 (FD1) more this year. He displayed a General Fund Department Expense summary, advising expenditures are at 85% with 91% of 2015 complete. He advised REET revenues are 42.8% higher than the same period last year. Mr. James displayed a Utility Fund Revenue Comparison, explaining without bond proceeds, the Utility Fund 2015 revenues are $1.7 million ahead of last year's revenues. Water sales increased by $507,000 over 2014, stormwater sales increased by $138,000 over 2014, and sewer sales increased by $467,000 over 2014. He displayed Utility Fund Expense Comparison, commenting overall Utility Funds expenses decreased $854,928 over 2014, primarily due to decreased capital expenses. Councilmember Buckshnis referred to Note 5 regarding an interfund loan and asked if that was for FD L Mr. James explained funds were loaned to the Street Construction fund due to grants for projects that are in the process of being reimbursed. Councilmember Buckshnis asked whether the two reserve funds were fully funded. Mr. James answered yes, when the loan is repaid. Councilmember Teitzel observed property tax revenue is up approximately $5,000 in 2015 and asked if that was due to assessed value increases or new construction. Mr. James answered a lot of new construction has been added; another reason is the permanent $0.50 EMS levy that was approved in 2009 and increases in assessed value that generated over $300,000. Councilmember Nelson observed on the General Fund Expense Summary, the City Council spent the least. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 5, 2016 Page 10 Packet Page 13 of 456 B. SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SORENSON FORENSICS, LLC FOR BIOLOGICAL SCREENING & DNA TESTING SERVICES Assistant Police Chief Jim Lawless explained since 2010 the City has contracted for DNA testing services which enhances the Police Department's ability to solve certain property crimes. The company the City has used since 2010 must be certified by the Washington State Patrol (WSP) in order to input their data into the database. That company has been through several mergers, acquisitions, sales and have relocated their testing facility from Texas to Maryland. In April the State was evaluating another company and entered into a contract. When it was time to renew with the company the City had been using, Orchid Cellmark, now Bode Cellmark, he was informed WSP would no longer accept their results and would only contract with and accept results from Sorenson. He contacted Sorenson, developed a contract which has been reviewed by legal and approved as to form. For all intents and purposes nothing will change; it may be to the City's benefit in the long range due to cost savings and quicker turnaround time. Funding has been approved in the 2016 budget for DNA testing services so there is no fiscal impact. Councilmember Nelson asked why WSP dropped the other facility. ACOP Lawless answered there are several reason; WSP must go on site quarterly to certify the lab. Another reason is a business practice; rather than visiting Bode Cellmark in Maryland, Sorenson is located in Utah. It had nothing to do with the quality of work that was being produced; it is very labor intensive to certify a lab. He also learned King County has had an independent, separate contract with Sorenson for DNA testing for a number of years. Another reason was WSP's desire to standardize the lab. When Edmonds first contracted with Orchid Cellmark, all the other agencies in Snohomish County piggybacked on the contract that Edmonds negotiated. He was able to negotiate the same thing with Sorenson and they agreed to a 3-year lock on the contract which likely will save money in the long run. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO APPROVE THE SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH SORENSON FORENSICS, LLC, FOR BIOLOGICAL SCREENING & DNA TESTING SERVICES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. C. COUNCIL AND COURT CHAMBERS A/V UPGRADE PROJECT Public Works Director Phil Williams explained this is a carryover from last year's budget, a total of approximately $195,000 to update the audio and visual technology in the Council Chambers to provide a better product, better digital resolution to the public for Council meetings and court. The budget was established at $195,000 based on an initial cost estimate and conversations with the consultant who worked with staff to design the improvements. Approximately $5,000 of the $195,000 was spent last year to develop the specs and select the equipment; the total for the work is $192,587. A vendor has been selected and staff is seeking authorization on next week's Consent Agenda for the Mayor to award the contract to Dimensional Communications for $192,587 plus an additional $20,000 for a management reserve. The funds are available from the Public Education Government (PEG) fees provided by Comcast that can only be spent for this purpose. The intent is a loan from the General Fund and to pay it back as the PEG fees are collected, approximately $44,000/year. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON, TO TAKE CARE OF THIS PROJECT. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOU7SLY. Mayor Earling clarified it does not need to come back on the Consent Agenda. 10. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 5, 2016 Page 11 Packet Page 14 of 456 Mayor Earling remarked the Historic Preservation Commission calendar is absolutely spectacular; it includes a lot of fun pictures and the narrative is very well written. He wished everyone a happy New Year and was truly looking forward to working with the new Council. He anticipated a great adventure and appreciated the Council's commitment to move things along. Mayor Earling expressed his appreciation to Councilmembers Tibbott and Teitzel for submitting questions to staff about agenda items prior to the meeting, remarking that is the way the Council needs to operate. Mayor Earling reiterated he had enjoyed working with Councilmember Fraley-Monillas as Council President during the past year. 11. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Fraley-Monillas thanked the Council for their support during the past year and she looking forward to another good year. She wished everyone a happy New Year. Councilmember Nelson wished everyone a happy New Year. He welcomed Councilmembers Teitzel and Tibbott, thanked Councilmember Fraley-Monillas for her service as Council President and looked forward to the new leadership under Council President Johnson. Councilmember Buckshnis echoed Councilmember Nelson's comments. Councilmember Teitzel thanked the Council for the warm welcome; he was pleased and honored to be on the Council. He thanked Councilmembers for the advice they provided during the past year during his campaign. He thanked the voters for placing their trust in him, assuring he will come prepared, make wise decisions and be a good steward of their money. Councilmember Mesaros commented typically the Council would be taking its first break at 8:30; it will be nice instead to be adjourning the meeting in 3-4 minutes. He thanked Councilmember Fraley-Monillas for her service as Council President and congratulated Council President Johnson as she leads the Council during the coming year. He looked forward to the coming year, anticipating it would be a good year for the Council and the City. There are a lot of decisions to be made and there is a good team on Council to accomplish that. He wished everyone a Happy New Year. Councilmember Tibbott wished everyone a happy and prosperous New Year. He thanked the Council for the help they gave him in preparing for tonight's meeting and passing on tips for being effective as a Councilmember. He especially thanked Council President Johnson for the extended amount of time she gave, providing perspective on Council decisions. He looked forward to a great year, commenting it had already been fun to work with the Council. Council President Johnson thanked Mayor Earling and past Council Presidents Buckshnis and Fraley- Monillas, she has learned a great deal from them both and their mentorship has meant a lot. She promised to do her best this year and with Councilmember Mesaros' help, she was certain they would be a great team. She congratulated the five Councilmembers and Mayor Earling who were sworn in tonight. 12. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) This item was not needed. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 5, 2016 Page 12 Packet Page 15 of 456 13. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION This item was not needed. 14. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 8:29 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes January 5, 2016 Page 13 Packet Page 16 of 456 AM-8231 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2016 Time• Consent Submitted For: Scott James Department: Finance Review Committee: Type: Action Information Submitted By: Committee Action: 3. B. Nori Jacobson Subject Title Approval of claim checks #217894 through #218028 dated January 7, 2016 for $2,504,306.32. (Check #217894 $165,000.00 was voided and re -issued as check #217894 for $165,600.00) Approval of payroll direct deposit and checks #62009 through #62018 for $496,548.94, benefit checks #62019 through #62026 and wire payments of $461,868.55 for the pay period December 16, 2015 through December 31, 2015. Recommendation Approval of claim, payroll and benefit direct deposit, checks and wire payments. 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 Year• Revenue: Expenditure• 2016 3,462,723.81 Fiscal Impact Fiscal Impact: Claims $2,504,306.32 ($2,669,306.32 less $165,000.00 for voided check) Payroll Employee checks and direct deposit $496,548.94 Payroll Benefit checks and wire payments $461,868.55 Total Payroll $958,417.49 AttarhmPntc Claim cks 01-07-16 Packet Page 17 of 456 Project Numbers 01-07-16 Payroll Summary 01-05-16 Payroll Benefits 01-05-16 Inbox Finance City Clerk Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Nori Jacobson Final Approval Date: 01/08/2016 Form Review Reviewed By Date Scott James 01/07/2016 01:44 PM Scott Passey 01/07/2016 01:47 PM Dave Earling O1/07/2016 03:01 PM Scott Passey 01/08/2016 06:36 AM Started On: 01/07/2016 12:47 PM Packet Page 18 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217894 1/6/2016 074651 SNO CO CLERKS OFFICE E1CA.ROW E1CA.THREE GRACES & PORTERF E1CA.Three Graces & Porterfield Deg 112.200.68.595.20.61.00 165,600.00 Total: 165,600.00 217895 1/7/2016 072627 911 ETC INC 35479 MONTHLY 911 DATABASE MAINT Monthly 911 database maint 001.000.31.518.88.48.00 100.00 Total: 100.00 217896 1/7/2016 070322 A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC 15-31959 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 164.15 15-33555 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 165.65 15-33851 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 199.23 15-33893 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 148.40 15-33903 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 148.98 15-34278 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 165.65 15-34313 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 167.38 15-34360 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 163.35 15-34537 INTERPRETER FEE Page: 1 Packet Page 19 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217896 1/7/2016 070322 A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC (Continued) INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 130.00 15-34983 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 106.40 15-35090 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 153.58 15-35363 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 176.58 15-35569 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 155.30 15-35712 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 162.78 15-35920 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 152.43 15-36142 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 155.30 15-36228 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 164.50 15-36352 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 158.75 Total: 2,838.41 217897 1/7/2016 072189 ACCESS INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 1241745 COURT SHREDDING COURT SHREDDING 001.000.23.512.50.49.00 66.16 Page: 2 Packet Page 20 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217897 1/7/2016 072189 072189 ACCESS INFORMATION MANAGEME (Continued) Total: 66.16 217898 1/7/2016 068201 ACTIVE NETWORK INC 4100131215 2016 MAINTENANCE & SUPPORT 2016 MAINTENANCE & SUPPORT 001.000.64.571.22.48.00 10,732.22 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.22.48.00 1,019.56 Total: 11,751.78 217899 1/7/2016 064615 AIR COMPRESSOR SERVICE 42635 WWTP-REPAIR. MAINTENANCE. h Repair/maintenance; warranty service 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 2,691.50 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 255.70 Total: 2,947.20 217900 1/7/2016 069667 AMERICAN MARKETING 20890 PLAQUE FOR CP BENCH PLAQUE FOR CP BENCH 127.000.64.575.50.31.00 139.03 9.5% Sales Tax 127.000.64.575.50.31.00 13.21 Total: 152.24 217901 1/7/2016 001375 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 040706-15104 APA DUES 2016 APA Dues- Chave 001.000.62.558.60.49.00 450.00 Total: 450.00 217902 1/7/2016 001429 AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOC DeLilla.APWA 2016 DELILLA.APWA RENEWAL 2016 DeLilla.APWA Renewal 2016 001.000.67.518.21.49.00 204.00 English.APWA 2016 ENGLISH.APWA RENEWAL 2016 English.APWA Renewal 2016 001.000.67.518.21.49.00 204.00 Hauss.APWA 2016 HAUSS.APWA RENEWAL 2016 Hauss.APWA Renewal 2016 001.000.67.518.21.49.00 204.00 Page: 3 Packet Page 21 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 4 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217902 1/7/2016 001429 001429 AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOC (Continued) Total: 612.00 217903 1/7/2016 074306 AMWINS GROUP BENEFITS INC 3988198 LEOFF 1 MEDICAL PREMIUMS LEOFF 1 Medical Premiums 009.000.39.517.20.23.10 8,662.76 LEOFF 1 Medical Premiums 617.000.51.517.20.23.10 1,130.67 Total: 9,793.43 217904 1/7/2016 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 1988375196 WWTP-UNIFOMRS. MATTSAND TC Uniforms 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 3.80 Mats and Towels 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 76.74 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 0.36 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 7.29 1988386075 WWTP-UNIFOMRS. MATS AND TO\ MATS AND TOWELS SERVICE 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 78.24 UNIFORM SERVICES 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 3.80 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 7.43 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 0.36 1988386076 PM UNIFORM SERVICE PM UNIFORM SERVICE 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 40.08 1988386077 FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 18.12 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 1.72 1988390197 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE Page: 4 Packet Page 22 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 5 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 217904 1/7/2016 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 1.33 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 5.06 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 5.06 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 5.06 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 5.06 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 5.05 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.518.20.41.00 0.13 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.41.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.41.00 0.48 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 0.48 1988390198 FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS & MAT FLEET DIVISION UNIFORMS 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 5.28 FLEET DIVISION MATS 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 11.96 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.24.00 0.50 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 1.14 Page: 5 Packet Page 23 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 6 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217904 1/7/2016 069751 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES (Continued) Total: 285.97 217905 1/7/2016 073934 ARIN S1249931 ANNUAL MAINTENANCE FEE 2016 Annual Maintenance for AS Number E 001.000.31.518.88.48.00 200.00 Total: 200.00 217906 1/7/2016 001441 ASCAP 500579369 2016 MUSIC LICENSE FEE 2016 MUSIC LICENSE FEE 001.000.64.571.22.49.00 336.00 Total: 336.00 217907 1/7/2016 071124 ASSOCIATED PETROLEUM 0843640-IN WWTP-DIESEL FUEL ULSE #2 DYED BULK FUEL 423.000.76.535.80.32.00 956.66 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.32.00 90.88 0846725-IN WWTP-FUEL #2 dyed bulk fuel 423.000.76.535.80.32.00 1,303.53 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.32.00 123.83 Total: 2,474.90 217908 1/7/2016 069451 ASTRA INDUSTRIAL SERVICES 00147409 WATER QUALITY - CV RUBBER KIT Water Quality - CV Rubber Kits 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 316.40 Freight 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 13.00 00147426 WATER QUALITY - FLARE CAPS Water Quality - Flare Caps 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 18.00 Freight 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 9.00 Total: 356.40 217909 1/7/2016 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 85578 UB OUTSOURCING AREA# 400 PRI Page: 6 Packet Page 24 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 7 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 217909 1/7/2016 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) UB OUTSOURCING AREA # 400 PRI 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 126.08 UB OUTSOURCING AREA # 400 PRI 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 126.08 UB OUTSOURCING AREA # 400 PRI 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 126.09 UB OUTSOURCING AREA #400 PO, 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 467.53 UB OUTSOURCING AREA #400 PO: 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 467.53 9.6% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 12.10 9.6% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 12.10 9.6% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 12.11 85643 UB OUTSOURCING AREA#200 PRII UB OUTSOURCING AREA#200 PRII 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 90.75 UB OUTSOURCING AREA #200 PRII 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 90.75 UB OUTSOURCING AREA#200 PRII 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 90.73 UB OUTSOURCING AREA #200 PO: 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 335.35 UB OUTSOURCING AREA#200 PO, 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 335.34 9.6% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 8.71 9.6% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 8.71 9.6% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 8.71 Page: 7 Packet Page 25 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 8 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217909 1/7/2016 070305 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER (Continued) Total: 2,318.67 217910 1/7/2016 069076 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATIONS INC COE1215 BACKGROUND INVESTIGATION FO Background Investigation for New 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 25.00 Total: 25.00 217911 1/7/2016 069226 BHC CONSULTANTS LLC 7354 E5GA.SERVICES THRU 11/27/15 E5GA.Services thru 11/27/15 423.000.75.594.35.41.30 18,070.69 7355 E5FA.SERVICES THRU 11/27/15 E5FA.Services thru 11/27/15 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 9,972.37 Total: 28,043.06 217912 1/7/2016 074307 BLUE STAR GAS 0873904-IN UNIT 65 - AUTOGAS CONVERSION Unit 65 - Autogas Conversion 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 6,500.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 617.50 0873905-IN UNIT 68 AUTOGAS CONVERSION Unit 68 Autogas Conversion 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 6,500.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 617.50 0873906-IN UNIT 38 - AUTOGAS CONVERSION Unit 38 - Autogas Conversion 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 6,500.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 617.50 0873908-IN UNIT 947 - AUTOGAS CONVERSIOP Unit 947 - Autogas Conversion 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 4,100.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 389.50 0873909-IN UNIT 10 AUTOGAS CONVERSION Page: 8 Packet Page 26 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 9 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217912 1/7/2016 074307 BLUE STAR GAS (Continued) Unit 10 Autogas Conversion 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 5,600.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 532.00 Total: 31,974.00 217913 1/7/2016 072005 BROCKMANN, KERRY 20355 PILATES YOGA F 20355 PILATES YOGA FUSION INST 20355 PILATES YOGA FUSION INST 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 537.83 Total: 537.83 217914 1/7/2016 072699 BUCHANAN SERVICES INC 8370-INA INV#8370-INA- EDMONDS PD INSTALL 3 MODEL CL4P9X LIFTS 001.000.41.521.80.35.00 2,550.00 EQUIPMENT RENTAL TO INSTALL 001.000.41.521.80.35.00 350.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.80.35.00 275.50 Total: 3,175.50 217915 1/7/2016 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 15595607 COPIER LEASE COPIER LEASE 001.000.23.523.30.45.00 65.17 15611317 WWTP-COPIER RENTAL COPIER RENTAL DECEMBER 2015 423.000.76.535.80.45.41 95.80 Total: 160.97 217916 1/7/2016 074442 CAPITAL ONE W4101046QA CITY HOLIDAY BRUNCH SUPPLIES CITY HOLIDAY BRUNCH SUPPLIES 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 164.45 BRUNCH SUPPLIES 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 605.60 Total: 770.05 Page: 9 Packet Page 27 of 456 vchlist 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM Voucher List City of Edmonds Page: 10 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217917 1/7/2016 069813 CDW GOVERNMENT INC BNW8647 WWTP-REPAIR/MAINTENANCE. EL CISCO ELECTRICAL SWITCHES 423.000.76.535.80.48.22 4,107.40 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.48.22 127.70 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.22 402.34 Total: 4,637.44 217918 1/7/2016 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 11956 WWTP-MONTHLY MAINTENANCE C MONTHLY MAINTENANCE/OPERAT 423.000.75.535.80.47.20 27,602.00 Total: 27,602.00 217919 1/7/2016 075384 CONOM, DEREK 5Z0076735 PUBLIC DEFENDER PUBLIC DEFENDER 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 362.50 Total: 362.50 217920 1/7/2016 075042 COVERALL OF WASHINGTON 7100162128 WWTP-DECEMBER 2015 JANITORI, DECEMBER 1-31 2015 423.000.76.535.80.41.23 514.00 Total: 514.00 217921 1/7/2016 073823 DAVID EVANS & ASSOC INC 368508 ElCA.SERVICES THRU 12/12/15 EllCA.Services thru 12/12/15 112.200.68.595.33.41.00 7,192.72 ElCA.Services thru 12/12/15 112.200.68.595.20.61.00 2,420.63 368721 E1CA.SERVICES THRU 12/31/15 ElCA.Services thru 12/31/15 112.200.68.595.33.41.00 4,894.13 ElCA.Services thru 12/31/15 112.200.68.595.20.61.00 1,400.71 Total: 15,908.19 Page: 10 Packet Page 28 of 456 vchlist 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM Voucher List City of Edmonds Page: 11 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217922 1/7/2016 006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGY 2016-WA0024058 WWTP-2016 WASTEWATER PERMI Permit #WA0024058 423.000.76.535.80.51.00 28,436.40 Total: 28,436.40 217923 1/7/2016 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 15-3617 INV#15-3617 - EDMONDS PD TRANSCRIPTION CASE # 15-200631 001.000.41.521.21.41.00 39.60 TRANSCRIPTION CASE #IA15-003 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 293.70 TRANSCRIPTION CASE #IA15-004 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 39.60 15-3618 CIVIL SERVICE COMMINUITY MINU' Civil Service Comminuity Minutes 001.000.22.521.10.41.00 82.50 15-3622 ESDB.MEETING MINUTES THRU 12 ESDB.Meeting Minutes thru 12/31/15 001.000.67.532.20.41.00 422.40 15-3623 ECON DEV COMMISSION MINUTET EDC Minute taker for October - Decei 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 269.10 Tota I : 1,146.90 217924 1/7/2016 006844 DMCJA YEAR2016 JUDGES ASSOCIATION MEMBERS[ JUDGES ASSOCIATION MEMBERSF 001.000.23.512.50.49.00 750.00 Total: 750.00 217925 1/7/2016 064640 DMCMA YEAR2016 MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION MEM MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION MEM 001.000.23.512.50.49.00 150.00 YEAR-2016 MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION MEM MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION MEM 001.000.23.512.50.49.00 150.00 Total: 300.00 Page: 11 Packet Page 29 of 456 vchlist 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM Voucher List City of Edmonds Page: 12 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217926 1/7/2016 075153 DOPPS, MARIA 1093 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 100.90 Total: 100.90 217927 1/7/2016 075515 ECOSS ED-PSSKIP-1 DOE CAPACITY GRANT - SERVICE; DOE Capacity Grant - Services thru 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 1,958.88 Total: 1,958.88 217928 1/7/2016 007905 EDMONDS FAMILY MEDICINE CLINIC 1730861-RADA PRE -EMPLOYMENT SCREENING Pre -Employment screening 001.000.22.521.10.41.00 123.60 Total: 123.60 217929 1/7/2016 008705 EDMONDS WATER DIVISION 7-05276 CEMETERY SEWER/STORM CEMETERY SEWER/STORM 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 143.12 Total: 143.12 217930 1/7/2016 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES AR24431 PM PRINTER C1030 #A7078 PM PRINTER C1030 #A7078 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 16.12 AR25267 COPIER MAINT COPIER MAINT 001.000.23.523.30.48.00 2.98 AR25387 WATER/SEWER - COPY USE-- WATER/SEWER - COPY USE-- 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 8.79 WATER/SEWER - COPY USE- 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 8.79 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 0.84 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 0.83 AR25388 PW - COPY USE -- Page: 12 Packet Page 30 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 13 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 217930 1/7/2016 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES (Continued) AR25647 AR25672 AR25675 PO # Description/Account Amount PW - Copy Use— 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 22.30 PW - Copy Use- 111.000.68.542.90.31.00 12.64 PW - Copy Use- 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 12.64 PW - Copy Use- 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 8.92 PW - Copy Use- 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 8.92 PW - Copy Use- 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 8.92 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 2.12 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.31.00 1.20 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 1.20 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 0.85 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 0.84 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 0.85 COPIER MAINT COPIER MAINT 001.000.23.512.50.48.00 65.50 MK5532 CITY CLERK OVERAGE CITY CLERKS COPIER CONTRACT 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 9.37 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 0.89 FLEET COPY USE — FLEET COPY USE — Page: 13 Packet Page 31 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 14 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217930 1/7/2016 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES (Continued) 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.24 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 0.88 AR25676 ADDITIONAL COPIES- DEV SERV ADDITIONAL COPIES- DEV SERV 001.000.62.524.10.45.00 265.69 Total: 471.32 217931 1/7/2016 075505 ENGINEERED PROCESS CONTROLS 5657 WWTP-C457 PHASE 4 ENERGY PR RETROFIT LCU MODULES AND RE' 423.100.76.594.39.65.10 2,990.00 Freight 423.100.76.594.39.65.10 251.58 9.5% Sales Tax 423.100.76.594.39.65.10 307.95 Total: 3,549.53 217932 1/7/2016 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD EDH674762 LEGAL DESCRIPTION- BRACKETTE legal description Bracketts Corner 001.000.62.558.60.41.40 104.92 Tota I : 104.92 217933 1/7/2016 064406 FBI LEEDA 8964-16 INV 8964-16 2016 DUES FOR ROBE 2016 FBI-LEEDA DUES - BARKER 001.000.41.521.22.49.00 50.00 Total: 50.00 217934 1/7/2016 009895 FELDMAN, JAMESA 123115 PUBLIC DEFENDER PUBLIC DEFENDER 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 20,000.00 Total: 20,000.00 217935 1/7/2016 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0489790 WATER INVENTORY - 2027 M-METE WATER INVENTORY - 2027 M-METE 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 3,056.06 Page: 14 Packet Page 32 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 15 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217935 1/7/2016 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC (Continued) 2034 - M-METEROMNI-01.5-030 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 3,972.90 2033 - M-MTRECR/WP-01-010 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 905.60 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 753.79 0489791 WATER INVENTORY -2033 Water Inventory -2033 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 452.80 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 43.02 0489792 WATER HYDRANT SUPPLIES WATER HYDRANT SUPPLIES 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 121.90 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 11.58 0491092 HYDRANT REPLACEMENT 18101 8, Hydrant Replacement 18101 84th 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 1,976.52 Water Parts 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 443.90 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 229.94 Total: 11,968.01 217936 1/7/2016 011900 FRONTIER 253-003-6887 LIFT STATION #6 VG SPECIAL ACCI LIFT STATION #6 VG SPECIAL ACCI 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 41.81 253-012-9189 WWTP AUTO DIALER- 1 VOICE GR wwtp-auto dialer-1 voice grade specie 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 41.23 253-017-7256 WWTP-TELEMETRY-8 VOICEGRAD WWTP TELEMETRY - 8 VOICEGRAI 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 223.48 425-745-5055 MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL PHOI` Page: 15 Packet Page 33 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 16 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217936 1/7/2016 011900 FRONTIER (Continued) MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL PHOI` 001.000.64.571.29.42.00 89.65 PARKS MAINT IP LINE (10 + TAX) 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 10.95 425-771-5553 WWTP AUTO DIALER- 1 BUSINES: WWTP AUTO DIALER- 1 BUSINES: 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 112.46 425-776-6829 CITY HALL ALARM LINES 121 5TH P CITY HALL FIRE AND INTRUSION AI 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 129.40 Total: 648.98 217937 1/7/2016 002500 GALLS LLC DBA BLUMENTHAL 004579005 1NV#004579005 ACCT#1 00 1074529 MOCK TURTLE NECK SHIRT 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 22.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 2.14 004637567 1NV#004637567 ACCT#1 00 1074529 METAL NAME TAG S.P.JENSEN 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 21.90 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 2.08 5277015 REF#5277015 CR FOR EXTRA TAG CR FOR EXTRA NAMETAG NOT - 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 -10.95 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 -1.04 Total: 36.63 217938 1/7/2016 075163 GARCIA-GARCIA, CESAR 10647 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 105.66 10782 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 105.66 Page: 16 Packet Page 34 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 17 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217938 1/7/2016 075163 GARCIA-GARCIA, CESAR (Continued) 10795 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 105.66 10817 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 105.66 Total: 422.64 217939 1/7/2016 075508 GOODWAY GROUP INC INV8576 DIGITAL ADVERTISING FOR DECEK Digital advertising campaign for 001.000.61.558.70.41.40 3,000.00 Total: 3,000.00 217940 1/7/2016 072515 GOOGLE INC 3359398386 BILLING ID# 5030-2931-5908 Google Apps - Dec-2015 001.000.31.518.88.48.00 31.00 Total: 31.00 217941 1/7/2016 012233 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO INC 982538195 WWTP-REPAIT MAINTENANCE. EL 3-PHOENIX CONTACTS — 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 946.23 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 16.37 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 91.45 982616926 WWTP-REPAIR/MAINTENANCE. EL 2-2866750 PHOENIX CONTACT 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 472.28 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 25.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 47.24 982681108 WWTP-REPAIR/MAINTENANCE. EL 10-1512-PW6PL ERICSON MANUFA 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 669.40 Page: 17 Packet Page 35 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 18 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217941 1/7/2016 012233 GRAYBAR ELECTRIC CO INC (Continued) Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 16.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.22 65.11 Total: 2,349.08 217942 1/7/2016 012355 GRCC/BAT BAT Cert Renewals BAT CERT RENEWAL - J WAITE, L N BAT Cert Renewal - J Waite, L McMui 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 84.00 Total: 84.00 217943 1/7/2016 069733 H B JAEGER COMPANY LLC 167130/1 SEWER - REPLACEMENT PUMPS Sewer - Replacement Pumps 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 796.80 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 75.70 167159/1 WATER PARTS - ARMORCAST BOX Water Parts - Armorcast Boxes, Polyr 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 2,715.24 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 257.95 Total: 3,845.69 217944 1/7/2016 012560 HACH COMPANY 9717260 WWTP-LAB SUPPLIES LAB SUPPLIES 423.000.76.535.80.31.31 323.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.31 30.69 9719173 WWTP-LAB SUPPLIES MISC. LAB PRODUCTS AND SUPPL 423.000.76.535.80.31.31 727.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.31 69.07 9722514 WWTP-LAB. SMALL EQUIPMENT TSS PORTABLE COMPLETE IN CAE Page: 18 Packet Page 36 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 19 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217944 1/7/2016 012560 HACH COMPANY (Continued) 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 2,645.75 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 79.47 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 258.89 Total: 4,133.87 217945 1/7/2016 074804 HARLES, JANINE 197335 PHOTOGRAPHY FOR DECEMBER Photography services for December 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 200.00 Total: 200.00 217946 1/7/2016 065764 HASNER, THOMAS W 1 LEOFF 1 CLAIM REIMBURSEMENT LEOFF 1 Claim Reimbursement 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 4,000.00 Total: 4,000.00 217947 1/7/2016 010900 HD FOWLER CO INC I4090329 WATER - PARTS AND SUPPLIES Water - Parts and Supplies 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 3,915.32 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 371.96 Total: 4,287.28 217948 1/7/2016 064528 HI -LINE ELECTRICAL 10427528 FLEET SHOP TOOL - RACHET CRIN Fleet Shop Tool - Rachet Crimp 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 97.90 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 6.84 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 9.94 Total: 114.68 217949 1/7/2016 075516 HOEPTNER PERFECTED PRODUCTS 118909 PW YARD HYDRANTS 5 WAY SPLIT PW Yard Hydrants 5 way Split Page: 19 Packet Page 37 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 20 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217949 1/7/2016 075516 HOEPTNER PERFECTED PRODUCTS (Continued) 111.000.68.542.90.31.00 126.34 PW Yard Hydrants 5 way Split 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 126.34 PW Yard Hydrants 5 way Split 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 126.34 PW Yard Hydrants 5 way Split 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 126.34 PW Yard Hydrants 5 way Split 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 126.34 Total: 631.70 217950 1/7/2016 075119 HOPE, SHANE Hopedec2015 MILEAGE REIMBURSMENT DEC 20 MILEAGE REIMBURSMENT DEC 20 001.000.62.524.10.43.00 10.70 Total: 10.70 217951 1/7/2016 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2729679 WWTP-OFFICE SUPPLIES OFFICE SUPPLIES 423.000.76.535.80.31.41 46.19 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.41 4.39 2729757 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.23.523.30.31.00 135.25 2729761 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.23.512.50.31.00 14.16 2732495 WWTP-OFFICE SUPPLIES MISC. OFFICE SUPPLIES 423.000.76.535.80.31.41 102.88 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.41 9.78 2734147 P&R PEDESTAL FILES P&R PEDESTAL FILES 001.000.64.571.21.35.00 538.00 Page: 20 Packet Page 38 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 21 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217951 1/7/2016 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.21.35.00 51.11 2734187 CITY CLERK THERMAL PRINTING F THERMAL PRINTING PAPER ROLL, 001.000.25.514.30.31.00 41.86 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.25.514.30.31.00 3.98 2734280 COPIER PAPER Copier paper 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 95.16 2735203 OFFICE SUPPLIES Office Supplies 001.000.22.518.10.31.00 818.26 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.22.518.10.31.00 77.73 2735296 CITY CLERK ADRESS STAMP CITY CLERK ADDRESS STAMP 001.000.25.514.30.31.00 19.63 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.25.514.30.31.00 1.86 Total: 1,960.24 217952 1/7/2016 075062 JAMESTOWN NETWORKS 3833 FIBER OPTICS INTERNET CONNEC Jan-16 Fiber Optics Internet Connecti 001.000.31.518.87.42.00 500.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.518.87.42.00 47.50 Total: 547.50 217953 1/7/2016 074662 LATITUDE GEOGRAPHICS GROUP INV0002105 GIS WEB SOFTWARE TECHNICAL; GIS Web Software Technical Support 001.000.31.518.88.41.00 66.70 Total: 66.70 217954 1/7/2016 075260 LAU, PING 11010 INTERPRETER FEE Page: 21 Packet Page 39 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 22 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217954 1/7/2016 075260 LAU, PING (Continued) INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 159.95 11182 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 109.95 Total: 269.90 217955 1/7/2016 072059 LEE, NICOLE 1559 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 121.28 Total: 121.28 217956 1/7/2016 072992 LYNNWOOD ICE CENTER 20497 ICE SKATE 20497 LEARN TO ICE SKATE INSTR 20497 LEARN TO ICE SKATE INSTR 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 119.00 20501 ICE SKATE 20501 LEARN TO ICE SKATE INSTR 20501 LEARN TO ICE SKATE INSTR 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 119.00 Total: 238.00 217957 1/7/2016 072376 MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY 4014242 WWTP-SUPPLIES Spark Plug Station -Safety Supplies; 423.000.76.535.80.31.12 262.95 Total: 262.95 217958 1/7/2016 070028 MCA YEAR 2016 PROBATION ASSOCIATION MEMBE PROBATION ASSOCIATION MEMBE 001.000.23.523.30.49.00 25.00 Total: 25.00 217959 1/7/2016 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO 1554 WWTP- SUPPLIES. MECHANICAL 1-ABASION-RESISTANT UHMW POI 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 206.00 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 22.41 44687549 WWTP-SUPPLIES MECHANICAL Page: 22 Packet Page 40 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 23 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217959 1/7/2016 020039 MCMASTER-CARR SUPPLY CO (Continued) CHEMICAL RESISTANT TYPE I PVC 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 55.06 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 9.77 454160087 WWTP-SUPPLIES. MECHANICAL SCREEN 80-MESH FOR 5"LG 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 17.82 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 6.18 45896935 WWTP-SUPPLIES. MECHANICAL THICK WALL LIGHT GRAY CPVC TF 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 58.72 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 8.12 Total: 384.08 217960 1/7/2016 021890 MICONTROLS INC 881086 FAC - ACTUATORS AND SUPPLIES FAC - Actuators and Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 345.23 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 32.80 881750 FAC - PARTS FAC - Parts 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 81.87 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 7.78 881782 FREIGHT Freight 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 7.96 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 0.76 Tota I : 476.40 217961 1/7/2016 064024 NAT'LASSOC FOR COURT MNGMNT YEAR-2016 NATIONAL MANAGEMENTASSOCl/ NATIONAL MANAGEMENTASSOCl/ Page: 23 Packet Page 41 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 24 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217961 1/7/2016 064024 NAT'LASSOC FOR COURT MNGMNT (Continued) 001.000.23.512.50.49.00 125.00 Total: 125.00 217962 1/7/2016 074356 NAVAS-RIVAS, HERNAN 10718 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 103.23 Total: 103.23 217963 1/7/2016 070855 NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS 10038412 DECEMBER MONTHLY FEE December Monthly Fee 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 75.00 Total: 75.00 217964 1/7/2016 067694 NC POWER SYSTEMS CO. PSCS0555356 WWTP-REPAIR. REPLACE. MECH, PARTS/SERVICE/TAX AND HANDLII` 423.000.76.535.80.48.21 1,431.50 Tota I : 1,431.50 217965 1/7/2016 024960 NORTH COAST ELECTRIC COMPANY S6874159.001 WWTP-SCADA & PLC CONTROLLOGIX EQUIPMENT - 423.100.76.594.39.65.10 96,342.87 Total: 96,342.87 217966 1/7/2016 064215 NORTHWEST PUMP & EQUIP CO 2664513-00 FLEET SHOP - WHEATON NOZZLE, Fleet Shop - Wheaton Nozzle, Hose, 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 537.14 Core Charge 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 105.90 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 27.81 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 53.67 Total: 724.52 217967 1/7/2016 075503 NURNBERG SCIENTIFIC 0151188-IN WWTP-LAB. SMALL EQUIPMENT FURNACE MUFFLE A 12X6X10 240 ' Page: 24 Packet Page 42 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 25 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217967 1/7/2016 075503 NURNBERG SCIENTIFIC (Continued) 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 2,806.53 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 266.62 0151268-IN WWTP-LAB. SMALL EQUIPMENT REFRIGERATOR ABS 12 CUFT 120N 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 2,890.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 274.55 Total: 6,237.70 217968 1/7/2016 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 638745 PM CALENDARS PM CALENDARS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 47.55 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 4.52 649948 PW OFFICE SUPPLIES PW OFFICE SUPPLIES 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 95.20 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 9.05 Tota I : 156.32 217969 1/7/2016 072878 PACIFIC COAST CHEMICALS CO 156626 WWTP-SUPPLIES. OPERATIONS Pioneer Clay 423.000.76.535.80.31.11 673.75 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.31.11 85.75 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.11 64.01 Total: 823.51 217970 1/7/2016 027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS 209004 STROM DUMP FEES Strom Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 120.00 209013 STORM DUMP FEES Page: 25 Packet Page 43 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 26 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217970 1/7/2016 027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS (Continued) Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 120.00 209020 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 120.00 209359 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 108.00 209417 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 96.00 209424 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 108.00 209436 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 108.00 Total: 780.00 217971 1/7/2016 065051 PARAMETRIX INC 21-23509A WWTP-PLC & SCADA SYSTEM UPC Phase 04-plc-301 replacement secon 423.100.76.594.39.41.10 20.00 Total: 20.00 217972 1/7/2016 074422 PARTSMASTER, DIV OF NCH CORP 20971726 FLEET SHOP - CUTOFF WHEEL Fleet Shop - Cutoff Wheel 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 62.59 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 9.39 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 6.84 20971727 WWTP-SUPPLIES. MECHANICAL Extended life cutoff wheel and Right 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 182.57 Freight Page: 26 Packet Page 44 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 27 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217972 1/7/2016 074422 PARTSMASTER, DIV OF NCH CORP (Continued) 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 24.19 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.21 19.64 Tota I : 305.22 217973 1/7/2016 075257 PCE PACIFIC INC 201427 WWTP-C457 PHASE 4 ENERGY PR PCE ONSIRE SERVICE TO SET UP, 423.100.76.594.39.65.10 2,922.25 9.5% Sales Tax 423.100.76.594.39.65.10 277.61 Total: 3,199.86 217974 1/7/2016 007800 PETTY CASH DEC 08 - DEC 31 DEC 08 THRU DEC 31 PETTY CASE Holiday Brunch Food supplies - Jesse 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 17.61 Holiday Brunch Food supplies - Cliff 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 51.17 Mileage to Class in Mt. Vernon - Sue 421.000.74.534.80.43.00 49.57 Cake for Jana's retirement - Denise 001.000.22.518.10.49.00 39.99 Tota I : 158.34 217975 1/7/2016 008475 PETTY CASH 123115 PW - CITY CELL PHONE ACCESSOI PW - City Cell Phone Accessories P 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 54.34 FAC MAINT - MILEAGE FOR SUPPL 001.000.66.518.30.49.00 16.62 STREET - CDL FEES - P JOHNSON 111.000.68.542.90.41.00 102.00 WATER - SUPPLIES 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 7.65 SEWER - SUPPLIES 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 11.80 Page: 27 Packet Page 45 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 28 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217975 1/7/2016 008475 008475 PETTY CASH (Continued) Total: 192.41 217976 1/7/2016 062296 PETTY CASH 12312015 PETTY CASH DISTRIBUTION stamps -postage 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 19.60 Lab Supplies -Ice 423.000.76.535.80.31.31 5.00 Total: 24.60 217977 1/7/2016 075514 PINNEO, AMY CHRISTINE BID-12315 BID ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES F( Downtown Alliance administrative 140.000.61.558.70.41.00 780.00 Total: 780.00 217978 1/7/2016 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC 1150994 CITY HALL - PARTS City Hall - Parts 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 72.96 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 6.93 1226659 W WTP-REPAIR/MAINTENANCE-ELE 2 HOF CP3030 CONCPT ENC PANE 423.000.76.535.80.48.22 243.32 1405864 WWTP-OFFSITE FLOW TELEMETR 3-HOF CP3030 CONCPT ENC PANE 423.100.76.594.39.65.10 333.31 9.5% Sales Tax 423.100.76.594.39.65.10 31.66 1413388 WWTP-OFFSITE FLOW TELEMETR 1 -HOF A4128CHSCFG 4X FBRGLS 423.100.76.594.39.65.10 267.77 9.5% Sales Tax 423.100.76.594.39.65.10 25.44 Total: 981.39 217979 1/7/2016 064735 PNWS - AWWA 2601 WWUC DUES 2016 WWUC DUES 2016 Page: 28 Packet Page 46 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 29 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217979 1/7/2016 064735 PNWS - AWWA (Continued) 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 500.00 Total: 500.00 217980 1/7/2016 071811 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR 217358 WWTP-POSTAGE Dept of L & I- 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 30.98 217421 FLEET - SETCOM RETURN POSTAL FLEET - SETCOM RETURN POSTAL 511.000.77.548.68.42.00 53.55 217506 W WTP-POSTAGE POSTAGE FOR LUBE WATCH MAIN 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 13.16 Total: 97.69 217981 1/7/2016 064088 PROTECTION ONE 2445047 ALARM MONITORING SENIOR CEN ALARM MONITORING SENIOR CEN 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 122.49 Tota I : 122.49 217982 1/7/2016 068697 PUBLIC SAFETY TESTING INC 2015-6506 RECRUITING ASSISTANCE, APPLIC Recruiting Assistance, Application 001.000.22.521.10.41.00 700.00 Total: 700.00 217983 1/7/2016 030400 PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR AGENCY 20160027 WWTP-PUGET SOUND CLEAN AIR 2016 OPERATING FEE 423.000.76.535.80.51.00 29,307.26 Total: 29,307.26 217984 1/7/2016 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 200009595790 FIRE STATION # 16 8429 196TH ST FIRE STATION # 16 8429 196TH ST 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 747.52 200019375639 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801 1 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801 1 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 162.54 200021829581 WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / METER 00C Page: 29 Packet Page 47 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 30 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217984 1/7/2016 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY (Continued) WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / METER 00( 423.000.76.535.80.47.63 473.45 Total: 1,383.51 217985 1/7/2016 070809 PUGET SOUND EXECUTIVE 15-2259 COURT SECURITY COURT SECURITY 001.000.23.512.50.41.00 4,496.25 Total: 4,496.25 217986 1/7/2016 030780 QUIRING MONUMENTS INC 00000160765 MARKER/INSCRIPTION FEROUGE MARKER/INSCRIPTION FEROUGE 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 603.00 00000160766 VASE BLOCK FEROUGE VASE BLOCK FEROUGE 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 155.00 Total: 758.00 217987 1/7/2016 074712 RAINIER ENVIRONMENTAL LAB 2068 WWTP - ACUTE TESTING December 2015 Acute Testing 423.000.76.535.80.41.31 700.00 Total: 700.00 217988 1/7/2016 075404 RASTOVICH, MICHELE 16-001 DIVERSITY COMMISSION CONSUL - Diversity Commission consultant 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 3,000.00 Total: 3,000.00 217989 1/7/2016 031600 RELIABLE FLOOR COVERINGS 124264 CITY HALL - ROPPE EXCHANGE DII City Hall - Roppe Exchange Differenc 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 15.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1.43 Total: 16.43 217990 1/7/2016 066786 RELIABLE SECURITY SOUND & DATA 21906 DOORS TO COURT OFFICE FIXED DOORS TO COURT OFFICE FIXED Page: 30 Packet Page 48 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 31 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217990 1/7/2016 066786 RELIABLE SECURITY SOUND & DATA (Continued) 001.000.23.512.50.49.00 211.34 21917 PS - MAXXESS BLP-206 PROCESS( PS - Maxxess BLP-206 Processor 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 921.60 Freight 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 17.63 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 89.23 Total: 1,239.80 217991 1/7/2016 069062 RONGERUDE, JOHN 8183 PUBLIC DEFENDER PUBLIC DEFENDER 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 1,500.00 Total: 1,500.00 217992 1/7/2016 074997 SEITEL SYSTEMS, LLC 29279 14108-SUPPORT DEC 2015 WORK 14108-Support December 1 - 29, 201 001.000.31.518.88.41.00 3,000.00 Total: 3,000.00 217993 1/7/2016 070298 SESAC INC 4168657 SESAC 2016 SESAC 2016 117.100.64.573.20.49.00 755.00 Total: 755.00 217994 1/7/2016 070115 SHANNON & WILSON INC 93551 E4FC.SERVICES THRU 12/19/15 E4FC.Services thru 12/19/15 422.000.72.594.31.41.20 115.00 Total: 115.00 217995 1/7/2016 063306 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS 4102-2 CITY HALL PAINT SUPPLIES City Hall Paint Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 177.43 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 16.86 Page: 31 Packet Page 49 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 32 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217995 1/7/2016 063306 063306 SHERWIN-WILLIAMS (Continued) Total: 194.29 217996 1/7/2016 068489 SIRENNET.COM 0194511-IN UNIT 947,310,E105PO - OUTBOARE Unit 947,310,e105po - Outboard Seal 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 337.50 Unit 947,310,e105po - Outboard Seal 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 675.00 Freight 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 55.76 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 111.52 0194770-IN UNIT EQ96PO - MONGOOSE 9" LO( Unit eg96po - Mongoose 9" Locking 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 434.00 Freight 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 22.60 0194779-IN UNIT EQ96PO - REAR WINDOW MC Unit eg96po - Rear Window Mount 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 14.10 0194944-IN UNIT EQ96PO - CONSOLE BOX, CU Unit EQ96PO - Console Box, Cup Ho 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 819.17 0195001-IN UNIT EQ96PO - INNER EDGE Unit eg96po - Inner Edge 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 1,039.80 Total: 3,509.45 217997 1/7/2016 037303 SNO CO FIRE DIST# 1 Q1-2016 Q1-2016 FIRE SERVICES CONTRA( Q1-2016 Fire Services Contract Payn 001.000.39.522.20.51.00 1,776,042.50 Retro Payment #5 for 2013-2014 Lab 001.000.39.522.20.51.00 200,507.60 Total: 1,976,550.10 217998 1/7/2016 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2001-2487-3 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9933 100TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 9933 100TH AVE W Page: 32 Packet Page 50 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 33 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217998 1/7/2016 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 39.87 2002-7495-9 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23602 76TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 23602 76TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 19.66 2004-2241-8 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70( FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70( 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 1,396.30 2007-4860-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9730 220TH ST SW TRAFFIC LIGHT 9730 220TH ST SW 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 18.54 2009-4334-8 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23202 EDMONDS V TRAFFIC LIGHT 23202 EDMONDS V 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 44.16 2011-9222-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 20408 76TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 20408 76TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 19.96 2013-2711-1 PINE STREET PARK PINE STREET PARK 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 16.85 2015-5730-3 CEMETERY BLDG CEMETERY BLDG 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 206.83 2015-6343-4 TRAFFIC LIGHT 660 EDMONDS WA TRAFFIC LIGHT 660 EDMONDS WA 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 28.32 2015-8215-2 TRAFFIC LIGHT 19600 80TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 19600 80TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 27.49 2016-1027-6 OVERHEAD STREET LIGHTING AT i OVERHEAD STREET LIGHTING AT 1 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 9.40 2017-0375-8 PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 23190 10( PEDEST CAUTION LIGHT 23190 10( 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 31.11 2017-6210-1 FIVE CORNERS Page: 33 Packet Page 51 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 34 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217998 1/7/2016 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) FIVE CORNERS 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 26.83 2020-7719-4 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 762.42 2020-8787-0 LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / ME] LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / MEl 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 203.75 2021-6153-5 CEMETERY WELL PUMP CEMETERY WELL PUMP 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 82.50 2022-8909-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22400 HWY 99 / ME TRAFFIC LIGHT 22400 HWY 99 / ME 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 81.48 2024-2158-2 LOG CABIN & DECORATIVE LIGHTI LOG CABIN & DECORATIVE LIGHTI 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 220.05 2030-9778-7 WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / METER 10( WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / METER 10( 423.000.76.535.80.47.61 27,699.55 2042-9221-3 CHARGE STATION #1 552 MAIN ST CHARGE STATION #1 552 MAIN ST 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 91.98 2044-6743-5 HAZEL MILLER PLAZA HAZEL MILLER PLAZA 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 48.05 2205-4758-2 TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 95TH AVE TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 95TH AVE 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 53.66 Tota I : 31,128.76 217999 1/7/2016 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE 1000391709 INV#1000391709 CUST#SSH00010 E TASK FORCE JAN-JUNE 2016 001.000.41.521.10.51.00 5,274.00 Page: 34 Packet Page 52 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 35 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 217999 1/7/2016 063941 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE (Continued) Total: 5,274.00 218000 1/7/2016 067609 SNOHOMISH COUNTY CITIES 12042015 SNOHOMISH COUNTY CITIES ANNI 2016 membership dues for SCC 001.000.21.513.10.49.00 200.00 Total: 200.00 218001 1/7/2016 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO 103583 CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 550.68 103585 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70( FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70( 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 674.47 103586 SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 555.23 103588 CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N CITY HALL 121 5TH AVE N 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 459.89 Total: 2,240.27 218002 1/7/2016 073787 SOUTH COUNTY PLUMBING 92640 WWTP-REPAIR/MAINTENANCE. FP repair/reset of toilet in mens locker 423.000.76.535.80.48.23 307.00 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.48.23 29.16 Total: 336.16 218003 1/7/2016 068439 SPECIALTY DOOR SERVICE 41905 FS 17 - SERVICE REPAIR FEES FOI FS 17 - Service Repair fees for Doors 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 1,057.38 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 100.45 Tota I : 1,157.83 218004 1/7/2016 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY S101475886.001 SEAVIEW PATHWAY LIGHTS SEAVIEW PATHWAY LIGHTS Page: 35 Packet Page 53 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 36 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218004 1/7/2016 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY (Continued) 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 82.34 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 7.82 S101475886.002 SEAVIEW PATHWAY LIGHTS SEAVIEW PATHWAY LIGHTS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 123.52 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 11.73 Total: 225.41 218005 1/7/2016 074797 SUPER CHARGE MARKETING LLC 2045 SOCIAL MEDIA SERVICES DECEME Social media services for December. 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 300.00 Total: 300.00 218006 1/7/2016 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 18099916 FLEET SHOP SUPPLIES Fleet Shop Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 300.35 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 28.53 Total: 328.88 218007 1/7/2016 072790 TCC PRINTING & IMAGING 88815 BROCHURE- PLANNING BROCHURE- PLANNING 014.000.62.557.20.41.00 731.94 Total: 731.94 218008 1/7/2016 071666 TETRATECH INC 35009-313 ESDB.SERVICES THRU DECEMBEF ESDB.Services thru December 2015 001.000.67.532.20.41.00 54,680.60 Total: 54,680.60 218009 1/7/2016 075476 TOM MARKS PHOTO 14894 HOLIDAY PHOTOSHOOT Holiday photoshoot 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 750.00 Page: 36 Packet Page 54 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 37 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218009 1/7/2016 075476 TOM MARKS PHOTO (Continued) 9.6% Sales Tax 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 72.00 Total: 822.00 218010 1/7/2016 042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY 40442 UNIT 379 - KEY Unit 379 - Key 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.50 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 0.62 Total: 7.12 218011 1/7/2016 062693 US BANK 2674 CUMMINS - UNIT PS17 - PARTS Cummins - Unit PS17 - Parts 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 71.03 Home Depot - Fleet Shop Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 63.44 Marine Engine - Unit M16 - Themosta 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 21.56 Home Depot - Fleet Shop Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 6.54 Good2Go - Unit 447POL 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 6.35 Lind Elect - Unit 44 POL - Auto Adapt 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 401.85 SetCom - Unit 582 - Repairs 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 141.25 Office Depot - Unit 100 - Holder 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 9.84 Amazon - Unit 98 - Gear Lubriant 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 74.15 Amazon - Fleet Shop - Replacement 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 49.75 Total: 845.76 218012 1/7/2016 065269 VALLEY FREIGHTLINER INC 2253370020 UNIT PS17 - ANTI -FREEZE Page: 37 Packet Page 55 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 38 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 218012 1/7/2016 065269 VALLEY FREIGHTLINER INC 218013 1/7/2016 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) Unit PS17 - Anti -Freeze 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 51.12 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 4.86 2253410030 UNIT 138 - SPEEDOMETER Unit 138 - Speedometer 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 485.63 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 46.13 Total: 587.74 9757671157 C/A 571242650-0001 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Bld Dept 001.000.62.524.20.42.00 338.61 iPhone/iPad Cell Service City Clerk 001.000.25.514.30.42.00 55.87 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Econ 001.000.61.557.20.42.00 75.53 iPad Cell Service Council 001.000.11.511.60.42.00 300.10 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Court 001.000.23.512.50.42.00 75.86 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Developmei 001.000.62.524.10.42.00 95.52 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Engineering 001.000.67.532.20.42.00 751.90 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Engineering 001.000.67.532.20.35.00 832.18 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Facilities 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 91.36 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Finance 001.000.31.514.23.42.00 95.52 iPhone/iPad Cell Service HR 001.000.22.518.10.42.00 95.52 Page: 38 Packet Page 56 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 39 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 218013 1/7/2016 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) iPhone/iPad Cell Service IS 001.000.31.518.88.42.00 445.30 iPhone/iPad Cell Service IS 001.000.31.518.88.35.00 2,441.80 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Mayor's Offi 001.000.21.513.10.42.00 95.52 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Parks Dept 001.000.64.571.21.42.00 40.01 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Police Dept 001.000.41.521.22.42.00 1,200.32 Air cards Police Dept 001.000.41.521.22.42.00 800.20 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Planning De 001.000.62.558.60.42.00 40.01 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 001.000.65.518.20.42.00 26.55 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 7.59 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 26.55 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 7.59 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 7.59 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 001.000.65.518.20.35.00 114.97 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 421.000.74.534.80.35.00 32.85 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 422.000.72.531.90.35.00 114.97 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 423.000.75.535.80.35.00 32.85 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Admin 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 32.84 Page: 39 Packet Page 57 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 40 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218013 1/7/2016 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS (Continued) iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Street C 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 171.38 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Fleet 511.000.77.548.68.42.00 55.51 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Water/, 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 120.70 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Water/, 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 120.71 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Water/,r 421.000.74.534.80.35.00 164.25 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Water/,r 423.000.75.535.80.35.00 164.24 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Sewer Dept 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 185.90 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Water 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 225.91 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Water 421.000.74.534.80.35.00 328.49 iPad Cell Service Storm 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 155.88 iPhone/iPad Cell Service WWTP 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 197.24 9757792725 C/A 772540262-00001 Lift Station access 001.000.31.518.88.42.00 74.45 Total: 10,240.14 218014 1/7/2016 069816 VWR INTERNATIONAL INC 8043465454 WWTP-LAB SUPPLIES MISC. SUPPLIES FOR LAB 423.000.76.535.80.31.31 659.59 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.31 62.66 Total: 722.25 218015 1/7/2016 047200 WA RECREATION & PARK ASSOC 2016 AGENCY MEMBERSF 2016 PLATINUM AGENCY MEMBER: Page: 40 Packet Page 58 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 41 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218015 1/7/2016 047200 WA RECREATION & PARK ASSOC (Continued) 2016 PLATINUM AGENCY MEMBER; 001.000.64.571.21.49.00 1,050.00 2016 PLATINUM AGENCY MEMBER: 001.000.64.571.22.49.00 1,050.00 2016 PLATINUM AGENCY MEMBER: 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 1,050.00 661 CONF REGISTRATION HITE CONF REGISTRATION HITE 001.000.64.571.21.49.00 269.00 Total: 3,419.00 218016 1/7/2016 068259 WA ST CRIMINAL JUSTICE 20116375 INV 20116375 NOELLE GRIMES - B/ BASIC LVNR CLASS - GRIMES-- 001.000.41.521.40.49.00 50.00 Total: 50.00 218017 1/7/2016 061485 WA ST DEPT OF HEALTH 2O16 Renewals CERT RENEWALS - J WAITE, L MCP Cert Renewals - J Waite, L McMurph� 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 336.00 Cert Renewals - T Harris, J Clemens, 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 210.00 Tota I : 546.00 218018 1/7/2016 067917 WALLY'S TOWING INC 54320 INV#54320 - EDMONDS PD TOW 1998 DODGE RAM #B673064 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 166.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 15.77 54387 INV#54387 - EDMONDS PD TOW 2015 NISSAN SENTRA#AVT7E 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 166.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 15.77 Total: 363.54 Page: 41 Packet Page 59 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 42 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 218019 1/7/2016 073472 WAPRO 218020 1/7/2016 074707 WASHINGTON LEGAL WORKS 218021 1/7/2016 075283 WAVE BROADBAND 218022 1/7/2016 073552 WELCO SALES LLC Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 1078 INV 1078 - 2016 MEMBERSHIP - CA 2016 WAPRO MEMBERSHIP 001.000.41.521.10.49.00 25.00 1138 INV 1138 - BROMAN 2016 MEMBER; 2016 WAPRO MEMBERSHIP - BROP 001.000.41.521.11.49.00 25.00 Total : 50.00 105 PUBLIC DEFENDER CR32465 PUBLIC DEFENDER 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 562.50 Total : 562.50 102-261607 FIBER HIGH SPEED INTERNET SEF High Speed Internet service 01/01/16 001.000.31.518.87.42.00 816.00 Total : 816.00 6908 P&R ENVELOPES P&R ENVELOPES 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 185.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 17.58 6913 UTILITY BILLING - 5000 PINK LETTE Utility Billing - 5000 Pink Letter 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 91.00 Utility Billing - 5000 Pink Letter 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 91.00 Utility Billing - 5000 Pink Letter 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 91.00 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 8.65 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 8.65 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 8.64 Page: 42 Packet Page 60 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 43 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218022 1/7/2016 073552 073552 WELCO SALES LLC (Continued) Total: 501.52 218023 1/7/2016 075215 WELCOME COMMUNICATIONS INV-150912SC0l INV#150912SC01 - EDMONDS PD ULTRA STINGER SL-20L BATTERIE; 001.000.41.521.22.31.00 121.28 Freight 001.000.41.521.22.31.00 15.86 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.31.00 11.52 Total: 148.66 218024 1/7/2016 074609 WEST COASTARMORY NORTH DEC-15 INV#DEC-15 - CUST ID-EDMONDS F RANGE USAGE-GAGNER 11/12/15 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 13.70 RANGE USAGE-GAGNER 11/19/15 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 13.70 RANGE USAGE-BURRELL 11/15 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 13.70 RANGE USAGE- MORRISON 12/9/V 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 13.70 RANGE USAGE - GAGNER 12/22/15 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 13.70 BAY RENTAL 11/12/15 3 HR @$40 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 120.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.40.41.00 6.51 Total: 195.01 218025 1/7/2016 049902 WHITMAN, TIMOTHY 2 LEOFF 1 CLAIM REIMBURSEMENT LEOFF 1 Claim Reimbursement 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 474.98 Tota I : 474.98 218026 1/7/2016 073479 WU, THOMAS 1038 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 162.93 Page: 43 Packet Page 61 of 456 vchlist Voucher List Page: 44 01/07/2016 12:33:18PM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 218026 1/7/2016 073479 073479 WU, THOMAS 218027 1/7/2016 061047 W W C PA Invoice (Continued) 2016 Renewals 218028 1/7/2016 075254 YAKIMA TECHNOLOGY SERVICES J22956 J22957 135 Vouchers for bank code : usbank 135 Vouchers in this report PO # Description/Account Amount Total : 162.93 2016 ANNUAL CERT RENEWALS - ., 2016 Annual Cert Renewals - J Waite 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 105.00 T Harris, J Clemens, D Crawford, S 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 90.00 Total : 195.00 HARD DRIVE REPLACEMENT Hard Drive Replacement November 2 001.000.31.518.88.41.00 127.50 SERVER INSTALLATION Server installation on November 6, 2C 001.000.31.518.88.41.00 212.50 Total : 340.00 Bank total : 2,669,306.32 Total vouchers : 2,669,306.32 Page: 44 Packet Page 62 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number STM 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade c329 EOAA STR 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) c424 E3DC STM 190th PI SW Wall Construction c428 E31FF STR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 EOJA STR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB WTR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E2FE SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA SWR 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach PI/224th St. Sewer Replacement c347 E1GA WTR 2012 Waterline Overlay Program c388 E2CA WTR 2012 Waterline Replacement Program c340 E1JE STM 2013 Citywide Drainage Replacement c406 E31FA STM 2013 Lake Ballinger Basin Study & Associated Projects c407 E3FB SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA STR 2014 Chip Seals c451 E4CB STM 2014 Drainage Improvements c433 E4FA STM 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD STR 2014 Overlay Program c438 E4CA WTR 2014 Waterline Overlays c452 E4CC WTR 2014 Waterline Replacement Program c422 E4JA STM 2014 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC STM 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects c466 ESFA STR 2015 Overlay Program c463 ESCA SWR 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project c441 E4GA STR 2015 Traffic Calming c471 ESAB WTR 2015 Waterline Overlays c475 ESCB WTR 2015 Waterline Replacement Program c440 E4JB WTR 2016 Water Comp Plan Update c460 E4JC SWR 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 ESGA WTR 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Projects c468 ESJA STR 220 7th Ave N Sidewalk c421 E3DA STR 220th Street Overlay Project c462 E4CD Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 63 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number WTR 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) c418 E3J13 STR 226th Street Walkway Project c312 E9DA STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STR 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) c425 E3DD STR 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) c423 E3DB STR 5th Ave Overlay Project c399 E2CC STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 ElCA WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1J13 STR 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project c245 E6DA STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB FAC AN Upgrades - Council Chambers c476 ESLA STR ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S c426 E3DE SWR Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation (2013 Sewer Pipe Rehab CIPP) c390 E2GB WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 EOIA STR Bikelink Project c474 ESDA STR Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project c256 E6DB PRK City Spray Park c417 E4MA SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB STR Citywide Safety Improvements c404 E2AC SWR City -Wide Sewer Improvements c301 EBGD WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) c482 ESJB STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1 FM PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA STM Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) c472 ESFC STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E41FE FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB WTR Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study c345 E1JC STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC FAC Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project c327 EOLA General Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis c478 ESDB FAC ESCO III Project c419 E3LB WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating c473 ESKA STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) c342 E1AA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 EBMA Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 64 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number FAC Frances Anderson Center Accessibility Upgrades c393 EKA STR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) c405 E2AD STR Interurban Trail c146 E2DB STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c381 E2FD SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study s011 ESGB STM LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin c434 E4FB SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC SWR Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08) c298 EBGA STR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements c265 E7AA WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 EBMB STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 E31FE STM NPDES m013 E7FG SWR OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements c142 E3GB WTR OVD Watermain Improvements (2003) c141 E3JB STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1 FN STM Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study c408 E3FC STR Pioneer Way Road Repair c389 E2CB WTR PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment c346 E1JD STM Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades c339 E1 FD FAC Public Safety Controls System Upgrades c444 E4LA STR School Zone Flashing Beacon/Lighting Grant c420 E3AA STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 ESFD PM Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements c321 E9MA FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 EOLB SWR Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design c304 E9GA WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA SWR Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update c370 E1GB STR Shell Valley Emergency Access Road c268 E7CB STR SR104 Corridor Transportation Study c427 E3AB General SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing c372 ElEA STR SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing c454 E4DB General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 65 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number UTILITIES Standard Details Updates solo ESNA STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1 FF STM Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th c429 E3FG STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity) c349 E1 FH STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 EOFC STIR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1 DA STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E21FB STM SW Edmonds-1 05th/1 06th Ave W Storm Improvements c430 E3FH STM Talbot Rd. Storm Drain Project/Perrinville Creek Mitigation c307 E91FB STIR Trackside Warning System c470 ESAA STIR Train Trench - Concept c453 E4DA STIR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA STM Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects c467 ESFB STM Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines c459 E4FF WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 ESHA Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 66 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Protect Protect Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title STM EOAA c329 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade STM EOFC c326 Stormwater GIS Support tertie and Reservoir Improvements WTR EOJA c363 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c327 Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project FAC EOLB c332 Senior Center Roof Repairs E17A Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) STR E1AB c343 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming e W at 212th St S Intersection Improvements STR E1DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing STM E1 FD c339 Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades Storm Contribution to Transportation Protects STM E1 FH c349 Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity) MMM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives STM E1 FN c376 Perrinville Creek Culvert Re GA 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach PI/224th St. Sewer Replacement SWR E1GB c370 Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update E1JA c333 2011 Waterline Replacement Program,& WTR E1JB c344 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood Edmonds G rge Stu WTR E1JD c346 PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment WTR 2012 Waterline Replacement Program WTR E1JK c375 Main Street Watermain Transportation Plan Update� STR E2AB c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project Citywide Safety Improvements STR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III WTR E2CA 2012 Waterline Overlay Program STR E2CB c389 Pioneer Way Road Repair c399 5th Ave Overlay Project IF STR E2DB c146 Interurban Trail h Talbot Rc1111L' age Improveme STM E2FB c379 SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration Svstem W 80 Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Stud STM E2FD c381 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 67 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Project Title STM E21FE c382 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements SWR E2GA c369 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update SWR E2GB c390 Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation (2013 Sewer Pipe Rehab CIPP) STR E3AA c420 School Zone Flashing Beacon/Lighting Grant STR E3AB c427 SR104 Corridor Transportation Study STR E3DA c421 220 7th Ave N Sidewalk STR E3DB c423 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) STR E3DC c424 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) STR E3DD c425 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) STR E3DE c426 ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S STM E3FA c406 2013 Citywide Drainage Replacement STM E3FB c407 2013 Lake Ballinger Basin Study & Associated Projects STM E3FC c408 Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study STM E3FE c410 Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive STM E3FF c428 190th PI SW Wall Construction STM E3FG c429 Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th STM E3FH c430 SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements SWR E3GA c398 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project SWR E3GB c142 OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements WTR E3JA c397 2013 Waterline Replacement Program WTR E3JB c418 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) WTR E3JB c141 OVD Watermain Improvements (2003) FAC EKA c393 Frances Anderson Center Accessibility Upgrades FAC E3LB c419 ESCO III Project STR E4CA c438 2014 Overlay Program STR E4CB c451 2014 Chip Seals WTR E4CC c452 2014 Waterline Overlays STR E4CD c462 220th Street Overlay Project STR E4DA c453 Train Trench - Concept STR E4DB c454 SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing STM E4FA c433 2014 Drainage Improvements STM E4FB c434 LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin STM E4FC c435 2014 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration STM E4FD c436 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects STM E41FE c455 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station STM E4FF c459 Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 68 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Protect Protect Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title SWR E4GA ' c441 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project. SWR E4GB c456 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study WWTP E4HA c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring WTR ir E4JA c422 2014 Waterline Replacement Program WTR E4J13 c440 2015 Waterline Replacement Program WTR E4JC c460 2016 Water Comp Plan Update FAC E4LA c444 Public Safety Controls System Upgrades E4MA City Spray Par FAC E4MB c443 Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab Trackside Warning Syste STR E5AB c471 2015 Traffic Calming 2015 Overlay Progra WTR E5CB c475 2015 Waterline Overlays General E5DB c478 Edmonds Waterfront Access Anal c466 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects STM E5FB c467 Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects E5FC c472 Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) STM E5FD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer ReplaceWrojects SWR E5GB sol l Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study WWTP Outfall Pip odifications WTR E5JA c468 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Projects Da on St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) WTR E51KA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating FAC qP grades - CoWi&hambers UTILITIES E5NA solo Standard Details Updates _ STR = 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project STR E6DB c256 Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project SR99 Enhancement Program STR E7AA c265 Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements t. SW Corrido provemen STR E7CB c268 Shell Valley Emergency Access Road NP PM E7MA c276 Dayton Street Plaza Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 69 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Project Title SWR E8GA c298 Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08) SWR E8GD c301 City -Wide Sewer Improvements PM E8MA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor PM E8MB c290 Marina Beach Additional Parking STIR E9CA c294 2009 Street Overlay Program STIR E9DA c312 226th Street Walkway Project STM E9FB c307 Talbot Rd. Storm Drain Project/Perrinville Creek Mitigation SWR E9GA c304 Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design PM E9MA c321 Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 70 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title WTR E3J13 c141 OVD Watermain Improvements (2003) SWR E3GB c142 OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements STR E2DB c146 Interurban Trail General E6MA c238 SR99 Enhancement Program STR E6DA c245 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project STR E6DB c256 Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project STR E7AA c265 Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements STR E7CB c268 Shell Valley Emergency Access Road PM E7MA c276 Dayton Street Plaza PM EBMA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor PM EBMB c290 Marina Beach Additional Parking STR E9CA c294 2009 Street Overlay Program SWR EBGA c298 Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08) SWR EBGD c301 City -Wide Sewer Improvements SWR E9GA c304 Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design STM E9FB c307 Talbot Rd. Storm Drain Project/Perrinville Creek Mitigation STR E9DA c312 226th Street Walkway Project PM E9MA c321 Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements WTR EOIA c324 AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements STM EOFC c326 Stormwater GIS Support FAC EOLA c327 Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project STM EOAA c329 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade FAC EOLB c332 Senior Center Roof Repairs WtR E1JA c333 2011 Waterline Replacement Program STM E1 FD c339 Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades WTR E1JE c340 2012 Waterline Replacement Program STM E1 FF c341 Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects STR E1AA c342 Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) STR E1AB c343 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming WTR E1JB c344 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood WTR E1JC c345 Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study WTR E1JD c346 PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment SWR E1GA c347 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach PI/224th St. Sewer Replacement STM E1 FH c349 Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity) Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 71 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title STIR E1DA c354 Sunset Walkway Improvements WTR EOJA c363 2010 Waterline Replacement Program STIR E1CA c368 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements SWR E2GA c369 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update SWR E1GB c370 Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update General ElEA c372 SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing STM E1 FM c374 Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives WTR E1JK c375 Main Street Watermain STM E1FN c376 Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement STM E2FA c378 North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements STM E2FB c379 SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System STM E2FC c380 Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study STM E2FD c381 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 STM E2FE c382 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements WTR E2CA c388 2012 Waterline Overlay Program STIR E2CB c389 Pioneer Way Road Repair SWR E2GB c390 Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation (2013 Sewer Pipe Rehab CIPP) STIR E2AA c391 Transportation Plan Update STIR E2AB c392 9th Avenue Improvement Project FAC EKA c393 Frances Anderson Center Accessibility Upgrades WTR E3JA c397 2013 Waterline Replacement Program SWR E3GA c398 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project STIR E2CC c399 5th Ave Overlay Project STIR E2AC c404 Citywide Safety Improvements STIR E2AD c405 Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) STM EYA c406 2013 Citywide Drainage Replacement STM E3FB c407 2013 Lake Ballinger Basin Study & Associated Projects STM E3FC c408 Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study STM EYE c410 Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive PRK E4MA c417 City Spray Park WTR E3JB c418 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) FAC E3LB c419 ESCO III Project STIR E3AA c420 School Zone Flashing Beacon/Lighting Grant STIR E3DA c421 220 7th Ave N Sidewalk Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 72 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title WTR E4JA c422 2014 Waterline Replacement Program STIR E3DB c423 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) STIR E3DC c424 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) STIR E3DD c425 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) STIR E3DE c426 ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S STIR E3AB c427 SR104 Corridor Transportation Study STM E3FF c428 190th PI SW Wall Construction STM E3FG c429 Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th STM E3FH c430 SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements STM E41FA c433 2014 Drainage Improvements STM E4FB c434 LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin STM E4FC c435 2014 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration STM E4FD c436 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects STIR E4CA c438 2014 Overlay Program WTR E4JB c440 2015 Waterline Replacement Program SWR E4GA c441 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project FAC E4MB c443 Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab FAC E4LA c444 Public Safety Controls System Upgrades WWTP E4HA c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring STIR E4CB c451 2014 Chip Seals WTR E4CC c452 2014 Waterline Overlays STIR E4DA c453 Train Trench - Concept STIR E4DB c454 SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing STM E41FE c455 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station SWR E4GB c456 Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I STM E4FF c459 Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines WTR E4JC c460 2016 Water Comp Plan Update SWR E4GC c461 Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study STIR E4CD c462 220th Street Overlay Project STIR E5CA c463 2015 Overlay Program STM E51FA c466 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects STM E5FB c467 Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects WTR E5JA c468 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Projects SWR E5GA c469 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 73 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By New Project Accounting Number) Engineering Project Project Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title STIR E5AA c470 Trackside Warning System STIR E5AB c471 2015 Traffic Calming STM E5FC c472 Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) WTR E51KA c473 Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating STIR E5DA c474 Bikelink Project WTR E5CB c475 2015 Waterline Overlays FAC E5LA c476 AN Upgrades - Council Chambers General E5DB c478 Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis STM E5FD c479 Seaview Park Infiltration Facility WWTP E5HA c481 WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications WTR E5J13 c482 Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) STIR E7AC i005 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements STM E7FG m013 NPDES UTILITIES E51NIA solo Standard Details Updates SWR E5GB sol l Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 74 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number FAC A/V Upgrades - Council Chambers c476 ESLA FAC Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehab c443 E4MB FAC Edmonds Museum Exterior Repairs Project c327 EOLA FAC ESCO III Project c419 E3LB FAC Frances Anderson Center Accessibility Upgrades c393 EKA FAC Public Safety Controls System Upgrades c444 E41-A FAC Senior Center Roof Repairs c332 EOLB General Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis c478 ESDB General SR104 Telecommunications Conduit Crossing c372 E1EA General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA PM Dayton Street Plaza c276 E7MA PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 EBMA PM Marina Beach Additional Parking c290 EBMB PM Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements c321 E9MA PRK City Spray Park c417 E4MA STM 100th Ave W/Firdale Ave/238th St. SW/Traffic Signal Upgrade c329 EOAA STM 190th PI SW Wall Construction c428 E3FF STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E2FE STM 2013 Citywide Drainage Replacement c406 E3FA STM 2013 Lake Ballinger Basin Study & Associated Projects c407 E3FB STM 2014 Drainage Improvements c433 E4FA STM 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD STM 2014 Willow Creek Daylighting/Edmonds Marsh Restoration c435 E4FC STM 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects c466 ESFA STM Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives c374 E1 FM STM Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) c472 ESFC STM Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station c455 E4FE STM Edmonds Marsh Feasibility Study c380 E2FC STM Lake Ballinger Associated Projects 2012 c381 E2FD STM LID Retrofits Perrinville Creek Basin c434 E4FB STM North Talbot Road Drainage Improvements c378 E2FA STM Northstream Pipe Abandonment on Puget Drive c410 E3FE STM NPDES m013 E7FG STM Perrinville Creek Culvert Replacement c376 E1 FN STM Perrinville Creek Stormwater Flow Reduction Retrofit Study c408 E3FC Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 75 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Project Title Number Number STM Public Facilities Water Quality Upgrades c339 E1 FD STM Seaview Park Infiltration Facility c479 ESFD STM Storm Contribution to Transportation Projects c341 E1 FF STM Storm Drainage Improvements - 88th & 194th c429 E3FG STM Stormwater Development Review Support (NPDES Capacity) c349 E1 FH STM Stormwater GIS Support c326 EOFC STM SW Edmonds Basin #3-238th St. SW to Hickman Park Infiltration System c379 E2FB STM SW Edmonds-105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements c430 E3FH STM Talbot Rd. Storm Drain Project/Perrinville Creek Mitigation c307 E9FB STM Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects c467 ESFB STM Video Assessment of Stormwater Lines c459 E4FF STR 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) c424 E3DC STR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA STR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB STR 2014 Chip Seals c451 E4CB STR 2014 Overlay Program c438 E4CA STR 2015 Overlay Program c463 ESCA STR 2015 Traffic Calming c471 ESAB STR 220 7th Ave N Sidewalk c421 E3DA STR 220th Street Overlay Project c462 E4CD STR 226th Street Walkway Project c312 E9DA STR 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements i005 E7AC STR 236th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to Madrona School) c425 E3DD STR 238th St. SW Walkway (100th Ave to 104th Ave) c423 E3DB STR 5th Ave Overlay Project c399 E2CC STR 76th Ave W at 212th St SW Intersection Improvements c368 E1CA STR 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project c245 E6DA STR 9th Avenue Improvement Project c392 E2AB STR ADA Curb Ramp Upgrades along 3rd Ave S c426 E3DE STR Bikelink Project c474 ESDA STR Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project c256 E6DB STR Citywide Safety Improvements c404 E2AC STR Five Corners Roundabout (212th Street SW @ 84th Avenue W) c342 E1AA STR Hwy 99 Enhancements (Phase III) c405 E2AD STR Interurban Trail c146 E2DB Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 76 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Funding Protect Title STIR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements Project Accounting Number c265 Engineering Project Number E7AA Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 77 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Project Title Number Number STIR Pioneer Way Road Repair c389 E2CB STIR School Zone Flashing Beacon/Lighting Grant c420 E3AA STIR Shell Valley Emergency Access Road c268 E7CB STIR SR104 Corridor Transportation Study c427 E3AB STIR SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing c454 E4DB STIR Sunset Walkway Improvements c354 E1DA STIR Trackside Warning System c470 ESAA STIR Train Trench - Concept c453 E4DA STIR Transportation Plan Update c391 E2AA SWR 2012 Sanitary Sewer Comp Plan Update c369 E2GA SWR 2012 Sewermain-Alder/Dellwood/Beach PI/224th St. Sewer Replacement c347 E1GA SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA SWR 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project c441 E4GA SWR 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects c469 ESGA SWR Alder Sanitary Sewer Pipe Rehabilitation (2013 Sewer Pipe Rehab CIPP) c390 E2GB SWR Citywide CIPP Sewer Rehab Phase I c456 E4GB SWR City -Wide Sewer Improvements c301 EBGD SWR Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study s0l l ESGB SWR Lift Station #1 Basin & Flow Study c461 E4GC SWR Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from L/s 13 - 09/01/08) c298 EBGA SWR OVD Sewer Lateral Improvements c142 E3GB SWR Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Design c304 E9GA SWR Sewer, Water, Stormwater Revenue Requirements Update c370 E1GB UTILITIES Standard Details Updates solo ESNA WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 EOJA WtR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA WTR 2012 Waterline Overlay Program c388 E2CA WTR 2012 Waterline Replacement Program c340 E1JE WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA WTR 2014 Waterline Overlays c452 E4CC WTR 2014 Waterline Replacement Program c422 E4JA WTR 2015 Waterline Overlays c475 ESCB WTR 2015 Waterline Replacement Program c440 E4JB WTR 2016 Water Comp Plan Update c460 E4JC WTR 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Projects c468 ESJA WTR 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) c418 E3JB Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 78 of 456 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Project Title Number Number WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1J13 WTR AWD Intertie and Reservoir Improvements c324 EOIA WTR Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) c482 ESJB WTR Edmonds General Facilities Charge Study c345 E1JC WTR Five Corners Reservoir Re -coating c473 ESKA WTR Main Street Watermain c375 E1JK WTR OVD Watermain Improvements (2003) c141 E3J13 WTR PRV Station 11 and 12 Abandonment c346 E1JD WWTP Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring c446 E4HA WWTP WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications c481 ESHA Revised 1/6/2016 Packet Page 79 of 456 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 763 (12/16/2015 to 12/31/2015) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount -ed2 REGULAR HOURS Educational Pav Correction 0.00 -156.28 111 ABSENT NO PAY LEAVE 32.00 0.00 120 SICK SICK LEAVE - L & 1 80.00 2,168.24 121 SICK SICK LEAVE 600.50 20,055.62 122 VACATION VACATION 2,933.13 99,533.42 123 HOLIDAY HOLIDAY HOURS 208.25 6,714.91 124 HOLIDAY FLOATER HOLIDAY 98.00 2,709.33 125 COMP HOURS COMPENSATORY TIME 189.27 6,070.71 129 SICK Police Sick Leave L & 1 35.25 1,308.75 130 COMP HOURS Holidav Compensation Used 19.00 604.28 132 JURY DUTY JURY DUTY 12.00 417.69 150 REGULAR HOURS Kellv Dav Used 224.60 7,946.43 155 COMP HOURS COMPTIME AUTO PAY 84.52 3,559.59 156 SICK SICK LEAVE PAYOFF-PERS 1 22.13 677.73 159 VACATION VACATION PAYOFF PERS-1 94.53 2,899.64 160 VACATION MANAGEMENT LEAVE 50.00 2,451.34 170 REGULAR HOURS COUNCIL BASE PAY 700.00 7,000.00 174 REGULAR HOURS COUNCIL PRESIDENTS PAY 0.00 200.00 175 REGULAR HOURS COUNCIL PAY FOR NO MEDICP 0.00 1,389.86 190 REGULAR HOURS REGULAR HOURS 13,212.95 428,174.89 191 REGULAR HOURS FIRE PENSION PAYMENTS 4.00 2,150.85 210 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME -STRAIGHT 140.50 5,703.27 215 OVERTIME HOURS WATER WATCH STANDBY 54.00 2,698.47 216 MISCELLANEOUS STANDBY TREATMENT PLANT 12.50 1,052.33 220 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME 1.5 182.00 10,866.89 225 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME -DOUBLE 6.00 413.37 410 MISCELLANEOUS WORKING OUT OF CLASS 0.00 200.55 411 SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL 0.00 572.61 600 RETROACTIVE PAY RETROACTIVE PAY 0.00 3,266.51 602 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP 32.75 0.00 603 COMP HOURS Holidav Comp 1.0 36.00 0.00 604 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP TIME 138.25 0.00 606 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP TIME 1.15 0.00 01 /07/2016 Packet Page 80 of 456 Page 1 of 3 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 763 (12/16/2015 to 12/31/2015) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount 607 COMP HOURS Holidav Compensatory Time 1.5 9.00 0.00 acc MISCELLANEOUS ACCREDITATION PAY 0.00 24.70 acs MISCELLANEOUS ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORT 0.00 169.99 boc MISCELLANEOUS BOC II Certification 0.00 82.79 colre MISCELLANEOUS Collision Reconstruction ist 0.00 105.27 cpl MISCELLANEOUS TRAINING CORPORAL 0.00 143.68 crt MISCELLANEOUS CERTIFICATION III PAY 0.00 609.54 det MISCELLANEOUS DETECTIVE PAY 0.00 100.25 det4 MISCELLANEOUS Detective 4% 0.00 962.34 ed1 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 2% 0.00 713.39 ed2 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 4% 0.00 852.06 ed3 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 6% 0.00 4,440.51 fmis SICK FAMILY MEDICAL/SICK 4.00 147.02 hol HOLIDAY HOLIDAY 2,489.60 83,212.22 k9 MISCELLANEOUS K-9 PAY 0.00 100.25 Iq1 LONGEVITY LONGEVITY PAY 2% 0.00 935.30 Ig10 LONGEVITY LONGEVITY 5.5% 0.00 543.60 Ig11 LONGEVITY LONGEVITY PAY 2.5% 0.00 858.80 Iq2 LONGEVITY PAY LONGEVITY PAY 4% 0.00 969.54 I0 LONGEVITY PAY LONGEVITY 6% 0.00 5,282.79 Iq4 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 1 % 0.00 202.00 Ici6 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv .5% 0.00 256.40 Iq7 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 1.5% 0.00 967.80 melk KELLY DAY Medical Leave Kelly Dav 1.00 27.00 mels SICK Medical Leave Sick 17.70 477.90 melv VACATION Medical Leave Vacation 77.30 2,087.10 mtc MISCELLANEOUS MOTORCYCLE PAY 0.00 191.24 pds MISCELLANEOUS Public Disclosure Specialist 0.00 46.65 phv MISCELLANEOUS PHYSICAL FITNESS PAY 0.00 1,685.09 prof MISCELLANEOUS PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS ; 0.00 153.70 sdp MISCELLANEOUS SPECIAL DUTY PAY 5% 0.00 504.43 sqt MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE SERGEANT 0.00 150.88 slb SICK SICK LEAVE BUY BACK 620.75 9,581.59 01 /07/2016 Packet Page 81 of 456 Page 2 of 3 Hour Type Hour Class Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 763 (12/16/2015 to 12/31/2015) Description traf MISCELLANEOUS TRAFFIC Hours 0.00 22,422.63 Total Net Pay: Amount 315.78 $737,552.60 $496,548.94 01 /07/2016 Page 3 of 3 Packet Page 82 of 456 Benefit Checks Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 763 - 12/16/2015 to 12/31/2015 Bank: usbank - US Bank Check # Date Payee # Name Check Amt Direct Deposit 62019 01/05/2016 epoa EPOA-1 POLICE 1,150.00 0.00 62020 01/05/2016 epoa4 EPOA-4 POLICE SUPPORT 117.00 0.00 62021 01/05/2016 jhan JOHN HANCOCK 1,028.10 0.00 62022 01/05/2016 flex NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS 1,002.48 0.00 62023 01/05/2016 cope SEIU COPE 52.00 0.00 62024 01/05/2016 seiu SEIU LOCAL 925 3,702.15 0.00 62025 01/05/2016 uw UNITED WAY OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY 724.00 0.00 62026 01/05/2016 icma VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS 304884 2,337.51 0.00 10,113.24 0.00 Bank: wire - US BANK Check # Date Payee # Name Check Amt Direct Deposit 2326 01/05/2016 pens DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS 229,938.43 0.00 2327 01/05/2016 aflac AFLAC 5,221.70 0.00 2331 01/05/2016 wadc WASHINGTON STATE TREASURER 19,518.50 0.00 2332 01/05/2016 us US BANK 100,461.23 0.00 2333 01/05/2016 mebt WTRISC FBO #N3177B1 91,584.35 0.00 2335 01/05/2016 pb NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION 4,982.60 0.00 2336 01/05/2016 oe OFFICE OF SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT 48.50 0.00 0.00 451,755.31 Grand Totals: 461,868.55 0.00 1 /7/2016 Packet Page 83 of 456 Page 1 of AM-8222 3. C. City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2016 Time: Consent Submitted By: Linda Hynd Department: City Clerk's Office Type: Information Subiect Title Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Stephen Millet (amount undetermined). Recommendation Acknowledge receipt of the Claim for Damages by minute entry. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Stephen Millet 8412 Olympic View Drive Edmonds, WA 98026 (Amount undetermined) Millet Claim for Damages Attachments Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Mayor Dave Earling 01/06/2016 09:31 AM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 01/06/2016 03:26 PM Form Started By: Linda Hynd Started On: 01/06/2016 08:26 AM Final Approval Date: 01/06/2016 Packet Page 84 of 456 RECEIVED 3`�` CITY OF EDMONDS CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM JAN 0 5 2016 EDMONDS CITY CLM. Date Claim Form Received by City / -il frr Please take note that 4'T>=Q H i" 1 I VI T who currently resides at Sot 1. 014 M f IL V I EW p 'ti �ir-1 r-_ j>cA o ,Azj S Z mailing address r-1fa_nnr-- RS , home phone # 206 S50 30,50, work phone # �b SS,�B6�5. and who resided at F N44_ at the time of the occurrence and whose date of birth is 01/)k/6L, is claiming damages against E�13:� 6J.- r=DMo-Afl5 in the sum of $ arising out of the following circumstances listed below. DATE OF OCCURRENCE: Pik . 07 . 2-01 5 TIME: 3P m — i Pm LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE: W T Q�, vn k 1 I.i b-Bl p RCS I Df=uXf _ f V_r1T7 O 3A ,p \N DESCRIPTION: 1. Describe the conduct and circumstance that brought about the injury or damage. Also describe the Injury or damage. �'• �cl' �1 .w AS l � jrAjr l t l &AP- kY 12 WT I P l t� _D _QR-OPLEn FL CI Dim �'eD" Lp o l - AID F ".Lai=&a & - /�A� ti �,zRT Elz C'&V_A Co u a-rr je t 1 i2w A4 LA&&SC'A$ I r� b W V] (_ rAr,JEJ) Q fO 6 IT (attach an extra sheet for additional information, if needed) 2. Provide a list of witnesses, if applicable, to the occurrence including names, addresses, and phone numbers. 3. Attach copies of all documentation relating to expenses, injuries, losses, and/or estimates for repair. 4. Have you submitted a claim for damages to your insurance company? Yes ' ( No If so, please provide the name of the insurance company: and the policy #: * * ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AUTOMOBILE CLAIMS ONLY License Plate # Driver License # Type Auto: (year) (make) (model) DRIVER: OWNER: Address: Address: Phone#: Phone#: Passengers: Name: Name: Address: Address * * NOTE: THIS FORM MUST BE SIGNED AND NOTARIZED * * Packet Page 85 of 456 S T 905r-1 tiM k 1.L,&T r being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the claimant for the above described; t at I ha read the above claim, know the contents thereof and believe the same to be true. I further acknowledge that any information I provide as part of this claim may be considered a public record and may be sybject t Qdisclosure pursu to RCW 42.56. _ _ , X 1�L Signature of Claimant(s) State of Washington County of !!�� " Nl l Ski certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 2W ", I tt,+/ is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that (he/she) signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be (his/her) free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. d: F Zvi tN 3i atu a "N,%v SION Ll ivi C 6 Y %jp7 Title �j NOTARY' My appointment expires: PUBLIC N� 05-21-2018�_ Please present the completed claim form to City Clerk's Office City of Edmonds 121 5m Avenue North Edmonds, WA, 98020 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Packet Page 86 of 456 AM-8227 3. D. City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2016 Time: Consent Submitted By: Mary Ann Hardie Department: Human Resources Type: Action Information Subiect Title Non -Represented Compensation Policy language (updated) Recommendation Approval by Council on the consent agenda at the 1/12/16 meeting. Previous Council Action Approved by Council at the 1/5/16 Council meeting to be forwarded to the 1/12/16 consent agenda. Narrative Clarification to policy language as follows (as approved by Council at the 1/6/16 meeting): 1. Comparable cities must be located in Snohomish, King, Pierce and Thurston counties. 2. The application of the above criteria will be utilized to select a minimum of eight cities that are closest in population size to the city of Edmonds that will be chose for the compensation study process. All of these 8 cities may not have every benchmark position from the survey represented. Additionally, private sector data may be gathered and considered where it is a significant factor in the City's competiveness. Please see the attached, revised policy reflecting the approved changes in red. Attachments NR Compensation Policy (redlined showing updates) Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Parks and Recreation Carrie Hite 01/07/2016 08:18 AM City Clerk Scott Passey 01/07/2016 08:18 AM Mayor Dave Earling 01/07/2016 10:26 AM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 01/07/2016 01:47 PM Form Started By: Mary Ann Hardie Started On: 01/07/2016 07:56 AM Packet Page 87 of 456 Final Approval Date: 01/07/2016 Packet Page 88 of 456 5.5 NON REPRESENTED EMPLOYEES The City's non -represented compensation policy strives to maintain equity, by offering competitive salaries and benefits in order to attract and retain high quality staff and an effective work force. It is the policy of the City for the classification and compensation plan to provide salaries that compare favorably with other similar cities in the region for comparable jobs, and within budget limitations. It is also the policy of the City to strive to maintain salaries that are internally equitable, in proper relationship to all other jobs within the City, within reasonable budget parameters. SALARY RANGE PROGRESSION Salary ranges for non -represented positions will have a 35% spread from the bottom to the top of each salary range, and will include a seven -step scale with 5% between each of the steps. All new employees will generally be hired at the first step of their salary range; however, an entry level rate of pay above the minimum may be offered to an applicant whose education and experience exceed the minimum qualifications for the classification, or when external labor market pay practices impact recruitment. Initial step placement at higher than Step 3 of the salary range is subject to approval by the Mayor prior to the offer of employment. Employees are advanced to the next salary step increment after satisfactorily completing the first six months of probation. After this, employees advance to the next step in the salary range on the January following their anniversary date and each succeeding January after a concurrent satisfactory overall performance evaluation has been completed by their supervisor, until reaching the maximum step. An employee is considered not to have achieved a satisfactory overall performance rating if two or more performance category areas in the evaluation receive less than a "meets standards" rating. An employee who fails to achieve at least a satisfactory overall performance rating on their annual performance evaluation shall not be eligible for a step increase until their next performance evaluation rating period. Employees who do not achieve a satisfactory overall performance rating will be immediately placed on a performance improvement plan (PIP). The PIP will provide clear expectations to the employee for the work performance items that must improve in order for the employee to achieve a satisfactory overall performance rating by the next evaluation period (usually 3 and/or 6 months) as determined under the PIP. A PIP also serves as a work plan for the employee that will likely include individualized, supervisor -provided feedback and counseling on improving work performance, as well as outlining any necessary areas of training or retraining in order for the employee to succeed on the PIP. In the event of promotion of a non -represented employee to another non -represented job classification in a higher salary range, the employee will be placed on the first step of the new salary range or the lowest step in the new range that results in an increase to their current salary. After this, the employee would follow the salary range progression described above for new employees. To ensure internal equity, employees promoted from a represented position to a non - represented position in a higher pay range, will be placed on the first step of the new salary range, or the lowest step in the new range that results in an increase to their current salary, including consideration of other cash compensation being received in the former position. After Packet Page 89 of 456 this, the employee would follow the salary range progression described above for new employees. In the event of a lateral placement of a non -represented employee to another non -represented job classification in the same pay range, the employee will not receive a salary increase. ANNUAL SALARY ADJUSTMENTS The Mayor will recommend the adjustment of salary ranges for non -represented employees to the City Council for approval as part of the budget process, effective January 1 of each year. The Mayor's recommendation will take into consideration the average adjustment negotiated and approved for represented employee groups. Each employee will maintain the same step within the newly approved salary range that they held prior to the adjustment. In addition, the City will attempt to mitigate compression issues as they arise. The Mayor will make appropriate and timely recommendations to City Council to maintain internal equity and prevent compression issues. MARKET ANALYSIS The Human Resources Department will conduct compensation surveys for each non - represented benchmark position no later than September 1, every three years. The following criteria will be used for determining which cities are comparable for the purposes of analyzing and comparing compensation ("Qualified Comparable Cities"): Comparable cities must be located in Snohomish, King, Pierce and, —Thurston, or Kitsap counties; and Comparable cities will include all cities with a population that is no more than 10,000 over or no more than 10,000 under the population of the City of Edmonds according to the most recent population figures published by the Washington State Office of Financial Management or a similar successor government agency; and The application of the above criteria will be utilized to select a minimum of eight ages -cities that are closest in population to the City of Edmonds that will be chosen for the compensation study process. All of these 8 cities may not have every benchmark position from the survey represented. If this process yields fewer than eight comparable cities (not counting Edmonds) for analysis during a particular year, additional cities shall be selected for analysis by adding an additional city or cities, up to eight, with agencies that are outside the 10,000 over/under criteria, but that are the next closest in population to the City of Edmonds, with the goal of having 50% of the cities with a higher population and 50% with a lower population than Edmonds. Additionally, private sector data wilVmay be gathered and considered where it is a significant factor in the City's competitiveness. Benchmark positions are those which are assigned clearly recognizable work at a well-defined level of responsibility, and for which comparable classifications are easily identified to ensure that sufficient data can be collected. Classifications that are selected as comparable for survey purposes must match the benchmark position by 80% in level of work and responsibility. Packet Page 90 of 456 Salaries for comparable positions that are not a complete match may be leveled up or down by a maximum of 20%, to adjust for differences in the level or scope of responsibility in work duties. Non -benchmark classifications (those for which there are not adequate comparable classifications) will be indexed to a corresponding City benchmark position, which is comparable in required qualifications, scope of work, and level of responsibility. Salary ranges for benchmarks will be determined by using the prevailing rates in the identified comparator cities. The City will be competitive within the defined market, but will not assume the position of a lead pay policy compared to the market; therefore the median or 50" percentile of the mid -range of salary data collected will be used to determine competitiveness. Every three years, based upon the survey data, the Mayor will recommend salary range market adjustments for non -represented positions to City Council. The Mayor will consider the following criteria in developing the recommendation: 1. Maintain the mid -point of each salary range between 5% high/low of the mid -point of the comparator city median. 2. Positions requiring adjustment will be assigned to the new salary range within the salary range table that places the position closest to the comparator city median. 3. Any employee whose actual salary falls below the newly adopted pay range minimum, shall be adjusted up to the new minimum upon adoption of the new pay ranges. 4. Any employee whose actual salary exceeds the top of the approved salary range, will have their salary frozen until such time that market rates support pay range adjustment for their job classification. Packet Page 91 of 456 AM-8236 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2016 Time: 5 Minutes Submitted For: Council President Johnson Department: City Council Type: Action Submitted By: Sandy Chase Tnfnrmntinn Subiect Title Appointment of Committee Representatives for 2016 Recommendation N/A Previous Council Action N/A 5. A. Narrative The appointment of committee representatives for 2016 will be announced at the City Council Meeting. Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Scott Passey Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey Form Started By: Sandy Chase Final Approval Date: 01/08/2016 Form Review Date O1/07/2016 02:39 PM O1/07/2016 03:01 PM O1/08/2016 06:36 AM Started On: 01/07/2016 02:28 PM Packet Page 92 of 456 AM-8228 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2016 Time: 15 Minutes Submitted By: Mary Ann Hardie Department: Human Resources Committee: Type: Information Forward to Consent Subiect Title Senior Construction Inspector, IS Manager & Accounting Manager job descriptions 6. A. Recommendation The decision packages for these positions were approved by Council in the 2016 budget. These new job descriptions are being forwarded to Council for approval. Previous Council Action These decision packages were approved by Council in the 2016 budget. Narrative Senior Construction Inspector (union position) The duties of work for this position fall under the body of work that is covered by the (SEIU) union. As per process, this position has been approved by the SEIU union through a memorandum of understanding (MOU) effective 1/l/16. A copy of this MOU is attached. Based on department/organizational needs, the position has been retitled to "Senior Construction Inspector" to accurately reflect the level and complexity of the job duties. There is no impact to the previously approved budget (for the wage range) for this position. A copy of this new job description is attached. Once approved, there will be a recruitment process started in order to fill the position. IS Manager (non -represented position) This job description reflects the job duties to be performed by the IS Manager (which will be a reclassification of the IS Supervisor position). A copy of this new job description is attached. This reclassification will occur after approval of the job description. Accounting Manager (non -represented position) This job description reflects the job duties to be performed by the Accounting Manager. A copy of this new job description is attached. Once approved, there will be a recruitment process started in order to fill the position. Packet Page 93 of 456 Attachments Senior Construction Inspector -MOU Senior Construction Inspector job description IS Manager job description Accounting Manager job description Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Parks and Recreation Carrie Hite 01/08/2016 08:05 AM City Clerk Scott Passey 01/08/2016 08:23 AM Mayor Dave Earling 01/08/2016 09:42 AM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 01/08/2016 10:05 AM Form Started By: Mary Ann Hardie Started On: 01/07/2016 08:07 AM Final Approval Date: 01/08/2016 Packet Page 94 of 456 Memorandum of Understanding Amended to the AGREEMENT by and between CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON and SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 925 January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2017 THIS AMENDMENT is supplemental to the AGREEMENT by and between the CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON (hereinafter the "City") and the SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 925 (hereinafter "SEIU"). WHEREAS, the parties have ratified a Collective Bargaining Agreement (hereinafter "CBA") effective January 1, 2015 through December 31, 2017; and WHEREAS, the parties have agreed to add one position to the SEIU classification schedule, as set forth in Appendix A to the CBA, effective January 1, 2016; NOW THEREFORE, the City and SEIU have entered into this Memorandum of Understanding to memorialize the following agreement: The parties will add a full time position titled "Senior Construction Inspector" with the same title job description to the SEIU classification schedule at the Pay Grade of NE/13 with a pay range of $5,480 - $6,793 effective January 1, 2016. This position will also be added to the master position classification listing in the next finalized SEIU CBA. SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 925 right, SI�I`[J Representative �J ate CITY OF EDMONDS Dave Earling, Mayor IaIa�� Date 1 of 1 Packet Page 95 of 456 DRAFT City of EDMONDS Washington SENIOR CONSTRUCTION INSPECTOR Department: Public Works - Engineering Pay Grade: NE 13 Bargaining Unit: SEIU FLSA Status: Non Exempt Revised Date: December 2015 Reports To: City Engineer POSITION PURPOSE: Under general supervision, inspects public and private development construction projects, in all stages of construction, improvement, alteration and repair; reviews plans, specifications and technical drawings, inspects worksite, and verifies compliance to codes, regulations, ordinances, specifications and standards; and performs contract administration duties on public works construction contracts. PRIMARY DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES: The following duties ARE NOT intended to serve as a comprehensive list of all duties performed by all employees in this classification, only a representative summary of the primary duties and responsibilities. Incumbent(s) may not be required to perform all duties listed and may be required to perform additional, position -specific duties. • Independently performs a variety of routine and complex inspections for the Public Works Department; assures safety, work quality, and compliance with approved plans, drawings and specifications, permits, standards and codes including environmental protection laws. • Inspects and monitors public works construction, transportation, sewer, water and stormwater utility improvements, in all stages of construction, improvement, alteration, and repair to assure compliance with applicable state and local regulations; identifies and documents deficiencies and deviations from quality and safety standards and project specifications. • Negotiates and prepares change order documents, contractor pay requests and project closeout documents; monitors construction project budget; and prepares state and federal required documentation of public works projects. • Reviews plans and specifications of assigned projects to gain familiarity with the projects prior to inspection; performs field inspections to evaluate and validate the work performed; verifies quality of workmanship, quality of materials used, and compliance with plans, specifications, and applicable codes and regulations; conducts and witnesses tests of work site, materials, and work products to assure quality and safety standards are met. • Assists contractors with problems and concerns, and responds within scope of authority; anticipates problems and pursues solutions; communicates project goals and objectives; assures effective communication of project status with Project Manager, City Engineer, City staff, contractors and other parties. • Coordinates traffic control activities as needed; assures safety rules and regulations are followed on all work zones and traffic control sites. • Performs field measurements of quantities placed by Contractor and prepares accurate field note records to support contractor pay requests. • Maintains inspection records, project documentation files, weekly statement of working days, requests for information and submittals. • Inspects private development (commercial, multi -family and residential) projects and associated construction improvements within City right of way and/or private property. • Uses and applies the City's permit system and other related permitting software on private development projects. Senior Construction Inspector December 2015 Packet Page 96 of 456 JOB DESCRIPTION Senior Construction Inspector DRAFT Prepares and issues correction notices, notice of violation and works with violators to bring issue into compliance. Responds promptly to questions from the public, contractors, private developers and other agencies; explains City codes, policies, procedures and regulations; provides information and recommendations within scope of authority. Maintains absolute confidentiality of work -related issues, client records and City information; performs related duties as required or assigned. Required Knowledge of: • City policies and procedures. • Applicable laws, regulations and codes • Federal, state, and local construction and safety codes, regulations and standards, and specialized sources of construction safety information. • Methods and techniques of inspecting public works construction projects and structures. • Regulations, protocols, and standards governing construction inspection and plan review activities. • Principles of design, construction, and maintenance of public works projects. • Administration principles and practices of construction and consultant contracts. • Federal and state codes and regulations governing public works projects, including, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), WSDOT standards and specifications and WSDOT Local Agency Guidelines (LAG). • Types of tests performed on construction materials and work sites, surface water management standards, and TESC (Temporary Erosion Sedimentation Control) practices. • Occupational hazards and safety precautions. • Principles of record keeping and records management. • Engineering mathematics and drafting standards and techniques. • Technical aspects of stormwater management principles and field inspection techniques of stormwater management facilities. • Easements and other property -related official records • Interpersonal skills using tact, patience and courtesy. • Effective oral and written communication principles and practices. • Modern office procedures, methods, and equipment including computers and computer applications sufficient to perform assigned duties. • English usage, spelling, grammar and punctuation. Required Skill in: • Using independent judgment within established procedural guidelines. • Interpreting statutes, rules, ordinances, codes and regulations, and comparing them with plans and technical specifications. • Using technical knowledge of construction methods and sound inspection procedures to evaluate workmanship and materials quality, and detect deviations from construction and safety standards. • Reading and interpreting construction drawings and specifications and comparing them with construction in progress. • Reviewing and verifying mathematical calculations. • Providing advice and consultation on standard construction methods and compliance requirements. • Establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with co-workers, contractors, homeowners, outside agencies, and the general public. • Operating a personal computer utilizing a variety of standard and specialized software. • Maintaining accurate and interrelated technical records; • Communicating effectively verbally and in writing. • Meeting schedules and timelines. • Utilizing personal computer software programs and other relevant software affecting assigned work, including digital mapping applications. Senior Construction Inspector December 2015 Packet Page 97 of 456 JOB DESCRIPTION Senior Construction Inspector MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Education and Experience: DRAFT High School Diploma/GED Certificate and the equivalent of two years of college -level course work in civil engineering technology or related field or Associates Degree in Civil Engineering, Construction Management, or related field and four years of construction inspection experience on public or private development projects; OR an equivalent combination of education, training and experience. Required Licenses or Certifications: Valid State of Washington Driver's License Valid Traffic Control Flagger card must be current (or obtained within 90 days of hire) Certified Erosion and Sediment Control Lead Certification must be current (or obtained within 90 days of hire) First Aid/CPR certification or training must be current (or completed within 90 days of hire) Additional technical training and certifications may be required. Must be able to successfully complete and pass background check. Work Environment: Work is performed in both standard office and outdoor work environments Occasional lifting or carrying of items weighing up to 50 pounds Occasional exposure to extreme weather conditions Exposure to potential physical danger when working in the field and/or conducting inspections and working around construction equipment, worksites and/or motor vehicles Working with dissatisfied and/or angry members of the public Incumbent Signature: Department Head: Date: Date: Senior Construction Inspector December 2015 Packet Page 98 of 456 City of EDMONDS Washington INFORMATION SERVICES MANAGER Draft Department: Finance and Information Services Pay Grade: NR-15 Bargaining Unit: Non Represented FLSA Status: Exempt Revised Date: December 2015 Reports To: Finance Director POSITION PURPOSE: The Information Services Manager is responsible for management of the day-to-day activities and long term strategic vision pertaining to the City's data and telecommunications networks, PC help desk, data backup and recovery, systems and network security, and servers and desktop computers. Provides training and direction, coordinates work flow and project assignments, serves as a working manager and a technical expert and resource for all staff assigned to the Information Services Department. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES: The following duties ARE NOT intended to serve as a comprehensive list of all duties performed by all employees in this classification, only a representative summary of the primary duties and responsibilities. Incumbent(s) may not be required to perform all duties listed and may be required to perform additional, position -specific duties. • Develop, implement and adjust long range Technology Strategic Plan with performance metrics and replacement schedules to ensure optimal use of technology assets and budgets. • Responsible for the City's disaster recovery and business continuity plan and operations. • Responsible for maintaining the overall effective operation and security of the City's telecommunications (telephony), and data network systems including design, development, and maintenance. • Verifies compatibility for integration of all potential or proposed systems involving technology infrastructure. • Ensures the City's vision and mission are considered in planning and implementing information technology systems. • Responsible for resolution of network or PC failures and problems. • Ensures that customer service and communication with customers is a priority. • Recommends and manages the Information Systems Department budget and any associated capital projects budgets. • Evaluates changes and new developments in office automation, information systems, computer hardware and software. Recommends which changes would improve the operation of City's information technology functions and negotiates with vendors and consultants to reach the best solution for the City. • Analyzes and determines "chargeback" rates to funds and departments. • Ensures compliance and accountability with federal, state and local regulations, policies and procedures. • Works collaboratively with Directors and staff to architect and guide City information systems including computer, network, storage, telecom, security and software systems. Information Services Manager December 2015 Packet Page 99 of 456 JOB DESCRIPTION INFORMATION SERVICES MANAGER • Supervises and reviews the work of assigned staff; assigns work activities and coordinates schedules, projects and programs; provides constructive feedback while reviewing and evaluating work; makes effective suggestions and recommendations. • Manages the workflow and prioritization of projects and all related staff and takes appropriate corrective action. • Serves as staff on a variety of boards, commissions and committees at the direction of the Finance Director. • Maintains awareness of new trends and developments in the fields related to area of assignment and incorporates new developments as appropriate ensuring processes, policies and practices are interpreted and applied consistently and effectively. • Coordinates policies and strategic planning under the direction of the Finance Director. Required Knowledge of: • Ability to motivate and encourage staff, builds teamwork, and fosters a sense of accomplishment. • Excellent interpersonal skills for establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with employees, other Division staff, and vendors. • Comprehensive and up-to-date knowledge of network operating system and data communication capabilities and functions, particularly those of Unix and Windows in a multi -domain environment utilizing TCP/IP and Cisco router technology. • Comprehensive and up-to-date knowledge of PC operating systems, along with common utilities for PC diagnosis. • Working knowledge of data and VOIP voice communication concepts, methods and security issues. • Strong written communication skills for composing documentation and corresponding with City employees and vendors. • Excellent organization, time management, problem solving and planning skills. • Knowledge of the functions of City departments, standard City office operations and procedures, and interdepartmental working relationships. • Ability and willingness to maintain the absolute confidentiality of all sensitive files and materials accessed, discussed or observed while in the performance of duties. • Willingness and ability to support on -call staff in the evenings and on weekends. • Maintains current knowledge of IT project management tools and techniques. • Federal, State and local laws, rules and regulations related to assigned activities and programs relevant to assigned functions. • Effective oral and written communication principles and practices to include public relations and public speaking. • Research methods and report preparation and presentation including external and management reporting requirements and report preparation. • Modern office procedures, methods and equipment including computers and computer applications such as: word processing, spreadsheets, and statistical databases. • English usage, spelling, grammar and punctuation. • Principles of business letter writing. • Principles and practices of governmental budget preparation and administration. • Supervisory and training principles, best management practices, methods and techniques. Information Services Manager December 2015 Packet Page 100 of 456 JOB DESCRIPTION INFORMATION SERVICES MANAGER Required Skill in: • Technical problem resolution • Supervising information resources and staff • Communicating effectively verbally and in writing, including public relations and public speaking. • Assessing IT resources for compatibility with current and projected needs and developing and implementing IT acquisition and integration strategy for all City departments. • Standard business platforms including Microsoft productivity software, servers and workstations. • Supervising, leading, coaching and using best management practices to improve staff performance; delegating tasks and workload assignments. • Establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with staff, management, vendors, outside agencies, community groups and the general public. • Administering program goals and objectives; implementing initiatives and recommendations in support of department and City goals. • Preparing clear and concise administrative and statistical reports and correspondence. • Adapting to changes in technology and developing organizational goals and objectives. • Developing and administering contracts for supplies, services and equipment. • Analyzing policy and making effective decisions with the approval of the Finance Director. • Evaluating processes and procedures for improvement and cost-effectiveness. • Interpreting and applying federal, state and local policies, laws and regulations. • Interpreting and administering policies and procedures sufficient to administer, discuss, resolve and explain them. • Applying program/project management techniques and principles. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Education and Experience: Bachelor's Degree in Computer Science, Business Administration or a closely related field; AND four years of significant experience in the administration or supervision of information technology systems including direct responsibility for leading, supervising or managing operations, programs and services, voice and data networks, customer web interface programs, integration responsibilities with vendors and contractors, software product design, budget/fiscal oversight/administration and project management; OR an equivalent combination of education, training, and experience. Required Licenses or Certifications: Valid State of Washington Driver's License. Must be able to successfully complete and pass a background check. Preferred Certifications: Cisco CNA Microsoft MCP WORKING CONDITIONS: Environment: • Indoor work environment. Information Services Manager December 2015 Packet Page 101 of 456 JOB DESCRIPTION INFORMATION SERVICES MANAGER Physical Abilities: • Bending at the waist, reaching overhead, above the shoulders and horizontally, stooping, kneeling, crouching, crawling or otherwise positioning oneself to accomplish tasks. • Sitting, standing or otherwise remaining in a stationary position for extended periods of time. • Reading and understanding a variety of materials. • Lifting/carrying or otherwise moving or transporting moderately heavy objects. • Hearing, speaking or otherwise communicating to exchange information in person and on the telephone. • Operating/using a computer keyboard or other office equipment. Hazards: • Contact with angry and/or dissatisfied employees and/or customers. • Prolonged exposure to glare from computer monitors. • Exposure to heavy dust in some work areas. Incumbent Signature: Department Head: Date: Date: Information Services Manager December 2015 Packet Page 102 of 456 JOB DESCRIPTION INFORMATION SERVICES MANAGER Information Services Manager December 2015 Packet Page 103 of 456 City of EDMONDS Washington ACCOUNTING MANAGER Department: Finance Salary Range NR-14 Bargaining Unit: Non Represented FLSA Status: Exempt Revised Date: January 2016 Reports To: Finance Director POSITION PURPOSE: Under the direction of the Finance Director, establishes Accounting Department goals, policies, procedures, and objectives that guide the daily activities of the division. Supervises, manages and evaluates work of assigned personnel. Manages and oversees financial reporting, payroll, accounts payable, accounts receivable, utility billing functions, fixed and capital assets, general ledger maintenance, and the automated financial system. Work duties include applying financial knowledge to liaise with vendors on requirements of financial systems; oversees compliance of City's financial accounting practices and analyze financial data to ensure successful audit the State Auditors and other government agencies. ESSENTIAL FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES: The following duties ARE NOT intended to serve as a comprehensive list of all duties performed by all employees in this classification, only a representative summary of the primary duties and responsibilities. Incumbent(s) may not be required to perform all duties listed and may be required to perform additional, position -specific duties. • Direct activities of assigned staff to ensure accurate and timely accounting and reporting of City's finances; assigns and evaluates work, monitors progress, revises procedures and work approaches to improve effectiveness. • Evaluates the performance of assigned staff; plans, coordinates and arranges for appropriate training of assigned staff; participates in the selection of accounting staff; and makes recommendations to the Department Director regarding transfers, reassignments, terminations and disciplinary actions. • Responsible for the preparation of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) prescribed by Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) and with the Budget, Accounting, and Reporting System (BARS). • Manages the audit process and serve as primary contact to the State Auditor's Office and other auditing agencies. Schedule State Auditor on -site work, act as liaison and coordinate interaction with other City staff for audit purposes, assign and establish deadlines for contributions from staff, and provide financial information required by the State Auditor's Office. • Develops, improves, implements, and enforces accounting policies and procedures in compliance with laws, Adopted City policies, codes and overall departmental goals and objectives. • Oversees the payroll function; reviews payroll activity for accuracy; reviews payroll policies and union contracts and ensures compliance. • Provides confidential research reports and analysis for the City's labor negotiating team; resolves discrepancies and authorizes corrective action; reviews monthly, quarterly and annual payroll related reports. • Oversees the accounts payable and purchasing functions; reviews departmental purchasing practices for compliance with adopted policies and procedures; audits purchase requests for selection of correct account coding; approves invoices and purchase orders; audits "open purchase order" vendor accounts for compliance with adopted policies and procedures; and, instructs other department employees on correct purchasing procedures. Accounting Manager January 2016 Packet Page 104 of 456 • Participates in the development of the annual budget, budgetary procedures, salary and benefit cost estimates, and detailed review of the preliminary and final budget documents and prepares assigned portions of the annual budget; recommends and manages the Accounting Department budget. • Coordinates grant reporting and preparation of year end grant schedules. • Oversees the utility billing function; reviews adjustment and waiver requests; ensure timely billing of utility accounts; assists with customer inquiries as needed and ensures high quality customer service by utility staff. • Oversees the City's treasury functions including timely completion of monthly bank reconciliations; maintain compliance with city investment policy and manages the City's banking relationships. • Analyzes, reviews and prepares a variety of complex financial reports and reports related to specific function; draw conclusions and make appropriate recommendations to Department Director. • Assists in the preparation of financial studies and reports including without limitation cost analysis, trend analysis, budget comparisons and quarterly reports. • Oversees the Business Improvement District billings, collections and assists with customer inquiries as needed and ensures high quality customer service by staff. • Prepares, reviews and submits a variety of financial reports to local, state and federal regulatory agencies and government offices. • May perform other duties as assigned. Required Knowledge of: • Operational characteristics, services and activities of an accounting office including business/industry principles and practices related to work assigned. • Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP); Government Accounting Standard Board (GASB); State of Washington Budgeting, Accounting and Reporting system(BARS); Government Accounting, Auditing and Financial Reporting (GAAFR) and related federal, state and local laws and codes. • Preparation of cost estimates for salaries and benefits for annual budgeting purposes. • Preparation of financial statements and comprehensive accounting reports including the CAFR and budgeting procedures. • Grant recording and reporting for compliance with BARS. • Computer hardware and automated accounting/financial systems. • Techniques in data verification and data entry and proper coding of documents. • Analysis of complex financial statements, reports and systems. • Proper principles and practices of preparing, entering and posting journal entries. • Performing a variety of professional accounting duties including financial analyses and forecasts. • Principles of customer service and public relations. • Research methods and report preparation and presentation. • Advanced mathematical computations and statistical methods adequate to correctly perform work. • Record -keeping and report writing techniques. • Effective oral and written communication principles and practices to include public relations. • Modern office procedures, methods and equipment including computers and computer applications such as: word processing, spreadsheets, and statistical databases. • English usage, spelling, grammar and punctuation. • Principles of business letter writing. • Principles and practices of governmental budget preparation and administration. Required Skill & Abilities in: • Administering assigned financial and accounting programs. • Meeting deadlines, working with multiple projects and overseeing, verifying, and validating the work of others, including those in other departments. • Operating automated accounting systems and general office equipment. • Identifying and reporting discrepancies. • Analyzing and interpreting fiscal and accounting reports. Accounting Manager January 2016 Packet Page 105 of 456 • Preparing informative and statistical reports. • Computing rapid and accurate mathematical computations. • Gathering data and verifying information. • Responding to inquiries from customers, regulatory agencies, audit firms or members of the business community. • Interpreting and applying federal, state and local policies, laws and regulations. • Utilizing personal computer software programs and other relevant software affecting assigned work and in compiling and preparing spreadsheets. • Establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with staff, management, vendors, outside agencies, community groups and the general public. • Interpreting and administering policies and procedures sufficient to administer, discuss, resolve and explain them. • Maintaining confidentiality and communicating with tact and diplomacy. • Communicating effectively verbally and in writing, including public relations. • Supervisory and training principles, methods and techniques. • Perceiving when non -routine activities are required and offers to help without needing to be asked. • Making efforts to modify workload to assist with an emergent problem, assignment or project whenever feasible. • Having a willingness to work overtime if needed to achieve division goals and as authorized by Department Director. May work an irregular schedule (morning, afternoon and evening hours). MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Education and Experience: Bachelor's Degree in Accounting, Finance, Business Administration or related field and four years of progressively responsible professional accounting experience that includes experience with general ledgers and journal entries, financial reports and recordkeeping and budget preparation in a medium to large scale finance or accounting department activities that includes three years of staff supervisory responsiblity; preferably in government/public sector accounting; OR an equivalent combination of education, training and experience. 96ipepv�iseryo referred Required Licenses or Certifications: CPA license preferred. Must be able to successfully complete and pass a background check including a credit check. WORKING CONDITIONS: Environment: • Office environment. • Constant interruptions. Physical Abilities • Hearing, speaking or otherwise communicating to exchange information in person or on the phone. • Operating a computer keyboard or other office equipment. • Reading and understanding a variety of materials. • Sitting or otherwise remaining stationary for extended periods of time. • Bending at the waist, reaching above shoulders and horizontally or otherwise positioning oneself to accomplish tasks. Hazards Accounting Manager January 2016 Packet Page 106 of 456 Contact with dissatisfied or verbally abusive individuals. Incumbent Signature: Department Head: Date: Date: Accounting Manager January 2016 Packet Page 107 of 456 AM-8237 6. B. City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2016 Time: 30 Minutes Submitted By: James Lawless Department: Police Department Type: Potential Action Information Subiect Title Presentation and Discussion of Updates to ECC 17.60 and 8.48 Relating to Parking in Residential Zones (Private Property and Public Right -of -Way) Recommendation Staff requests and recommends approval both proposed ordinances. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Over the course of the past several years, Concerns have been raised from time -to -time about perceived large numbers of vehicles parked on various single family residential lots and about extensive vehicle repair being done in front yards. These activities can feel significant to neighbors and may conflict with community expectations for front yards within single-family residential neighborhoods. Furthermore, large amounts of impervious surface for vehicle parking and driving can result in excessive storm water runoff. To address these issues, the Code Enforcement Inspector for the Development Services Department has been working cooperatively with officers in the Police Department. The existing code for residential parking is contained in Chapter 17.60 ECDC. Below are several key concerns with the existing code and specific solutions for each. Number of vehicles: Many households depend on some vehicle parking on their front driveway. However, when too many vehicles are parked or stored in the front yard of a single-family residence, the area looks like a parking lot. • The existing code prohibits the parking of more than 5 vehicles in the front yards of single-family lots (with certain exceptions) but does not specify whether that would apply only to vehicles parked outdoors or would include vehicles parked in a garage. • The proposed code amendment would prohibit the parking of more than 4 vehicles in the front yards of single-family lots (with certain exceptions) but would specify that the restriction applies only outdoors. Amount of impervious surface: Impervious surfaces — especially impervious surfaces used by motor vehicles — cause storm water runoff problems. Packet Page 108 of 456 • The existing code does not limit the area of impervious surface for outdoor parking on single-family lots. • The proposed code amendment would restrict the amount of impervious surface for outdoor parking in the front yards of single-family lots. It would do so by not allowing impervious parking surfaces to take up more than 50% of the front yard. Also single-family driveways would be limited to 24 feet in width for two -car garages or 30 feet in width for three -car garages, with certain exceptions. (NOTE: This restriction would not preclude additional storm water management measures from a more comprehensive storm water code update process in 2016.) Car repair: For most households, occasional vehicle repair in the front yard is not a neighborhood problem. But in a few neighborhoods, car repair activities can look like a business (even when there is no evidence of a business) and operate many hours of the day. • The existing code limits outdoor car repairs on single-family residential lots but is not clear about some details. • The proposed code amendment would add the following limits: (a) Outdoor car repair would be only between the hours of 8:00 am and 10:00 pm; (b) The storage of vehicle parts must be either in an enclosed structure or screened from public view. In addition, neighborhood concerns have also been raised about numerous vehicles from one household being parked on residential streets. Currently, there is no limitation as to how many vehicles that are registered to one residential unit can be parked on the public right of way in front of that residential unit. At times, this leads to numerous vehicles being parked on the right of way, at times preventing individuals from parking in front of or near their own residence. • The proposed code amendment (ECC 8.50.120) would add the following limits: o Up to two vehicles registered to a dwelling unit may be parked within one thousand feet of that dwelling unit on the public right-of-way for a period of up to 72 hours. o In no case may more than two cars registered to a dwelling unit park on the public right-of-way within one thousand feet of the dwelling unit. The proposed changes to ECC 17.60 were presented to the Planning Board during their October 28, 2015 meeting. In addition, a public hearing on the matter was held during a Special Meeting of the Planning Board on November 18, 2015, at which time the Board recommended minor changes (included in the language attached) and recommended that the item be forwarded to City Council for consideration. Attachments Ordinance Restricting Cars on Residential Property Ordinance Restricting Cars on Public Right -of -Way Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Scott Passey Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey Form Started By: James Lawless Final Approval Date: 01/08/2016 Form Review Date 01/08/2016 06:35 AM 01/08/2016 08:12 AM 01/08/2016 08:24 AM Started On: 01/07/2016 03:43 PM Packet Page 109 of 456 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING EDMONDS CITY CODE CHAPTER 17.60 REGARDING VEHICLES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF MOTOR VEHICLES ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, TO LIMIT REPAIRS ON VEHICLES IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS, AND TO REDUCE FRONT YARD IMPROVED SURFACE AREA; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Edmonds Community Development Code (ECDC) currently allows five motor vehicles to be parked on an entire residential lot, including parking within a garage; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has found that that a limit on the total number of motor vehicles on a residential lot is not necessary and a limit on motor vehicle numbers should only apply to outdoor parking in the front yard; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the front yard of single-family zoned properties should not be overly dominated by vehicle parking and impervious surfaces; and WHEREAS, a maximum of four motor vehicles parked outdoors in the front yard is an appropriate limit; and WHEREAS, the Edmonds Community Development Code currently does not limit the time period for car repair in residential zones; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that car repair may only be permitted during certain hours of the day and in an area shielded from public view; and THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 17.60.040 of the ECDC, entitled "Vehicles in residential zones," is hereby amended to read as follows (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in Packet Page 110 of 456 17.60.040 Vehicles in residential zones. A. No more than 4ve-four motor vehicles shall be parked outdoors in the front yard ofan a residential lot. Each motor vehicle must be currently licensed and operable. 1. Exemptions. vehiele for- eaeh lieensed driver- ever- five may be paf-ked at thm paffiettlar- address-, howevef:, eaeh lieensed dr-iver- ffmst have that pai4iettlaf address on his or- her- lieense. ba. This regulation does not apply to: i. Motor vehicles when parked in a completely enclosed building or carport, or in a rear yard and screened from adjacent properties and the public right-of-way by a five-foot opaque fence or by a vegetative barrier that is between five feet and eight feet in height and provides a visual barrier equivalent to an opaque fence. Corner lots and flag lots which have no rear yard may establish a screening area which qualifies for this exemption in a side yard. ii. Temporary parking fora duration not to exceed 24 hours; iii. Multi -family buildings or other complex with an approved building and parking plan; iv. Permitted construction areas; or v. Motorcycles or mopeds. B. No more than two recreational vehicles of any kind may be parked outside an approved enclosed structure anywhere on a property. If the recreational vehicle cannot be stored as described in subsection (D) of this section due to site constraints, the recreational vehicle shall be parked off site during those extended times when not in use. Only one side yard may be used for storage of recreational vehicles. For the purposes of this chapter, "recreational vehicle" means a vehicular -type unit primarily designed for recreational camping or travel use that has its own motive power or is mounted on or towed by another vehicle. The units include travel trailers, fifth -wheel trailers, folding camping trailers, truck campers, and motor homes. C. Except for property specifically zoned for and licensed by the city of Edmonds for vehicle use, vehicle storage, repair, or sales, the operating of a vehicle -oriented business is prohibited. D. An intact, appropriately licensed and operable vehicle may be parked or stored outside a structure in the manner provided below: 1. In a front yard, up to four motor vehicles, provided that the vehicle is on a driveway or other improved parking surface. The improved surface in the front yard) shall not exceed 50 percent 50%, of the required front yard area and the driveway for a two -car _ garage shall not be wider than 24 feet and, for a three -car garage shall not be wider than 30 feet, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer for public safety purposes. 2. In a side yard or rear yard; provided all vehicle parts and accessories, including but not limited to containers of oils and fluids, shall be stored in an arrr-ove s*..,,,.tufe a completely Packet Page 111 of 456 enclosed building and in compliance with all health regulations and provisions of state and federal law. MM I �M I I M.. 11 M., I 011-IN JIM w�r�rN�w�ww�rr IrwwwwN rr�wu�w��wr uw�uu�rr�r F Ws".. 1-1WA, V! unuuuiwrw�w�www.x�r�r� E. No vehicle shall be left unattended on blocks, jacks, or ramps or otherwise elevated above the ground in an unstable manner. Packet Page 112 of 456 F. The storage of any vehicle on any residentially zoned property which does not have a dwelling unit is prohibited unless the property is adjacent to a property with a dwelling unit owned by the same person. Vehicles shall be registered to that specific dwelling unit. G. Vehicles shall not intrude into the improved public right-of-way or obstruct sight visibility from adjacent driveways, private roads, or public rights -of -way. H. Vehicles equipped with liquefied petroleum gas containers shall meet the standards of the Interstate Commerce Commission. Valves or gas containers shall be closed when the vehicle is parked or stored. In the event of leakage, immediate corrective action shall be taken. I. Vehicles shall not exceed the length equal to one half of the required minimum lot width or 40 feet, whichever is less, in any residential zone district. J. Servicing, repairing, assembling, wrecking, modifying, restoring or otherwise working on vehicles outside a completely enclosed building or a carport is prohibited unless meeting the following criteria: 1. The maintenance or repair shall not exceed 30 days in any 12-month period and shall be of a vehicle registered to a resident of the property or family member. 2. Such work shall be conducted on no more than one vehicle at any one time. 3. Sueh work shall be done in an area whieh is ser-eened 4em Publie view. 3.Such work shall be done only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. 4. Such work shall not be done in the public right-of-way. 5 Storage of parts, equipment, or other supplies needed for the repair of the vehicle on the premises must be kept within an enclosed structure or in an area that is screened from public view. 6. The repair is not in association with any business use, whether licensed or not, such as buying, selling, trading, repairing or restoring of vehicles or parts thereof, unless the property is zoned for and licensed by the city of Edmonds for such business. 7. The repair is conducted in a manner which complies with all property performance standards and noise regulations. 8. The repair is conducted in a manner to not allow any vehicle fluids to enter the ground or enter any drainage_system or body of water. 9. Disposal of all waste products shall be done in accordance with Chapter 19.114 RCW. 10. Upon completion of any work allowed by this section, the property shall be cleaned of all debris, oil, grease, gasoline, cloths, rags, and equipment or material used in the work, and shall be left in such a condition that no hazard to persons, storm drain system or property shall remain. All hazardous waste shall be appropriately handled and disposed. Packet Page 113 of 456 Section 2. Chapter 17.60 of the ECDC, entitled Property Performance Standards, is hereby amended to add a new section 17.60.005, which shall read as follows: 17.60.005 Definitions For the purposes of this chapter, the following definitions apply. Improved surface means the outdoor area covered by a permanent hard surface, including concrete, asphalt, or pavers, whether pervious or impervious, which may be designed or used for driving or parking motor vehicles on any parcel of land, excluding public right of way - Required front yard means the entire lot area between the street lot line and the minimum street setback distance as identified in ECDC 16.20.030. Section 3. Chapter 21.15 of the ECDC, entitled "C" Terms, is hereby amended to add a new section 21.15.012, which shall read as follows: 21.15.012 Carport V Carport means a legally permitted structure, covered by a roof, for the sheltering of a motor vehicle. Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance, being an exercise of a power specifically 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. Packet Page 114 of 456 ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED: MAYOR DAVE EARLING APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: i JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. 1� Packet Page 115 of 456 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2016, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING EDMONDS CITY CODE CHAPTER 17.60 REGARDING VEHICLES IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF MOTOR VEHICLES ON RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, TO LIMIT REPAIRS ON VEHICLES IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS, AND TO REDUCE FRONT YARD IMPROVED SURFACE AREA; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2016. 7 'ITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Packet Page 116 of 456 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING EDMONDS CITY CODE CHAPTER 8.50 REGARDING ABANDONED AND JUNKED MOTOR VEHICLES TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF MOTOR VEHICLES REGISTERED TO A DWELLING IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Edmonds City Code (ECC) currently does not restrict the number of motor vehicles registered to a dwelling unit that may be parked on a residential street within 1,000 feet of that dwelling unit; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that a dwelling unit may only park up to two cars on the public right-of-way within 1,000 feet of the dwelling for up to 72 hours; THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 8.50.120 of the ECC, entitled "Abandoning vehicles unlawful," is hereby amended to read as follows (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in A. No person shall leave or permit a vehicle to remain on any highway or private property without the permission of the owner longer than 24 hours; provided, however, said vehicles may remain on the highway for a period not to exceed 72 hours if it is lawfully parked. B. Up to two vehicles registered to a dwelling unit may be parked within one thousand (1,000) feet of the dwelling unit on the public right-of-way for a period of up to 72 hours. In no case may more than two cars registered to a dwelling unit park on the public right-of-way within one thousand feet of the dwelling unit. Packet Page 117 of 456 Section 2. Severability. If any section, subsection, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance should be held invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Section 3. Effective Date. This ordinance is subject to referendum and shall take effect thirty (30) days after final passage of this ordinance. APPROVED: MAYOR DAVE EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED : CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: Im JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Page 118 of 456 SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. of the City of Edmonds, Washington On the day of , 2016, the City Council of the City of Edmonds, passed Ordinance No. A summary of the content of said ordinance, consisting of the title, provides as follows: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, AMENDING EDMONDS CITY CODE CHAPTER 8.50 REGARDING ABANDONED AND JUNKED MOTOR VEHICLES TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF MOTOR VEHICLES REGISTERED TO A DWELLING IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2016. 3 CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Packet Page 119 of 456 AM-8230 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2016 Time: 10 Minutes Submitted For: Shane Hope, Director Department: Development Services Type: Information Submitted By: Shane Hope Information Subiect Title Summary of 2015 CG and CG2 Development in the Highway 99 Area. Recommendation Consider the information, with any comments or questions. Previous Council Action N/A 6. C. Narrative ISSUE: A report is being provided to respond to the City Council's interest in whether the changes made to CG and CG2 zoning in late 2014 had an effect on development in the Highway 99 area. BACKGROUND: In late 2014, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 3981, which amended certain code language in Chapter 16.60 ECDC for the CG (General Commercial) Zone. CG designations make up a big portion of the land along Highway 99. (Note: the zone does not include the Medical Use zone, which is a separate district.) The key amendments for the CG district were: 1. Removing the requirement for commercial development to comprise the first two floors of development in those parts of the zone that were also designated "Highway 99 Corridor" or "High -Rise Node"; and 2. Establishing the general number of vehicle parking spaces for commercial uses to apply to all types of commercial uses, rather than having separate requirements for every type of commercial use. Some Council members also wanted to ensure that the effects of the amendments would be reviewed at a future time. So a provision was built into the ordinance (codified as ECDC 16.60.020.B) for the Development Services Director to report to the City Council by February 1, 2016, summarizing 2015 development activities for the CG and CG2 districts in the Highway 99 area. Attached is a list that summarizes the development that occurred in this area in 2015. The list does not include simple tenant improvements that retained a commercial use. The attached list shows permit applications for a 60-unit assisted living facility at 21006 72nd Ave. West and three sets of 4-unit townhomes between 7232 and 7236 212th SW. In these cases, the projects could have occurred under the prior zoning (before the recent amendments) because they were not designate Packet Page 120 of 456 "Highway 99 Corridor" or "High Rise Node." One new commercial permit application was received that would allow for a one-story shell retail building. For the residential uses, the same parking standards apply as had previously. For the one new commercial use, the generalized standards would apply, based on square footage. CONCLUSION The 2014 zoning amendments for the CG and CG2 zones in the Highway 99 area have not resulted in any significant changes to development patterns, including for vehicle parking. Meanwhile, the development of a Highway 99 Subarea Plan is underway; it will include a zoning audit for this area. Results of the audit, later in 2016, will be provided to the City Council. Attachments Attachment 1 - 2015 CG Permits Report Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date City Clerk Scott Passey 01/08/2016 06:35 AM Mayor Dave Earling 01/08/2016 08:14 AM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 01/08/2016 08:24 AM Form Started By: Shane Hope Started On: 01/07/2016 12:12 PM Final Approval Date: 01/08/2016 Packet Page 121 of 456 2015 CG and CG2 PERMITS REPORT PERMIT NUM sel_zone Primary Address BLD20150032 CG 2 21006 72ND AVE W, EDMONDS BLD20150177 CG 2 7232 212TH ST SW, EDMONDS BLD20150178 CG 2 7236 212TH ST SW, EDMONDS BLD20150179 CG 2 7234 212TH ST, EDMONDS BLD20150520 CG 2 21940 HIGHWAY 99, EDMONDS Work Description 60-UNIT ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY 4-UNIT TOWNHOME - MECHANICAL AND PLUMBING INCLUDED 4-UNIT TOWNHOME - MECHANICAL AND PLUMBING INCLUDED 4-UNIT TOWNHOME - MECHANICAL AND PLUMBING INCLUDED NEW SINGLE STORY RETAIL SHELL BUILDING. 6,162 S.F. PM_Permit_Applied 1/8/2015 2/12/2015 2/12/2015 2/12/2015 4/27/2015 Packet Page 122 of 456 AM-8221 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2016 Time: 5 Minutes Submitted For: Phil Williams Department: Public Works Committee: Submitted By: Scott Passey Type: Action Information " Subiect Title Authorization for Mayor to sign 2015-2017 Coordinated Prevention Grant Agreement with Department of Ecology. Recommendation It is recommended that the Mayor be authorized to sign the 2015-2017 Coordinated Prevention Grant Agreement. Previous Council Action Since 1995, the Edmonds City Council and staff have agreed to pursue an interlocal cooperative agreement with the City of Lynnwood to share resources in respect to their waste prevention and recycling programs. The primary source of funding for these programs is the Washington State Department of Ecology's Coordinated Prevention Grant (CPG) Agreement. These funds are offered as a 75/25 match grant. Narrative The waste prevention, recycling, and conservation programs of the City of Edmonds includes providing full-time education and outreach efforts on a wide variety of environmental issues including solid waste handling, hazardous waste disposal, recycling maximization, water conservation, and state and regional policy implementation coordination. The goal of these programs is to ensure the preservation of the health of our community environment and the protection of local watersheds and waterways from environmental pollution through proactive communication and the provision of many incidental and related public services. Fiscal Impact Fiscal Year: 2015 Revenue: $10,637 Fiscal Impact: No impact on General Fund. Expenditures are from enterprise utility fund. Fiscal Year: 2016 Revenue: $21,273 Fiscal Impact: No impact on General Fund. Expenditures are from enterprise utility fund. Expenditure: $3,545 Expenditure: $7,092 Packet Page 123 of 456 Fiscal Year: 2017 Revenue: $10,637 Expenditure: $3,545 Fiscal Impact: No impact on General Fund. Expenditures are from enterprise utility fund. Attachment 1 - DOE Grant Agreement Inbox Reviewed By Public Works Phil Williams Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey Form Started By: Scott Passey Final Approval Date: 01/06/2016 Attachments Form Review Date 01/06/2016 02:03 PM 01/06/2016 02:22 PM 01/06/2016 03:26 PM Started On: 01/06/2016 07:43 AM Packet Page 124 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds DEPARTMENT OF ECG LOGY State of Washington Agreement W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 WASTE 2 RESOURCES COORDINATED PREVENTION GRANT PROGRAM AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY AND City of Edmonds This is a binding Agreement entered into by and between the State of Washington, Department of Ecology, hereinafter referred to as "ECOLOGY" and City of Edmonds, hereinafter referred to as the 'RECIPIENT" to carry out with the provided funds activities described herein. GENERAL INFORMATION Project Title: Total Cost: Total Eligible Cost: Ecology Share: Recipient Share: The Effective Date of this Agreement is: The Expiration Date of this Agreement is no later than Project Type: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP $56,729.00 $56,729.00 $42,546.75 $14,182.25 07/10/2015 06/30/2017 Implementation Pro'ect Short Description: The RECIPIENT will continue its waste prevention and recycling (WR&R) program for citizens of the City of Edmonds with its $56,729.00 CPG monies, said program comprising promotion of all local recycling collection and drop-off services for solid and moderate -risk materials and hard -to -recycle items, review of recycling provisions for new developments, making WR&R outreach information available at a new spot in City Hall and with City website postings, holiday tree -cycling and recycling at annual outdoor public events with a collective diversion of 30 tons of material expected that includes five (5) tons of organics during the 2015-2017 grant cycle. Multi -family outreach is planned for 600 residents and 25 complexes, with 350 residents and 10 new complexes participating; success will be measured by contacts made, number of participants, number of information pieces distributed and one or more follow-up surveys to gauge effect. Project Long Description: N/A Page 1 of 19 W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 125 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Page 2 of 19 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds Overall Goal: Provide regional solutions and intergovernmental cooperation; prevent or minimize environmental contamination through planning and project implementation; and comply with state and local solid and hazardous waste management plans and laws. W2 RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 126 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-l517-Edmond-00049 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds RECIPIENT INFORMATION Organization Name: City of Edmonds Federal Tax ID: 91-6001244 DUNS Number: 040172827 Mailing Address: 121 5th Ave N Edmonds, WA, 98115 Physical Address: 121 5th Ave N Edmonds, Washington, 98020 Organization Email: jerry.shuster@edmondswa.gov Contacts Project Manager Steve Fisher Recycling Coordinator 20525 60th Avenue W Lynnwood, Washington, 98036 Email: sftsher@ci.lynnwood.wa.us Phone: (425) 670-5244 Billing Contact Lori Palmer Accounting Specialist 121 5th Ave N Edmonds, Washington, 98020 Email: lori.palmer@edmondswa.gov Phone: (425) 771-0240 Authorized David O Earling Signatory I Mayor 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, Washington, 98020 Email: dave.earling@edmondswa.gov Phone: (425) 771-0247 Page 3 of 19 W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 127 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Page 4 of 19 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds ECOLOGY INFORMATION Mailing Address: Department of Ecology Waste 2 Resources PO BOX 47600 Olympia, WA 98504-7600 Physical Address: Waste 2 Resources 300 Desmond Drive Lacey, WA 98503 Contacts Project Vicki Colgan Manager 3190 160th Ave SE Bellevue, Washington, 98008-5452 Email: vco1461(cr�,ecy.wa.gov Phone: (425) 649-7224 Financial Vicki Colgan Manager 3190 160th Ave SE Bellevue, Washington, 98008-5452 Email: vcol461(a�ecy.wa.gov Phone: (425) 649-7224 W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 128 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds Page 5 of 19 RECIPIENT agrees to furnish the necessary personnel, equipment, materials, services, and otherwise do all things necessary for or incidental to the performance of work as set forth in the Scope of Work. RECIPIENT agrees to read, understand, and accept all information contained within this entire Agreement. Furthermore, RECIPIENT acknowledges that they have reviewed the terms and conditions of this Agreement, Scope of Work, attachments, all incorporated or referenced documents, as well as all applicable laws, statutes, rules, regulations, and guidelines mentioned in this Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire understanding between the parties, and there are no other understandings or representations other than as set forth, or incorporated by reference, herein. This Agreement shall be subject to the written approval of Ecology's authorized representative and shall not be binding until so approved. The signatories to this Agreement represent that they have the authority to execute this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereby sign this Agreement Washington State Department of Ecology Program Manager Laurie Davies Waste 2 Resources City of Edmonds Date David O Earling Mayor Date W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 129 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Page 6 of 19 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds SCOPE OF WORK Task Number: Task Title: Task Cost: $56,729.00 Waste Reduciton and Recycling Education and Outreach Task Description: Continuing its WR&R program, the RECIPIENT will have six (6) related areas of focus in this grant cycle: 1. promote all recycle services offered in Snohomish County, including proper designation of unwanted household hazardous wastes (HHW), the local designated collection sites for electronic waste, fluorescent tubes and bulbs, and sites for unwanted/expired prescriptions and medicines. 2. provide outreach to the multi -family sector of the City and assist in increasing and enhancing collection of'clean' recyclables. The Project will refer to guidelines described in the state Multi -family Recycling Study in order to use best management practices for outreach as well as to investigate the inclusion of promotion of organics collection at multi -family properties. 3. continue to expand recycling collection at public events, where recycling bins will be made available for loan and collected materials will be tracked and measured. The WSU Community Sustainable Stewards will be partners on outreach for at least two of the events - the Waterfront Festival and the Taste of Edmonds - both three (3) day outdoor events, in which organics will also be collected separately. 4. partner with the local Boy Scouts to promote and facilitate their holiday tree -cycling activity, as well as support the County's initiatives to work with the certified waste haulers to harmonize services and communication formats, and to expand their waste prevention and recycling educational efforts, especially as regards school classroom workshops and presentations. 5. continue acting as part of the City review and planning processes for any proposed commercial and multi -family development that will require a plan for recycle collection areas, or an update of City policies regarding recycling. 6. maintain and update waste prevention and recycling information at City Hall's new Green Information Room and on the City website, plus place this information strategically in local newspapers, online news sources and mailed newsletters as appropriate. The RECIPIENT will note a return to the requirement for Ecology review before printing promotional or other materials to be paid for by monies granted under this Agreement. The full text of this requirement can be found in Proviso 918 under the General Terms and Conditions that follow below. The RECIPIENT may charge user fees for some items or may drop user fees to increase the volume of materials collected. The RECIPIENT will credit this grant for any revenue received from the collection of fees or commodity sales on items the grant is directly supporting. In addition, the Coordinated Prevention Grant Program does not pay for costs covered by an existing product stewardship program (such as E-cycle Washington, LightRecycle Washington, or Call2Recycle). Contact your Ecology grant project manager or consult the following website if you are unsure about a cost's grant -eligibility: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/swfa/ProductStewardshipFAQ.html. The costs of membership in civic, business, and technical/ professional organizations are allowed to the extent they are covered in the overhead rate. If the RECIPIENT does not charge overhead to this task, it may directly bill for membership(s) pre -approved by ECOLOGY. W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 130 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds Task Goal Statement: The Waste Prevention and Recycling Project is an ongoing effort to increase awareness and use of all recycle and reuse services, options and opportunities, as well as sustaining such awareness and use throughout the Edmonds community. In that there continues to be an overall concern with the quality of recyclables collected and ongoing contamination issues at curbside despite a healthy recycle participation rate in the City, this project is aimed at creating a cleaner recycled product stream. Finally, as the County's HHW facility continues to need promotion and support, there will be a focus on informing the community about the need for and the opportunity to return HHW to a facility equipped to hanle it. Task Expected Outcome: In projecting a collective diversion of an additional 30 tons of recyclable material that includes five (5) tons of organics during the 2015-2017 grant cycle, the RECIPIENT will use collection information provided by the City's certified waste haulers at least quarterly, data that shows separate tracking of garbage/ recycle/ yard waste tons collected, along with the number of accounts in the residential, multi -family and commercial sectors. Multi -family outreach is planned for 600 residents and 25 complexes, with 350 residents and 10 new complexes participating; success will be measured by contacts made, number of participants, number of information pieces distributed and one or more follow-up surveys to gauge effect. Recipient Task Coordinator: Steve Fisher Waste Reduciton and Recycling Education and Outreach Deliverables Page 7 of 19 Number Description Due Date 1.1 Q1: Conduct WR&R community outreach. Oversee public event recycling collection. Reporting and grant payment request. 1.2 Q2: Continue WR&R community outreach. Assist Scouts with tree -cycle. Reporting and grant payment request. 1.3 Q3: Continue WR&R community outreach. Reporting and grant payment request. 1.4 Q4: Continue WR&R community outreach. Oversee public event recycling collection. Reporting and grant payment request. 1.5 Q5: Conduct WR&R community outreach. Oversee public event recyclin collection. Reporting and grant payment request. 1.6 Q6: Continue WR&R community outreach. Assist Scouts with tree -cycle. Reporting and grant payment request. 1.7 Q7: Continue WR&R community outreach. Reporting and grant payment request. 1.8 Q8: Continue WR&R community outreach. Oversee public event recycling collection. Reporting and grant closeout. W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 131 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Page 8 of 19 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 132 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Page 9 of 19 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds BUDGET Funding Distribution EG160535 Funding Title: State Building Construction Account Funding Type: Grant Funding Expiration Date: Funding Effective Date: 07/10/2015 Funding Source: Title: State Building Construction Account (SBCA) Type: State CFDA: Assistance Agreement: Description: Recipient Match %: 25 InKind Interlocal Allowed: Yes InKind Other Allowed: No Is this Funding Distribution used to match a federal grant? No State Building Construction Account Task Total Waste Reduciton and Recycling Education and Outreach $ 56,729.00 Total: $ 56,729.00 06/30/2017 W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 133 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Page 10 of 19 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds FuudinLi Distribution Summary Recipient / Ecology Share Funding Distribution Name Recipient Match % Recipient Share Ecology Share Total State Building Construction Account 25.00 % $ 14,182.25 $ 42,546.75 $ 56,729.00 Total $ 14,182.25 $ 42,546.75 $ 56.729.00 AGREEMENT SPECIFIC TERMS AND CONDITIONS N/A SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS Indirect costs can be charged at a rate of up to 25% of salaries and benefits. GENERAL FEDERAL CONDITIONS If a portion or all of the funds for this agreement are provided through federal funding sources or this agreement is used to match a federal grant award, the following terms and conditions apply to you. CERTIFICATION REGARDING SUSPENSION, lEBARMENT, INELIGIBILITY OR VOLUNTARY EXCLUSION: 1. The RECIPIENT/CONTRACTOR, by signing this agreement, certifies that it is not suspended, debarred, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible or otherwise excluded from contracting with the federal government, or from receiving contracts paid for with federal funds. If the RECIPIENT/CONTRACTOR is unable to certify to the statements contained in the certification, they must provide an explanation as to why they cannot. 2. The RECIPIENT/CONTRACTOR shall provide immediate written notice to ECOLOGY if at any time the RECIPIENT/CONTRACTOR learns that its certification was erroneous when submitted or had become erroneous by reason of changed circumstances. 3. The terms covered transaction, debarred, suspended, ineligible, lower tier covered transaction, participant, person, primary covered transaction, principal, proposal, and voluntarily excluded, as used in this clause, have the meaning set out in the Definitions and Coverage sections of rules implementing Executive Order 12549. You may contact the department for assistance in obtaining a copy of those regulations.. 4. The RECIPIENT/CONTRACTOR agrees it shall not knowingly enter into any lower tier covered transaction with a person who is proposed for debarment under the applicable Code of Federal Regulations, debarred, suspended, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this covered transaction. 5. The RECIPIENT/CONTRACTOR further agrees by signing this agreement, that it will include this clause titled "CERTIFICATION REGARDING SUSPENSION, DEBARMENT, INELIGIBILITY OR VOLUNTARY EXCLUSION" without modification in all lower tier covered transactions and in all solicitations for lower tier covered transactions. 6. Pursuant to 2CFR180.330, the RECIPIENT/CONTRACTOR is responsible for ensuring that any lower tier covered transaction complies with certification of suspension and debarment requirements. 7. RECIPIENT/CONTRACTOR acknowledges that failing to disclose the information required in the Code of Federal Regulations may result in the delay or negation of this funding agreement, or pursuance of legal remedies, including suspension and debarment. W2 RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 134 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Page 11 of 19 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds 8. RECIPIENT/CONTRACTOR agrees to keep proof in its agreement file, that it, and all lower tier recipients or contractors, are not suspended or debarred, and will make this proof available to ECOLOGY before requests for reimbursements will be approved for payment. RECIPIENT/CONTRACTOR must run a search in <http://www.sam.izov> and print a copy of completed searches to document proof of compliance. Federal Funding Accountability And Transrwency Act FFATA Reporting R uirements: RECIPIENT must complete the FFATA Data Collection Form (ECY 070-395) and return it with the signed agreement to ECOLOGY. Any RECIPIENT that meets each of the criteria below must also report compensation for its five top executives, using FFATA Data Collection Form. Receives more than $25,000 in federal funds under this award; and Receives more than 80 percent of its annual gross revenues from federal funds; and Receives more than $25,000,000 in annual federal funds ECOLOGY will not pay any invoice until it has received a completed and signed FFATA Data Collection Form. ECOLOGY is required to report the FFATA information for federally funded agreements, including the required DUNS number, at www.fsrs.gov <http://www.fsrs.goy> within 30 days of agreement signature. The FFATA information will be available to the public at www.usas4ndinp,.gov <httVWwww.usaspendJng.gova. For more details on FFATA requirements, see www.fsrs.gov <hgp://www.fsrs.gov>. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1. ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS a) RECIPIENT shall follow the "Administrative Requirements for Recipients of Ecology Grants and Loans — EAGL Edition". https:Hfortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/SummaryPages/1401002.html b) RECIPIENT shall complete all activities funded by this Agreement and be fully responsible for the proper management of all funds and resources made available under this Agreement. c) RECIPIENT agrees to take complete responsibility for all actions taken under this Agreement, including ensuring all subgrantees and contractors comply with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. ECOLOGY reserves the right to request proof of compliance by subgrantees and contractors. d) RECIPIENT's activities under this Agreement shall be subject to the review and approval by ECOLOGY for the extent and character of all work and services. 2. AMENDMENTS AND MODIFICATIONS This Agreement may be altered, amended, or waived only by a written amendment executed by both parties. No subsequent modification(s) or amendment(s) of this Agreement will be of any force or effect unless in writing and signed by authorized representatives of both parties. ECOLOGY and the RECIPIENT may change their respective staff contacts and administrative information without the concurrence of either party. 3. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES RECIPIENT shall take reasonable action to avoid, minimize, or mitigate adverse effects to archeological or cultural resources. Activities associated with archaeological and cultural resources are an eligible reimbursable cost subject to W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 135 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Page 12 of 19 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds approval by ECOLOGY. RECIPIENT shall: a) Immediately cease work and notify ECOLOGY if any archeological or cultural resources are found while conducting work under this Agreement. b) Immediately notify the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation at (360) 586-3064, in the event historical or cultural artifacts are discovered at a work site. c) Comply with Governor Executive Order 05-05, Archaeology and Cultural Resources, for any capital construction projects prior to the start of any work. d) Comply with RCW 27.53, Archaeological Sites and Resources, for any work performed under this Agreement, as applicable. National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) may require the RECIPIENT to obtain a permit pursuant to Chapter 27.53 RCW prior to conducting on -site activity with the potential to impact cultural or historic properties. 4. ASSIGNMENT No right or claim of the RECIPIENT arising under this Agreement shall be transferred or assigned by the RECIPIENT. 5. COMMUNICATION RECIPIENT shall make every effort to maintain effective communications with the RECIPIENT's designees, ECOLOGY, all affected local, state, or federal jurisdictions, and any interested individuals or groups. 6. COMPENSATION a) Any work performed prior to effective date of this Agreement will be at the sole expense and risk of the RECIPIENT. ECOLOGY must sign the Agreement before any payment requests can be submitted. b) Payments will be made on a reimbursable basis for approved and completed work as specified in this Agreement. c) RECIPIENT is responsible to determine if costs are eligible. Any questions regarding eligibility should be clarified with ECOLOGY prior to incurring costs. Costs that are conditionally eligible may require approval by ECOLOGY prior to purchase. d) RECIPIENT shall not invoice more than once per month unless agreed on by ECOLOGY. e) ECOLOGY will not process payment requests without the proper reimbursement forms, Progress Report and supporting documentation. ECOLOGY will provide instructions for submitting payment requests. f) ECOLOGY will pay the RECIPIENT thirty (30) days after receipt of a properly completed request for payment. g) RECIPIENT will receive payment through Washington State Department of Enterprise Services' Statewide Payee Desk. RECIPIENT must register as a payee by submitting a Statewide Payee Registration form and an IRS W-9 form at the website, http://www.des.wa.gov/services/ContractingPurchasingBusiness/VendorPay/Pages/default.aspx. For any questions about the vendor registration process contact the Statewide Payee Help Desk at (360) 407-8180 or email payeehelpdesk(aD,des.wa.gov. h) ECOLOGY may, at its sole discretion, withhold payments claimed by the RECIPIENT if the RECIPIENT fails to satisfactorily comply with any term or condition of this Agreement. i) Monies withheld by ECOLOGY may be paid to the RECIPIENT when the work described herein, or a portion thereof, has been completed if, at ECOLOGY's sole discretion, such payment is reasonable and approved according to this Agreement, as appropriate, or upon completion of an audit as specified herein. j) RECIPIENT should submit final requests for compensation within thirty (30) days after the expiration date of this Agreement. Failure to comply may result in delayed reimbursement. 7. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL LAWS RECIPIENT agrees to comply fully with all applicable Federal, State and local laws, orders, regulations, and permits related to this Agreement, including but not limited to: a) RECIPIENT agrees to comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and policies of the United States and the State of Washington which affect wages and job safety. W2RCPG- l 517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 136 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Page 13 of 19 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds b) RECIPIENT agrees to be bound by all federal and state laws, regulations, and policies against discrimination. c) RECIPIENT certifies full compliance with all applicable state industrial insurance requirements. d) RECIPIENT agrees to secure and provide assurance to ECOLOGY that all the necessary approvals and permits required by authorities having jurisdiction over the project are obtained. RECIPIENT must include time in their project timeline for the permit and approval processes. ECOLOGY shall have the right to immediately terminate for cause this Agreement as provided herein if the RECIPIENT fails to comply with above requirements. If any provision of this Agreement violates any statute or rule of law of the state of Washington, it is considered modified to conform to that statute or rule of law. 8. CONFLICT OF INTEREST RECIPIENT and ECOLOGY agree that any officer, member, agent, or employee, who exercises any function or responsibility in the review, approval, or carrying out of this Agreement, shall not have any personal or financial interest, direct or indirect, nor affect the interest of any corporation, partnership, or association in which he/she is a part, in this Agreement or the proceeds thereof. 9. CONTRACTING FOR GOODS AND SERVICES RECIPIENT may contract to buy goods or services related to its performance under this Agreement. RECIPIENT shall award all contracts for construction, purchase of goods, equipment, services, and professional architectural and engineering services through a competitive process, if required by State law. RECIPIENT is required to follow procurement procedures that ensure legal, fair, and open competition. RECIPIENT must have a standard procurement process or follow current state procurement procedures. RECIPIENT may be required to provide written certification that they have followed their standard procurement procedures and applicable state law in awarding contracts under this Agreement. ECOLOGY reserves the right to inspect and request copies of all procurement documentation, and review procurement practices related to this Agreement. Any costs incurred as a result of procurement practices not in compliance with state procurement law or the RECIPIENT's normal procedures may be disallowed at ECOLOGY's sole discretion. 10. DISPUTES When there is a dispute with regard to the extent and character of the work, or any other matter related to this Agreement the determination of ECOLOGY will govern, although the RECIPIENT shall have the right to appeal decisions as provided for below: a) RECIPIENT notifies the funding program of an appeal request. b) Appeal request must be in writing and state the disputed issue(s). c) RECIPIENT has the opportunity to be heard and offer evidence in support of its appeal. d) ECOLOGY reviews the RECIPIENT's appeal. e) ECOLOGY sends a written answer within ten (10) business days, unless more time is needed, after concluding the review. The decision of ECOLOGY from an appeal will be final and conclusive, unless within thirty (30) days from the date of such decision, the RECIPIENT furnishes to the Director of ECOLOGY a written appeal. The decision of the Director or duly authorized representative will be final and conclusive. The parties agree that this dispute process will precede any action in a judicial or quasi-judicial tribunal. W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 137 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Page 14 of 19 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds Appeals of the Director's decision will be brought in the Superior Court of Thurston County. Review of the Director's decision will not be taken to Environmental and Land Use Hearings Office. Pending final decision of a dispute, the RECIPIENT agrees to proceed diligently with the performance of this Agreement and in accordance with the decision rendered. Nothing in this contract will be construed to limit the parties' choice of another mutually acceptable method, in addition to the dispute resolution procedure outlined above. 11. ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS a) RECIPIENTS who collect environmental -monitoring data must provide these data to ECOLOGY using the Environmental Information Management System (EIM). To satisfy this requirement these data must be successfully loaded into EIM, see instructions on the EIM website at: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/eim. b) RECIPIENTS are required to follow ECOLOGY's data standards when Geographic Information System (GIS) data are collected and processed. More information and requirements are available at: http://www.ecy.wa.gov/services/gis/data/standards/standards.htm. RECIPIENTS shall provide copies to ECOLOGY of all final GIS data layers, imagery, related tables, raw data collection files, map products, and all metadata and project documentation. c) RECIPIENTS must prepare a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) when a project involves the collection of environmental measurement data. QAPP is to ensure the consistent application of quality assurance principles to the planning and execution of all activities involved in generating data. RECIPIENTS must follow ECOLOGY's Guidelines for Preparing Quality Assurance Project Plans for Environmental Studies, July 2004 (Ecology Publication No. 04-03-030). ECOLOGY shall review and approve the QAPP prior to start of work. The size, cost, and complexity of the QAPP should be in proportion to the magnitude of the sampling effort. 12. GOVERNING LAW This Agreement will be governed by the laws of the State of Washington, and the venue of any action brought hereunder will be in the Superior Court of Thurston County. 13. INDEMNIFICATION ECOLOGY will in no way be held responsible for payment of salaries, consultant's fees, and other costs related to the project described herein, except as provided in the Scope of Work. To the extent that the Constitution and laws of the State of Washington permit, each party will indemnify and hold the other harmless from and against any liability for any or all injuries to persons or property arising from the negligent act or omission of that party or that party's agents or employees arising out of this Agreement. 14. INDEPENDENT STATUS The employees, volunteers, or agents of each party who are engaged in the performance of this Agreement will continue to be employees, volunteers, or agents of that party and will not for any purpose be employees, volunteers, or agents of the other party. 15. KICKBACKS RECIPIENT is prohibited from inducing by any means any person employed or otherwise involved in this Agreement to give up any part of the compensation to which he/she is otherwise entitled to or receive any fee, commission, or gift in return for award of a subcontract hereunder. 16. MINORITY AND WOMEN'S BUSINESS ENTERPRISES (MWBE) RECIPIENT is encouraged to solicit and recruit, to the extent possible, certified minority -owned (MBE) and W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 138 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG- I 517-Edmond-00049 Page 15 of 19 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds women -owned (WBE) businesses in purchases and contracts initiated under this Agreement, Contract awards or rejections cannot be made based on MWBE participation; however, the RECIPIENT is encouraged to take the following actions, when possible, in any procurement under this Agreement: a) Include qualified minority and women's businesses on solicitation lists whenever they are potential sources of goods or services. b) Divide the total requirements, when economically feasible, into smaller tasks or quantities, to permit maximum participation by qualified minority and women's businesses. c) Establish delivery schedules, where work requirements permit, which will encourage participation of qualified minority and women's businesses. d) Use the services and assistance of the Washington State Office of Minority and Women's Business Enterprises (OMWBE) (866-208-1064) and the Office of Minority Business Enterprises of the U.S. Department of Commerce, as appropriate. 17. ORDER OF PRECEDENCE In the event of inconsistency in this Agreement, unless otherwise provided herein, the inconsistency shall be resolved by giving precedence in the following order: (a) applicable federal and state statutes and regulations; (b) The Agreement; (c) Scope of Work; (d) Special Terms and Conditions; (e) Any provisions or terms incorporated herein by reference, including the "Administrative Requirements for Recipients of Ecology Grants and Loans"; and (f) the General Terms and Conditions. 18. PRESENTATION AND PROMOTIONAL MATERIALS ECOLOGY reserves the right to approve RECIPIENT's communication documents and materials related to the fulfillment of this Agreement: a) If requested, RECIPIENT shall provide a draft copy to ECOLOGY for review and approval ten (10) business days prior to production and distribution. b) RECIPIENT shall include time for ECOLOGY's review and approval process in their project timeline. c) If requested, RECIPIENT shall provide ECOLOGY two (2) final copies and an electronic copy of any tangible products developed. Copies include any printed materials, and all tangible products developed such as brochures, manuals, pamphlets, videos, audio tapes, CDs, curriculum, posters, media announcements, or gadgets with a message, such as a refrigerator magnet, and any online communications, such as web pages, blogs, and twitter campaigns. If it is not practical to provide a copy, then the RECIPIENT shall provide a description (photographs, drawings, printouts, etc.) that best represents the item. Any communications intended for public distribution that uses ECOLOGY's logo shall comply with ECOLOGY's graphic requirements and any additional requirements specified in this Agreement. Before the use of ECOLOGY's logo contact ECOLOGY for guidelines. RECIPIENT shall acknowledge in the communications that funding was provided by ECOLOGY. 19. PROGRESS REPORTING a) RECIPIENT must satisfactorily demonstrate the timely use of funds by submitting payment requests and progress reports to ECOLOGY. ECOLOGY reserves the right to amend or terminate this Agreement if the RECIPIENT does not document timely use of funds. b) RECIPIENT must submit a progress report with each payment request. Payment requests will not be processed without a progress report. ECOLOGY will define the elements and frequency of progress reports. c) RECIPIENT shall use ECOLOGY's provided progress report format. d) Quarterly progress reports will cover the periods from January 1 through March 31, April 1 through June 30, July l W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 139 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Page 16 of 19 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds through September 30, and October 1 through December 31. Reports shall be submitted within thirty (30) days after the end of the quarter being reported. e) RECIPIENT shall submit the Closeout Report within thirty (30) days of the expiration date of the project, unless an extension has been approved by ECOLOGY. RECIPIENT shall use the ECOLOGY provided closeout report format. 20. PROPERTY RIGHTS a) Copyrights and Patents. When the RECIPIENT creates any copyrightable materials or invents any patentable property under this agreement, the RECIPIENT may copyright or patent the same but ECOLOGY retains a royalty free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, recover, or otherwise use the material(s) or property, and to authorize others to use the same for federal, state, or local government purposes. b) Publications. When the RECIPIENT or persons employed by the RECIPIENT use or publish ECOLOGY information; present papers, lectures, or seminars involving information supplied by ECOLOGY; or use logos, reports, maps, or other data in printed reports, signs, brochures, pamphlets, etc., appropriate credit shall be given to ECOLOGY. c) Presentation and Promotional Materials. ECOLOGY shall have the right to use or reproduce any printed or graphic materials produced in fulfillment of this Agreement, in any manner ECOLOGY deems appropriate. ECOLOGY shall acknowledge the RECIPIENT as the sole copyright owner in every use or reproduction of the'materials . d) Tangible Property Rights. ECOLOGY's current edition of "Administrative Requirements for Recipients of Ecology Grants and Loans," shall control the use and disposition of all real and personal property purchased wholly or in part with funds furnished by ECOLOGY in the absence of state and federal statutes, regulations, or policies to the contrary, or upon specific instructions with respect thereto in this Agreement. e) Personal Property Furnished by ECOLOGY. When ECOLOGY provides personal property directly to the RECIPIENT for use in performance of the project, it shall be returned to ECOLOGY prior to final payment by ECOLOGY. If said property is lost, stolen, or damaged while in the RECIPIENT's possession, then ECOLOGY shall be reimbursed in cash or by setoff by the RECIPIENT for the fair market value of such property. f) Acquisition Projects. The following provisions shall apply if the project covered by this Agreement includes funds for the acquisition of land or facilities: a. RECIPIENT shall establish that the cost is fair value and reasonable prior to disbursement of funds provided for in this Agreement. b. RECIPIENT shall provide satisfactory evidence of title or ability to acquire title for each parcel prior to disbursement of funds provided by this Agreement. Such evidence may include title insurance policies, Torrens certificates, or abstracts, and attorney's opinions establishing that the land is free from any impediment, lien, or claim which would impair the uses intended by this Agreement. g) Conversions. Regardless of the agreement expiration date, the RECIPIENT shall not at any time convert any equipment, property, or facility acquired or developed under this Agreement to uses other than those for which assistance was originally approved without prior written approval of ECOLOGY. Such approval may be conditioned upon payment to ECOLOGY of that portion of the proceeds of the sale, lease, or other conversion or encumbrance which monies granted pursuant to this Agreement bear to the total acquisition, purchase, or construction costs of such property. 21. RECORDS, AUDITS, AND INSPECTIONS RECIPIENT shall maintain complete program and financial records relating to this Agreement, including any engineering documentation and field inspection reports of all construction work accomplished. All records shall: a) Be kept in a manner which provides an audit trail for all expenditures. b) Be kept in a common file to facilitate audits and inspections. c) Clearly indicate total receipts and expenditures related to this Agreement. d) Be open for audit or inspection by ECOLOGY, or by any duly authorized audit representative of the State of Washington, for a period of at least three (3) years after the final grant payment or loan repayment, or any dispute resolution hereunder. W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 140 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-I517-Edmond-00049 Page 17 of 19 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds RECIPIENT shall provide clarification and make necessary adjustments if any audits or inspections identify discrepancies in the records. ECOLOGY reserves the right to audit, or have a designated third party audit, applicable records to ensure that the state has been properly invoiced. Any remedies and penalties allowed by law to recover monies determined owed will be enforced. Repetitive instances of incorrect invoicing or inadequate records may be considered cause for termination. All work performed under this Agreement and any property and equipment purchased shall be made available to ECOLOGY and to any authorized state, federal or local representative for inspection at any time during the course of this Agreement and for at least three (3) years following grant or loan termination or dispute resolution hereunder. RECIPIENT shall provide right of access to ECOLOGY, or any other authorized representative, at all reasonable times, in order to monitor and evaluate performance, compliance, and any other conditions under this Agreement. 22. RECOVERY OF FUNDS The right of the RECIPIENT to retain monies received as reimbursement payments is contingent upon satisfactory performance of this Agreement and completion of the work described in the Scope of Work. All payments to the RECIPIENT are subject to approval and audit by ECOLOGY, and any unauthorized expenditure(s) or unallowable cost charged to this agreement shall be refunded to ECOLOGY by the RECIPIENT. RECIPIENT shall refund to ECOLOGY the full amount of any erroneous payment or overpayment under this Agreement. RECIPIENT shall refund by check payable to ECOLOGY the amount of any such reduction of payments or repayments within thirty (30) days of a written notice. Interest will accrue at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per year from the time ECOLOGY demands repayment of funds. Any property acquired under this Agreement, at the option of ECOLOGY, may become ECOLOGY's property and the RECIPIENT's liability to repay monies will be reduced by an amount reflecting the fair value of such property. 23. SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Agreement or any provision of any document incorporated by reference shall be held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other provisions of this Agreement which can be given effect without the invalid provision, and to this end the provisions of this Agreement are declared to be severable. 24. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) RECIPIENT must demonstrate to ECOLOGY's satisfaction that compliance with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act (Chapter 43.21C RCW and Chapter 197-I1 WAC) have been or will be met. Any reimbursements are subject to this provision. 25. SUSPENSION When in the best interest of ECOLOGY, ECOLOGY may at any time, and without cause, suspend this Agreement or any portion thereof for a temporary period by written notice from ECOLOGY to the RECIPIENT. RECIPIENT shall resume performance on the next business day following the suspension period unless another day is specified by ECOLOGY. 26. SUSTAINABLE PRACTICES W2RCPG- 1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 141 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Page 18 of 19 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds In order to sustain Washington's natural resources and ecosystems, the RECIPIENT is fully encouraged to implement sustainable practices and to purchase environmentally preferable products under this Agreement. a) Sustainable practices may include such activities as: use of clean energy, use of double -sided printing, hosting low impact meetings, and setting up recycling and composting programs. b) Purchasing may include such items as: sustainably produced products and services, EPEAT registered computers and imaging equipment, independently certified green cleaning products, remanufactured toner cartridges, products with reduced packaging, office products that are refillable, rechargeable, and recyclable, and 100% post -consumer recycled paper. For more suggestions visit ECOLOGY's web page: Green Purchasing, http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/swfa/epp. 27. TERMINATION a) For Cause ECOLOGY may terminate for cause this Agreement with a seven (7) calendar days prior written notification to the RECIPIENT, at the sole discretion of ECOLOGY, for failing to perform an Agreement requirement or for a material breach of any term or condition. If this Agreement is so terminated, the parties shall be liable only for performance rendered or costs incurred in accordance with the terms of this Agreement prior to the effective date of termination. Failure to Commence Work. ECOLOGY reserves the right to terminate this Agreement if RECIPIENT fails to commence work on the project funded within four (4) months after the effective date of this Agreement, or by any date mutually agreed upon in writing for commencement of work, or the time period defined within the Scope of Work. Non -Performance. The obligation of ECOLOGY to the RECIPIENT is contingent upon satisfactory performance by the RECIPIENT of all of its obligations under this Agreement. In the event the RECIPIENT unjustifiably fails, in the opinion of ECOLOGY, to perform any obligation required of it by this Agreement, ECOLOGY may refuse to pay any further funds, terminate in whole or in part this Agreement, and exercise any other rights under this Agreement. Despite the above, the RECIPIENT shall not be relieved of any liability to ECOLOGY for damages sustained by ECOLOGY and the State of Washington because of any breach of this Agreement by the RECIPIENT. ECOLOGY may withhold payments for the purpose of setoff until such time as the exact amount of damages due ECOLOGY from the RECIPIENT is determined. b) For Convenience ECOLOGY may terminate for convenience this Agreement, in whole or in part, for any reason when it is the best interest of ECOLOGY, with a thirty (30) calendar days prior written notification to the RECIPIENT. If this Agreement is so terminated, the parties shall be liable only for performance rendered or costs incurred in accordance with the terms of this Agreement prior to the effective date of termination. Non -Allocation of Funds. ECOLOGY's ability to make payments is contingent on availability of funding. In the event funding from state, federal or other sources is withdrawn, reduced, or limited in any way after the effective date and prior to the completion or expiration date of this agreement, ECOLOGY, at its sole discretion, may elect to terminate the agreement, in whole or part, or renegotiate the agreement, subject to new funding limitations or conditions. ECOLOGY may also elect to suspend performance of the agreement until ECOLOGY determines the funding insufficiency is resolved. ECOLOGY may exercise any of these options with no notification or restrictions. If payments have been discontinued by ECOLOGY due to unavailable funds, the RECIPIENT shall not be obligated to repay monies which had been paid to the RECIPIENT prior to such termination. RECIPIENT's obligation to continue or complete the work described in this Agreement shall be contingent upon W 2 RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 142 of 456 Agreement No: W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Page 19 of 19 Project Title: 2015-17 CPG City of Edmonds IMP Recipient Name: City of Edmonds availability of funds by the RECIPIENT's governing body. c) By Mutual Agreement ECOLOGY and the RECIPIENT may terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, at any time, by mutual written agreement. d) In Event of Termination All finished or unfinished documents, data studies, surveys, drawings, maps, models, photographs, reports or other materials prepared by the RECIPIENT under this Agreement, at the option of ECOLOGY, will become property of ECOLOGY and the RECIPIENT shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory work completed on such documents and other materials. Nothing contained herein shall preclude ECOLOGY from demanding repayment of all funds paid to the RECIPIENT in accordance with Recovery of Funds, identified herein. 28. THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY RECIPIENT shall ensure that in all subcontracts entered into by the RECIPIENT pursuant to this Agreement, the state of Washington is named as an express third party beneficiary of such subcontracts with full rights as such. 29. WAIVER Waiver of a default or breach of any provision of this Agreement is not a waiver of any subsequent default or breach, and will not be construed as a modification of the terms of this Agreement unless stated as such in writing by the authorized representative of ECOLOGY. GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS LAST UPDATED 12/25/2015 W2RCPG-1517-Edmond-00049 Packet Page 143 of 456 AM-8238 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2016 Time: 10 Minutes Submitted For: Rob English Submitted By: Megan Luttrell Department: Engineering Type: Forward to Consent Information 6. E. Subiect Title Presentation of a Professional Services Agreement with Louis Berger Group for design of the Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station Recommendation Forward this agenda item for approval at the January 19th City Council meeting. Previous Council Action On February 21, 2012, Council authorized the Mayor to sign a professional services agreement with SAIC (now part of the Louis Berger Group) for the Dayton Street and SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Study. Narrative The intersection of Dayton St and SR104 frequently floods. The intersection and immediate vicinity is an economic and transportation focal point for the City, Port of Edmonds, Washington Department of Transportation, Washington State Ferries, Sound Transit and private commercial property owners. The results of the Dayton Street and SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Study were presented to Council in May 2013 and the report was completed in August 2013 (Attachment 2). Briefly, the primary causes of the flooding at the intersection during moderate to large storm events are (See attached figure): The inability of Shellabarger Creek to entirely flow under SR104 into Edmonds Marsh. The flow, instead, travels north along eastern ditch line of SR104 overwhelming the storm system at the intersection with Dayton. The culverts under SR104 that are supposed to carry the Shellabarger Creek flow into the marsh are partially silted restricting their capacity. More importantly, the marsh has silted in over the years such that the flow has "no place to go." • The elevation of the Dayton St. stormwater line at the intersection of SR104 is lower than the water level in Puget Sound during much of the tidal cycle; this means the water cannot flow on its own into Puget Sound when the tide is high. One of the recommendations in the report form 2013 was to improve conveyance of stormwater to Puget Sound. This includes: • Install large pump station east in City/Port owned Beach Place parking lot to move peak flows out of the Dayton stormwater main line into Puget Sound. Packet Page 144 of 456 • Connecting south part of Salish Crossing site (that currently drains though Harbor Square and into the Marsh) and an overflow from the Harbor Square system into this pump station. A pre -design study for these improvements was authorized by the Mayor in October 2014 (professional service agreement with the Louis Berger Group for $90,977). The Pre -design report was completed in May 2015 (Attachment 3). A Request for Qualification for this project was published in the Everett Herald and the Seattle Daily Journal of Commence on October 15 and October 22, 2015 and made available on the City's website. Statements of Qualifications (SOQ) were due to the City Engineer by November 5, 2015. Three firms submitted SOQs: CHS Engineers, the Louis Berger Group, and Stantec. After evaluating the SOQ against the selection criteria, the Louis Berger Group was selected by Engineering staff. The preliminary scope of professional services with the Louis Berger Group for this project includes: 1. Completion of plans, specification, and cost estimated for the Dayton Street pump station. 2. The design will include the connecting the Salish Crossing site and Harbor Square overflows to the new pump station. 3. Completion of a pre -design to isolate the Shellabarger Creek flow from the Dayton Street flows 4. Optional tasks include the civil and geotechnical design of the water quality treatment facility and the sediment pond on the east side of SR 104. The City is pursuing grants to pay for these improvements. The City and consultant are working to finalize the scope of work and have a complete professional services agreement ready for approval for the January 19, 2016. These improvements will reduce the flooding at the intersection of Dayton Street and SR 104. Additional planned improvements will reduce the flooding frequency even further. These additional improvements include: • Daylighting Willow Creek so the Edmonds Marsh can "drain down" quicker during low tide. • Complete the isolating of the Shellabarger Creek flow from the Dayton Street flows by "forcing" the flows to go under SR104. This necessities re-establishment of a channel on the west side of SR 104 with the Edmonds Marsh Design of these improvements will be part of the next scope of work for Willow Creek Daylight/Edmonds Marsh project that will finalized in February 2016. The next scope of work for Willow Creek Daylight/Edmonds Marsh project will include (as an option) the permitting costs for the water quality treatment facility and the sediment pond on the east side of SR 104. By combining the permitting tasks for all planned (with Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of Ecology and City permits), cost savings will be realized compared to doing the permitting on a piecemeal basis. Financial Impact The base scope of work has a cost of $289,833 plus a $30,000 management reserve for a total of $319,833. The 2016 budget has $302,700 for the Dayton pump station design. The design work to connect the south part of Salish Crossing site (that currently drains though Harbor Square and into the Marsh) and an overflow from the Harbor Square system into this pump station will come out of the budget for the Edmonds Marsh/ Willow Creek Daylighting budget. This project has a 2016 budget of $487,700. Attachments Packet Page 145 of 456 Attachment 1 - Draft Scope & Budget Attachment 2 - Dayton Street & SR104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Study Attachment 3 - Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station Predesign Final Report Attachment 4 - Map of Area Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering (Originator) Megan Luttrell 01/08/2016 08:19 AM Public Works Megan Luttrell 01/08/2016 08:19 AM City Clerk Scott Passey 01/08/2016 08:23 AM Mayor Dave Earling 01/08/2016 09:43 AM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 01/08/2016 10:05 AM Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Started On: 01/07/2016 04:23 PM Final Approval Date: 01/08/2016 Packet Page 146 of 456 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station Phase II Scope of Work January 5, 2016 Introduction: As Part of the Dayton Street and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Study and the subsequent Stormwater Pump Station Predesign Report prepared for the City of Edmonds by Louis Berger (formerly SAIC/Leidos), several improvements were recommended to reduce flood hazards and improve water quality in the vicinity of Dayton Street and State Route (SR) 104. The most significant of the planned improvements is a 9 cfs pump station in a parking lot north of Dayton Street and west of Railroad Avenue, with a force main that reconnects to an existing 24-inch storm drain system upstream of an existing water quality swirl concentrator prior to discharge to the Puget Sound. Other recommended improvements included upstream conveyance modifications, water quality treatment in the vicinity of the SR 104/Dayton intersection, and a sediment pond located upstream of the Shellabarger Creek culvert crossing of SR 104. More specifically, the project elements are summarized below and their locations are shown on Exhibit A-1. Dayton Street Pump Station (Area 1) • 9 cfs duplex submersible pump station in pre -cast manhole • Precast concrete valve vault • 18-inch-diameter force main • 24-inch-diameter gravity storm drain improvement to divert existing system to the pump • Reconfigured miscellaneous small diameter storm piping near the existing water quality treatment swirl concentrator • Electrical, instrumentation, and controls including equipment housed in a NEMA rated weatherproof enclosure • Permanent standby emergency generator with weather/acoustic enclosure • Site restoration (paving, sidewalks, and brickwork) • Replacement of the existing malfunctioning tide flex gate with an "in -line" Checkmate Valve • Pump controlled using level sensing system with backup floats to provide high and low water alarms • Local audio-visual alarms that trigger autodialer. Each alarm shall require manual acknowledgement to resume operation of stopped equipment. • Connections for potential future SCADA improvements Dayton Street Storm System Modifications (Area 2) • Two New storm connections between the Harbor Square drainage system to the Dayton Street System to allow Harbor Square drainage system to overflow to the Dayton system when flood levels in the Edmonds Marsh are high • New connection between Salish Crossing and Dayton Street System • New connection between WSDOT ferry system to Dayton Street System Exhibit A Dayton Street Pump Station Page 1 Louis Berger Packet Page 147 of 456 Other Davton Street and SR 104 Imorovement Elements Shellabarger Creek Sediment Pond (Area 3 — Optional) • New sediment pond to capture sediment upstream of SR 104 • Re -orient creek alignment to better align the SR 104 culvert Water Quality Improvements Near Intersection of SR 104 and Dayton St (Area 4 - Optional) • Add a coalescing plate oil/water separator in vicinity of the intersection primarily to improve water quality from WSDOT ferry queuing area. The purpose of this contract is for the Consultant to assist the City in the implementation of the Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station Project and other improvements to reduce flood hazard and improve water quality in the vicinity. The level of design information varies for the above recommended improvements. Preliminary design is complete for the pump station. Only conceptual design is complete for the other elements. The Dayton Street Pump Station and Dayton Street Storm System Modifications are funded through the City's Capital Improvement Program. The Shellebarger Creek Sediment Ponds and Water Quality Improvements are recommended, but not funded at this time. The implementation of these latter improvements will be considered as optional tasks. TASK 1. Project Management This task includes project management activities as well as team meetings and miscellaneous coordination. 1.1 Project Administration The Consultant will conduct activities related to the ongoing management of the team and administration of the contract. Included will be activities concerning scheduling, budget monitoring, invoicing, work plan preparation, contract and subconsultant administration, and miscellaneous client coordination. 1.2 Project Meetings The Consultant will attend three (3) project meetings with the City. These meetings are in addition to meetings under the technical tasks described below. The project meetings will include discussions such as the project's technical elements and results, design reviews, and project status. Task 1 Assumptions • Project duration of 14 months is assumed (the pump station is planned to be bid in early 2017) Task 1 Deliverables • Monthly progress reports and invoices. • Attendance at up to three (3) meetings. Exhibit A Dayton Street Pump Station Page 2 Louis Berger Packet Page 148 of 456 TASK 2. Quality Assurance/Quality Control Senior independent staff will review product deliverables. This task will include internal review by Louis Berger, and independent review by BHC. TASK 3. Supplemental Survey and Potholing The Consultant (DHA) will perform both supplemental survey and potholing at the pump station site, previously surveyed under pre -design, and perform additional survey support for other planned project elements. The topographic survey will be in accordance with City of Edmonds standards. The Consultant will locate a sufficient amount of the existing right-of-way monuments to generate City street right of ways and platted lot lines. The Consultant (DHA) will also employ APS to perform the underground utility paint out and potholing as described below. The Consultant will rely on the City of Edmonds to paint out their underground storm, sewer and water facilities. The planned areas where supplemental survey will be collected are shown on Exhibit A-1. These are described below. Area 1— Dayton Pump Station. This area was surveyed during predesign. Supplemental survey includes survey of potholes, a half day of survey to pick up any new information and respond to comments on the survey, and to pick up ordinary high water level along the beach near the outfall. Area 1 includes an assumption of up to 10 potholes. Area 2 - This area includes isolated portions along Dayton Street. The areas to be surveyed are associated with Dayton Street Storm System Modifications described above (i.e. connecting Harbor Square and Salish Lodge drainage to Dayton system). Area 2 includes an assumption of up to 4 potholes. Note that the area where the proposed connection from the ferry queuing lane to the Dayton St system has already been surveyed. Area 3 (Optional) — This area includes survey for the proposed sediment pond. The budget is based upon survey of a 200'x 200' area. This includes topographic survey, surface features, and utility locates. No potholes are assumed for this area. This will also include survey of wetland delineation and ordinary high water as flagged by environmental team member. Survey of this area will not proceed until authorized by the City. Area 4 (Optional) — This area includes survey for the water quality facility. The survey for the water quality facility assumed a 50'x50' area. It is noted that the exact location may be modified from previously shown. The Consultant will not survey this area until approval from the City. This includes topographic survey, surface features, and utility locates. No potholes are assumed for this area at this time. Survey of this area will not proceed until authorized by the City. Task 3 Assumptions • Rights of Entry will be obtained by the City • Total number of potholes will not exceed 14 Task 3 Deliverables • Draft Surveys in AutoCad format • Final Surveys in AutoCad format Exhibit A Dayton Street Pump Station Page 3 Louis Berger Packet Page 149 of 456 TASK 4. Pump Station Geotechnical Investigations Final design geotechnical services (by Shannon and Wilson, S&W) will include exploring the subsurface conditions at the proposed Dayton Pump Station and the stormwater oil control vault to be located in the vicinity of the ferry queuing area. The scope of work under this task summarizes the effort of geotechnical investigations at both sites. However, for budgeting purposes, they are separated into subtask 4.1 for the pump station and 4.2 for the water quality facility. The geotechnical investigations for the water quality facility are optional, and will not proceed until authorized by the City. An observation well will be installed in the Pump station boring to facilitate groundwater level measurements and testing to determine the hydraulic conductivity of the aquifer at the pump station location. Geotechnical recommendations for design of these structures and associated piping will be prepared based on the results of the new explorations and existing soil boring data. Geotechnical services will include the following: • Subsurface Exploration Plan and Utility Locates • Consultant will prepare a subsurface exploration plan for review and approval by The Louis Berger Group and City of Edmonds. Following approval of the exploration plan, Consultant will locate the underground utilities at the soil boring locations through the One -Call Utility Locate service and through review of available utility survey plans provided by Luis Berger prior to drilling. Subsurface Explorations Consultant will perform two geotechnical borings to maximum depths of 30 feet at the pump station and 20 feet at the stormwater oil/water vault. Borings will be performed using a truck -mounted drill rig and mud rotary drilling techniques. The borings will be located adjacent to the proposed pump station and oil/water separator vault. The pavement at each boring location will be cored by concrete coring company working under a subcontract with Consultant (S&W). Consultant will provide traffic control flaggers and signage during coring and drilling at the oil control vault. Consultant assumes no traffic control will be required at the proposed pump station. A Consultant (S&W) representative will log the soils during drilling and collect soil samples. Drill cuttings will be drummed and removed from the site, assuming the cuttings are clean. Consultant will notify the City if any contaminated soils are encountered. If hydrocarbon contamination is suspected, Consultant will seek additional authorization from the City for laboratory testing and proper disposal of the cuttings. The drilling subcontractor will install an observation well in the pump station boring. Consultant hydrogeologist will perform a slug test in the well. Slug tests provide an approximation of the hydraulic conductivity of soils in the immediate vicinity of the screened section of the tested well. The groundwater observation well will be furnished with a steel well cover installed flush with the pavement surface. It is assumed that decommissioning of the well will be incorporated into the contract documents and be done by the construction contractor, unless otherwise directed by the City. Laboratory Testi Exhibit A Dayton Street Pump Station Page 4 Louis Berger Packet Page 150 of 456 Consultant will perform geotechnical laboratory testing of selected soil samples retrieved from the borings. Laboratory testing will consist of a total of 4 grain size distribution analyses and will be conducted in the Consultant's (S&W) laboratory in Seattle. Review of Design Plans and Specifications Consultant (S&W) will conduct review of the geotechnical related plans and specification for consistency with geotechnical report. This will include review of dewatering specification. Task 4 Deliverables • Draft Geotechnical Reports Following the completion of the subsurface explorations and laboratory testing, Consultant will prepare two independent draft geotechnical reports, one for the pump station and one for the optional water quality facility. The draft reports will present a description of the subsurface conditions at the pump station and oil/water separator vault site including boring logs, slug testing results and laboratory testing results. The report will contain geotechnical conclusions and recommendations for the following: • Seismic design in accordance with 2015 International Building Code, • Shoring design recommendations and types of shoring methods, • Temporary construction dewatering methods and groundwater discharge flow estimates. • Foundation support for pump station and vault including allowable bearing pressures, approximate elevation of competent bearing soil, and total estimated settlement, • Design recommendations for buoyancy uplift resistance, • Lateral at -rest earth pressures for buried structures, • Reuse of on -site soils as backfill • Final Geotechnical Report After all comments are received from the design team members and City of Edmonds, Consultant will revise the draft geotechnical reports as necessary and produce final geotechnical reports. One hard copy and an electronic copy of the report will be provided. • Geotechnical review of 90 Percent Plans and Specifications TASK S. Supplemental Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modeling Task 5 is an allowance task to allow the use of the Phase I model to either; • Assess any changes in pump water level settings, controls, or other changes in configuration, and/or • To continue evaluating alternative configurations in the upstream system that may be considered such as improvements to the Shellebarger Creek Culvert, berming east of SR 104, or Exhibit A Dayton Street Pump Station Page 5 Louis Berger Packet Page 151 of 456 other isolation options. The current future alternatives model will be updated to reflect the proposed improvements. Task 5 Assumptions • Consultant shall work with the City to define modeling needs. • Effort will be limited to the available budget. If additional budget is needed, it will be taken from the Management Reserve following approval of the City. Task 5 Deliverables • Modeling Results in the form of a brief 2-3 page memo. • Final Improved Conditions Model (with recommended improvements) TASK 6. Pump Station Permitting This task includes permitting support and development for the pump station and Dayton Street storm drainage modifications, which include replacement of the existing tide flex valve with an "in -line" Checkmate valve. Permitting will be led by S&W with assistance from Louis Berger. Permitting tasks associated with these improvements consist of the following: • Shoreline Permit — Consultant will coordinate with the City of Edmonds to determine if the improvements meet Shoreline Exemption Criteria outlined in Washington Administrative Code Chapter 173-27. If the exemption criteria is not met, Consultant will complete the application for a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (SSDP). The enclosed cost estimate assumes reparation of a SSDP application and attendance of the associated public hearing will be required. • A SEPA Checklist will be prepared for the City to process. • Critical Areas Checklist — For the purposes of this scope, it is assumed that activities associated with the pump station will occur within wetland and stream buffer. The City requires that a Critical Areas Checklist be submitted for work within critical area buffers. The City will then review the checklist, make a precursory site visit, and make a determination of the subsequent steps necessary to complete the work. Exhibit A Dayton Street Pump Station Page 6 Louis Berger Packet Page 152 of 456 Task 6 Assumptions: • The City plans to replace the existing tide flex gate with an "in -line" Checkmate backflow prevention valve placed within the pipe system. Thus no grading or new structural work to remove the existing tideflex valve is required and it can be considered maintenance with no JARPA or BA being required. Should it be determined later that these permits are required, this effort shall be funded through the management reserve or contract change order. • No cultural resources review is assumed for this project. • Permitting fees will be paid by the City. • No separate permitting will be required from WSDOT for the connection to Dayton. The City will coordinate approvals for this connection. • The Shoreline permit will cover all City required permits (i.e., no separate stormwater permit or grading/drainage permit) • Discipline specific analyses or studies will not be required for the completion of the SEPA Checklist. • The City will not require critical areas studies beyond what is currently available for the processing of the critical areas checklist. • Any required informational display materials required for the public hearing will be based upon readily prepared graphics from the predesign report or design tasks.. Task 6 Deliverables: • Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Application • SEPA Checklist • Critical Areas Checklist TASK 7. Pump Station Plans, Specifications and Estimate The Consultant will prepare engineering design plans, technical specifications (including Division 1) and construction cost estimates for the Pump Station. This will include the Dayton Street Storm Modifications described above. The pre -design document already prepared is assumed to reflect preliminary design at approximately 15 percent completion. The City will be provide the City standard front end of the specifications and the Consultant will combine the City's front end with the special provisions and the schedule of price (bid item summary). Task 7.1— Prepare 60 Percent Plans, Specifications and Cost Estimate The Consultant will prepare a 60 percent design submittal for review. The 60 percent submittal shall include drawings, a construction cost estimate, and technical specifications. The basis for the technical specifications will be the 2014 Standard Specifications prepared by the Washington State Department of Transportation and the American Public Works Association (Standard Specifications), combined with applicable GSI specifications for the pump station electrical, mechanical, and controls. The Consultant will write sections of the technical specifications for items not included in the Standard Specifications. Text will be in MS Word format. The budget includes one meeting with the City to review design issues. This task will include coordination with Snohomish County PUD for the new electrical service. In addition, emergency generator requirements will be confirmed including: performing a load study, generator sizing and fuel usage calculations, identify noise requirements, and desired length of operation (BHC). Exhibit A Dayton Street Pump Station Page 7 Louis Berger Packet Page 153 of 456 It is anticipated that Twenty-three (23) drawings will be sufficient to adequately describe the work and the engineering fee estimate is based on the following drawing list: 1. G-1 Title sheet, location map, and index of drawings. 2. G-2 Legend, abbreviations, and general notes 3. C-1 General Arrangement Plan and survey notes 4. C-2 Pump Station Area Site Plan: 1"=30' 5. C-3 Temporary Erosion Control Plan 6. C-4 Tempoary Erosion Control Notes and Sequencing 7. C-5 Plan and Profile Sheets (1"= 40' at half size), Sht 1 of 2 8. C-6 Plan and Profile Sheets (1"= 40' at half size), Sht 2 of 2 9. C-7 Pump Station Plan and Sections (including valve vaults), Sht 1 of 2 10. C-8 Pump Station Plan and Sections (including valve vaults), Sht 2 of 2 11. C-9 Drainage Details (replace tideflex valve, new valve, trench section, etc.), Sht 1 of 2 12. C-10 Drainage Details (Dayton Street system connections, O/F manholes), Sht 2 of 2 13. C-11 Restoration details 14. C-13 Utility Relocation details and Utility Pothole Data 15. C-14 Landscape plan, details and notes 16. E-1 Symbols and Legend 17. E-2 One -Line Diagram 18. E-3 Electrical Equipment Elevations 19. E-4 Pump Station Electrical Power and Control Plan 20. E-5 Wet Well Details 21. E-6 Control Panel Details 22. E-7 Control Wiring Diagrams 23. E-8 Generator Details Task 7.2 — 90 Percent Plans, Specifications and Cost Estimate The City will provide written comments to the Consultant on the 60 percent design submittal. It is assumed that the City comments will be combined on one set of plans and specifications and that conflicting comments between City departments will be resolved. In addition, the City will provide the City -prepared portion of the Contract Documents for review by the Consultant. The Consultant will address the 60 percent comments in the 90 percent Plans, Specifications and Cost Estimate submittal. Task 7.3 — Final Plans, Specifications and Cost Estimate The City will provide written comments to the Consultant on the 90 percent design submittal. It is assumed that the City comments will be combined on one set of plans and specifications. The Consultant will address the 90 Percent comments in the Final (bid ready) Plans, Specifications and Cost Estimate submittal. Task 7 Deliverables Exhibit A Dayton Street Pump Station Page 8 Louis Berger Packet Page 154 of 456 • 60 Percent Plan submittal (1 full size and 3 half-size set of plans, 3 sets of Project Specifications, and cost estimate) • 90 Percent Plan submittal (1 full size and 3 half-size set of plans, 3 sets of Project Specifications, and cost estimate) • Final Bid -Ready Plan Submittal (1 full size and 3 half-size set of stamped, camera-ready "paper" original plans and specifications, 3 sets of Project Specifications, and cost estimate) • CD containing digital files of plans, specifications, and estimate. Task 7 Assumptions • For the budget, it is assumed that the pump station design will move forward as described in the preliminary design without significant changes (to type, size, location) and that subsequent 90%, and Final plans advance without significant changes. • It is assumed that private utilities in the right of way or City park area will be responsible for relocating their facilities and that the contractor will need to coordinate with these utilities. It is assumed the City will send the 60 percent plans to affected private utilities with request for relocation planning. It is assumed that the City will take the lead in coordinating the effort with the utility companies. • The City will be responsible for printing and reproduction beyond the number of copies provided. • The City will perform coordination required with property owners. • No construction easements are needed for the pump station. • It is assumed that the traffic control plan can be described in the specifications and that standard traffic control details will be included in the contract documents and that no design drawings are required. • A specific dewatering plan will not be included. Criteria for dewatering will be provided in the specifications based upon the geotechnical report. The Contractor will be responsible for developing a detailed dewatering plan. • No temporary or permanent irrigation design is included. • Shoring designs will be developed by Contractor. • Roadway pavement marking restoration will be specified to match existing and it is assumed design of pavement restoration marking is not required. • Operation and Maintenance Manual will be developed under subsequent phase. TASK 8. Management Reserve Allowance of Management Reserve Funds for extra scope items only when authorized by City. ADDITIONAL OPTIONAL TASKS (Not included in Current Contract Budget) Under separate contracts, the Consultant previously developed conceptual improvements that work together with the pump station to reduce flood hazards and improve water quality. These include: • Isolation of Shellabarger Creek Overflows from Dayton Street System, • Shellabarger Creek Sediment Pond, and • Water Quality Improvements Near Intersection of SR 104 and Dayton St Exhibit A Dayton Street Pump Station Page 9 Louis Berger Packet Page 155 of 456 Under the Additional Optional Design Tasks, Consultant may be asked to complete design of the Shellebarger Creek Sediment Pond and the Water Quality Improvements near the SR 104/Dayton Street intersection. The following optional task description included the assumption that the City (or other City Consultant) will work with WSDOT in advance to arrive at general agreement on the design type, size and location. Preliminary Budgets have been established for budgeting purposes, however, additional scoping details would be needed to finalize these budgets. OPTIONAL TASK 1. Additional Project Management It is assumed that this work would be conducted in 2017 requiring additional project management. A preliminary budget for Project Management and meetings is presented in the budget. It is assumed that the additional work would not extend beyond 2017. OPTIONAL TASK 2. Quality Assurance/Quality Control This task would include quality assurance and quality control for the design of the sedimentation pond and water quality improvements. OPTIONAL TASK 3. Additional Survey The optional survey tasks were previously described above. OPTIONAL TASK 4. Geotechnical Investigations for Water Quality Facility The optional geotechnical tasks were previously described above. OPTIONAL TASKS. Supplemental Hydrologic/Hydraulic Modeling The optional task would include supplemental modeling to assess the improvements. OPTIONAL TASK 6. Supplemental Permitting Support The optional task would include permit support for the sedimentation pond and water quality facility. The preliminary budget assumes that the City or other City Consultant takes the lead on obtaining permits. OPTIONAL TASK 7. Other Dayton St/SR 104 Improvement Plans, Specifications and Estimate Task 7.1— Prepare 30 Percent Plans, Specifications and Cost Estimate This optional task includes design of the water quality facility and sediment pond on the east side of SR 104. The Consultant will prepare a 30 percent design submittal for review. The 30 percent submittal shall include drawings, a construction cost estimate, and an outline for the technical specifications. The basis for the technical specifications will be the 2014 Standard Specifications prepared by the Washington State Department of Transportation and the American Public Works Association (Standard Specifications). The Consultant will write sections of the technical specifications for items not included in the Standard Specifications. Text will be in MS Word format. The City will provide the City's standard front end specifications and the Consultant will be responsible for incorporating the technical specifications into complete Contract Documents. Exhibit A Dayton Street Pump Station Page 10 Louis Berger Packet Page 156 of 456 ■ The budget includes one meeting with the City to review design issues. It is anticipated that thirteen (13) drawings will be sufficient to adequately describe the work and the engineering fee estimate is based on the following drawing list: 1. G-1 Title sheet, location map, and index of drawings. 2. G-2 Legend, abbreviations, and general notes 3. C-1 General Arrangement Plan (1"=200'), Survey Notes, and Utility Pothole Data 4. C-2 Water Quality Facility Site Plan (1"=30') 5. C-3 Water Quality Facility Sections and Profiles 6. C-4 Water Quality Facility Details 7. C-5 Temporary Erosion Control Plan 8. C-6 Temporary Erosion Control Plan Notes and Details 9. C-7 Sediment Pond Plan and Profile (1"= 40' at half size) 10. C-8 Sediment Ponds Sections and Details 11. C-9 Sediment Plan Stream Diversion and Details 12. C-10 Sediment Plan Grading Point Table 13. Sediment Pond Planting Plan, Details, and Schedule Task 7.2 — 60 Percent Plans, Specifications and Cost Estimate The City will provide written comments to the Consultant on the 30 percent design submittal. It is assumed that the City comments will be combined on one set of plans and specifications and that conflicting comments between City departments will be resolved. In addition, the City will provide the City -prepared portion of the Contract Documents for review by the Consultant. The Consultant will address the comments and submit 60 percent Plans, Specifications and Cost Estimate. Task 7.3 — 90 Percent Final Plans, Specifications and Cost Estimate The City will provide written comments to the Consultant on the 60 percent design submittal. It is assumed that the City comments will be combined on one set of plans and specifications. The Consultant will address the comments and 90 percent Plans, Specifications and Cost Estimate. Task 7.4 — Final Plans, Specifications and Cost Estimate The City will provide written comments to the Consultant on the 90 percent design submittal. It is assumed that the City comments will be combined on one set of plans and specifications. The Consultant will address the comments and submit Final (bid ready) Plans, Specifications and Cost Estimate. Task 7 Deliverables • Deliverables shall be similar to the Task 7 Design effort. Exhibit A Dayton Street Pump Station Page 11 Louis Berger Packet Page 157 of 456 Task 7 Assumptions • Assumptions are similar to the Task 7 Design Assumptions for the pump station, except as noted below. • The design of the Isolation of Shellabarger Creek Overflows from Dayton Street System is not included in this task (and assumed to be done by the City or other Consultant) • Permitting support is not included in this task and is assumed to be done by the City or other Consultant as part of the Willow Creek Daylighting project) • Consultant will provide an easement drawing for the sediment pond for City's use in acquiring easement. • Temporary irrigation design for landscape restoration, if needed, will be done by the Contractor as a requirement in the specifications. • Design modification to the SR 104 culvert are not included Exhibit A Dayton Street Pump Station Page 12 Louis Berger Packet Page 158 of 456 City of Edmonds Washington Project: Dayton Street Pump Station Phase 11 and Related Improvements Project Budget Task Summary January 5, 2016 Summary - Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station Project Char es Phase Task LB LB Travel Subcontractor (Subtotal - Total No. No. Phase/Task Labor Labor Revenue Expenses Charges All Expenses) Charges 1 0 Project Management & Admin 0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1 1 Project Administration 72.00 $10,816 $0 $0 $0 $10,816 1 2 Project Meetings 16.00 $2,814 $100 $0 $100 $2,914 2 1 Quality AssurancelQaulityControl 18.00 $4,271 $0 $1,791 $1,791 $6,062 3 0 Survey & Potholing 0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 3 1 Survey - Area 1 (Pump Station) 4.00 $591 $0 $10,331 $10,331 $10,922 3 2 Survey - Area 2 (Dayton Connections) 4.00 $591 $50 $8,126 $8,176 $8,767 3 3 3a Survey - SR 104 Half Road and Shoulc 0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 3 3 3b Survey - Sediment Pond (Optional) 0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 3 4 Water Quality Facility (Optional) 0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 4 0 Geotechnical Investigations 0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 4 1 Geotechnical Investigations - Pump Statio 8.00 $1,407 $0 $15,204 $15,204 $16,611 4 2 Geotech. Invest. - WQ Fac. (Optional) 0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 5 1 Supplemental HIH modeling 40.00 $5,078 $0 $0 $0 $5,078 6 1 Pump Station Permittting 64.00 $8,627 $0 $23,525 $23,525 $32,152 7 0 Pump Station Planss, Spec.s & Est. 0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 7 1 Prepare 60% Plans, Specs., & Est. 540.00 $73,901 $50 $29,831 $29,881 $103,782 7 2 Prepare 90% Plans, Specs., & Est. 322.50 $44,065 $50 $17,439 $17,489 $61,554 7 3 Prepare Final Plans, Specs., & Est. 126.50 $17,248 $0 $13,929 $13,929 $31,177 0.00 $0 $0 $0 Subtotals 1,215.00 1 $169,407 1 $250 1 $120,176 1 $120,426 1 $289,833 Management Reserve Total Contract Value Summary - Dayton Street Optional Tasks (Preliminary Budgets - Not Contracted at This Time) $30,000 $319,833 Charges LB LB Travel Subcontractor (Subtotal - Phase Task Total No. No. Phase/Task Labor Hrs Labor Revenue Expenses Charges All Expenses) Charges 1 0 Project Management & Admin 0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 1 1 Project Administration 48.00 $7,211 $0 $0 $0 $7,211 1 2 Project Meetings 8.00 $1,407 $50 $0 $50 $1,457 2 1 Quality AssurancelQaulityControl 8.00 $1,898 $0 $0 $0 $1,898 3 1 3b Survey - Sediment Pond (Optional) 4.00 $591 $0 $3,406 $3,406 $3,997 3 2 Water Quality Facility (Optional) 4.00 $591 $0 $1,797 $1,797 $2,388 4 2 Geotech. Invest. - WQ Fac. (Optional) 8.00 $1,407 $0 $8,937 $8,937 $10,344 5 1 Supplemental HIH modeling 30.00 $3,913 $0 $0 $0 $3,913 6 2 Permitting for Sed Pond/WQ Fac. 64.00 $8,627 $0 $0 $0 $8,627 7 0 Design for Sed Pond & WQ Fac. 0.00 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 7 1 Prepare 30% Plans, Specs., & Est. 187.50 $25,468 $0 $0 $0 $25,468 7 2 Prepare 60% Plans, Specs., & Est. 219.50 $29,762 $50 $0 $50 $29,812 7 3 Prepare 90% Plans, Specs., & Est. 235.50 $31,909 $0 $0 $0 $31,909 7 4 Prepare Final Plans, Specs., & Est. 89.00 $12,068 $0 $0 $0 $12,068 0.00 $0 $0 $0 Subtotals 1 905.501 $124,850 1 $100 1 $14,1401 $14,240 1 $139,090 Packet Page 159 of 456 City of Edmonds Washington Project: Dayton Street Pump Station Phase H and Related Improw Labor Revenue Summary January 5, 2016 Enter names and rates from left to right Task Totals Select Name, Class, OR Giseburt, Cammermeyer, Greenberg, Michael S Weber, Mary B Jon W Vasquez, Ruben Ellis, James Allisona B Olson, Arlene T Nelson, Ralph D Classification° Default Rate ** $235.16 $190.67 $145.14 $116.26 $97.86 $131.10 $93.91 $294.36 $0.00 Manual Rate $206.50 $190.75 $145.20 $116.29 $97.90 $131.13 $93.93 $237.24 Phase Task Default or Manual Manual Manual Manual Manual Manual Manual Manual Manual Default No. No. Phase/Task Hours Revenues Effective Labor Rate $206.50 $190.75 $145.20 $116.29 $97.90 $131.13 $93.93 $237.24 $0.00 1 0 Project Management & Admin 0.00 $0 1 1 Project Administration 72.00 $10,815 36.00 36.00 1 2 Project Meetings 8.00 8.00 16.00 $2,814 2 1 Quality Assurance/Qaulity Control 18.00 18.00 $4,270 3 0 Survey & Potholing 0.00 $0 3 1 Survey - Area 1 (Pump Station) 1.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 $591 3 2 Survey - Area 2 (Dayton Connections) 1.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 $591 3 3 3a Survey - SR 104 Half Road and Shoulc 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 $0 3 3 3b Survey - Sediment Pond (Optional) 0.00 $0 3 4 Water Quality Facility (Optional) 0.00 $0 4 0 Geotechnical Investigations 0.00 $0 4 1 Geotechnical Investigations - Pump Statio 4.00 4.00 8.00 $1,407 4 2 Geotech. Invest. - WQ Fac. (Optional) 0.00 $0 5 1 Supplemental H/H modeling 4.00 8.00 24.00 4.00 40.00 $5,077 6 1 Pump Station Permittting 8.00 16.00 40.00 0.00 64.00 $8,627 7 0 Pump Station Planss, Specs & Est. 0.00 $0 7 1 Prepare 30% Plans, Specs., & Est. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 $0 7 2 Prepare 60% Plans, Specs., & Est. 62 0 158 215 0 89 16 0 540.00 $73,901 7 3 Prepare 90% Plans, Specs., & Est. 36 0 100 121 0 49 16 0 322.60 $44,065 7 4 Prepare Final Plans, Specs., & Est. 14 0 41 46 0 18 8 0 126.44 $17,248 0.00 $0 Total Hours 174.24 8.00 331.52 421.76 24.00 155.52 82.00 18.00 0.00 1215.04 Total Revenues $35,981 $1,526 $48,137 $49,046 $2,350 $20,393 $7,702 $4,270 $169,405 Packet Page 160 of 456 Dayton Street and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Study City of Edmonds August 2013 ■ SAIC. 4 HERRERA Packet Page 161 of 456 Dayton Street and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Study City of Edmonds July 2013 (* HERRERA Packet Page 162 of 456 This report has been prepared for the use of the client for the specific purposes identified in the report. The conclusions, observations and recommendations contained herein attributed to SAIC constitute the opinions of SAIC. To the extent that statements, information and opinions provided by the client or others have been used in the preparation of this report, SAIC has relied upon the same to be accurate, and for which no assurances are intended and no representations or warranties are made. SAIC makes no certification and gives no assurances except as explicitly set forth in this report. © 2013 SAIC All rights reserved. Packet Page 163 of 456 Dayton Street and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Study City of Edmonds Table of Contents Table of Contents List of Tables List of Figures Section 1 INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE ........................1-1 Existing System Description............................................................................. 1-7 Investigations and Findings............................................................................. 1-16 FieldSurvey........................................................................................... 1-16 Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modeling ..................................................... 1-16 Selection of Design Event...................................................................... 1-22 Section 2 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION .............. 2-1 Screening of Potential Alternatives................................................................... 2-1 Alternative Descriptions.................................................................................... 2-1 Alternative Evaluation..................................................................................... 2-11 Hydraulic Performance.......................................................................... 2-12 CostEstimates........................................................................................ 2-14 Environmental Implications and Permitting .......................................... 2-16 Constructability...................................................................................... 2-19 Maintenance........................................................................................... 2-19 Utility Conflict Potential........................................................................ 2-19 Compatibility with other Site Uses ........................................................ 2-20 Future Compatibility with Sea Level Rise ............................................. 2-20 Other Considerations............................................................................. 2-21 Summary and Recommendations.................................................................... 2-22 Recommended Alternative..................................................................... 2-25 Implementation of Recommended Alternative ...................................... 2-26 List of Appendices A Hydrologic/Hydraulic Analysis B Field Survey Results C Preliminary Screening of Alternatives D Cost Estimates E City Council and Public Open House Materials File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIE. Packet Page 164 of 456 Table of Contents List of Tables Table 1-1: SWMM Model Validation Runs............................................................ 1-18 Table 1-2: SWMM Model Results........................................................................... 1-20 Table 1-3: Frequency Analysis for Design Events Water Surface Elevations ........ 1-21 Table 1-4: Design Events......................................................................................... 1-22 Table 2-1: Alternatives For Detailed Alternative Evaluation .................................... 2-3 Table 2-2: Alternative Evaluation Criteria.............................................................. 2-12 Table 2-3: Results of Alternative Modeling............................................................ 2-14 Table 2-4: Cost Estimate Summary......................................................................... 2-15 Table 2-5: Low Medium and High Sea Level Rise Projections .............................. 2-21 Table 2-6: Alternative Evaluation Summary........................................................... 2-23 Table 2-7: Recommended Alternative Implementation and Cost Estimate Summary............................................................................................... 2-27 Table A-1: HSPF Basin PERLND, IMPLND and Total Areas ................................ A-9 Table A-2: Impervious and Effective Impervious Fractions for Study Area ZoningTypes....................................................................................... A-10 Table A-3: Peak Flow Predictions for 2-, 10-, 25- and 100-Year Return Intervals, cfs......................................................................................... A-12 Table A-4: SWMM Model Validation Runs.......................................................... A-20 Table A-5: SWMM Model Results......................................................................... A-25 Table A-6: Design Events....................................................................................... A-27 Table A-7: Alternative Modeling Results............................................................... A-30 Table C-1: City of Edmonds Initial List (Draft) of Alternatives for Screening — December 6, 2012..........................................................C-3 ZZ SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 165 of 456 Table of Contents List of Figures Figure 1-1. Map of Study Area.................................................................................. 1-3 Figure 1-2. Dayton St/SR 104 Intersection looking south, Dec 03, 2007.................. 1-5 Figure 1-3. Salish Crossing Parking Lot adjacent to Dayton Street/SR 104 Intersection looking NW, Dec 12, 2010................................................ 1-5 Figure 1-4. Salish Crossing Parking Lot and Dayton Street/SR 104 Intersection looking NW, November 19, 2012....................................... 1-6 Figure 1-5. Study Area Drainage System.................................................................. 1-9 Figure 1-6. Drainage System Boundaries................................................................ 1-11 Figure 1-7. Tide Gate at Edmonds Marsh Outfall to Puget Sound (open) ............... 1-15 Figure 2-1. Alternative 1.......................................................................................... 2-29 Figure 2-2. Alternative 2.......................................................................................... 2-31 Figure 2-3. Alternative 3.......................................................................................... 2-33 Figure 2-4. Alternative 4.......................................................................................... 2-35 Figure 2-5. Recommended Alternative.................................................................... 2-37 Figure A-1. HSPF Subbasin Map............................................................................. A-5 Figure A-2. HSPF Model Schematic........................................................................ A-7 Figure A-3. Shellabarger Creek - SR 104 Culvert .................................................. A-18 Figure A-4. Model Validation with the November 2012 Storm ............................. A-22 Figure A-5. SWMM Frequency Plots..................................................................... A-24 Figure A-6. Ferry Queuing Area Drainage............................................................. A-31 File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC W Packet Page 166 of 456 Section 1 INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The intersection of Dayton Street and State Route (SR) 104 in downtown Edmonds has flooded on numerous occasions in recent years resulting in disruptions to traffic and ferry operations. Figure 1-1 shows the location of the intersection and the general vicinity. The intersection is in a low-lying area and is drained by a pipe system extending west along Dayton Street to outfall to Puget Sound. The outfall is equipped with a valve to prevent tidal flow from backing up into the drainage system. The intersection is located just north of the Edmonds Marsh, a contiguous low-lying area. Shellabarger Creek crosses SR 104 and enters into the marsh about 1,000-feet south of the intersection. The flow from Shellabarger Creek through the crossing is affected by a number of factors that can inhibit flow entering the marsh such as tidal conditions, sediment and debris accumulation, and an abundance of vegetation that clogs the creek channel. As such, during storm events, flow through the culvert backs up causing water levels on the east side of SR 104 to rise. The high water levels cause Shellabarger Creek to inundate a low lying wetland on the east side of SR 104 and then overflow north to the Dayton Street and SR 104 intersection. This flow, in combination with the runoff from other tributary area to the intersection, can overwhelm the existing Dayton Street stormwater conveyance system and result in periodic flooding, particularly when high tides coincide with heavy rainfall. Figures 1-2, 1-3, and 1-4 show the intersection and adjacent area flooding during three recent large storm events. High water levels in the marsh have also contributed to flooding of portions of the parking area and two structures at the nearby Port of Edmonds' Harbor Square development. File:001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Packet Page 167 of 456 Section 1 This page intentionally left blank. 1-2 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Altematives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 168 of 456 325 0 325 650 Creek/Ditch Figure 1-1 1 =325 • Scale Feet Pipe/Culvert Project Area SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Packet Page 169 of 456 INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Figure 1-2. Dayton St/SR 104 Intersection looking south, Dec 03, 2007 Figure 1-3. Salish Crossing Parking Lot adjacent to Dayton Street/SR 104 Intersection looking NW, Dec 12, 2010 File: 001712 126512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 1-5 Packet Page 170 of 456 Section 1 Figure 1-4. Salish Crossing Parking Lot and Dayton Street/SR 104 Intersection looking NW, November 19, 2012 The intersection and surrounding area is an economic and transportation focal point for the City, with the Harbor Square development, the west access to the Edmonds waterfront, the ferry traffic queuing area, and future development opportunities to the northwest of the intersection (Salish Crossing). The Edmonds Marsh offers a rich and diverse environmental amenity that is an attraction for the community. As such, recurrent flooding of the area is a major concern. The purpose of this investigation is to perform field topographic survey and hydrologic and hydraulic analyses to help determine the cause(s) of flooding as well as to identify and evaluate alternative improvements to reduce flooding. As a separate project, the City of Edmonds working with staff at Earthcorps (formerly operating as People for Puget Sound) to explore the feasibility of maximizing Chinook salmon rearing habitat in the Edmonds Marsh through daylighting the connection between Willow Creek and Puget Sound. The project is partially funded by the Washington State Recreation and Conservation Office (RCO). Some of the survey and hydrologic and hydraulic modeling data developed as part of this flood study was used as a part of the fish habitat study. In addition, alternative improvements developed for flood hazard reduction were identified in many cases to be consistent with improvements being proposed as a part of the daylighting project. 1-6 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Altematives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 171 of 456 INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Existing System Description The focus of this study is on two drainage systems that become interconnected during high flows, the Dayton Street drainage system and the Edmonds Marsh. These systems are described in more detail below. Figure 1-5 presents a graphic of the existing drainage systems in the project area. Figure 1-6 depicts drainage basin boundaries tributary to the project area drainage systems. The Dayton Street system drains an approximate 33.5-acre area that extends east as far as 3rd Avenue S and as far north as Main Street. From the intersection with SR 104, the system extends west along Dayton to Admiral Way, where it continues west through an easement on Port of Edmonds property. At the outlet to Puget Sound, the system includes a tide gate (tide flex valve) that prevents flows backing up in the system during high tides. Approximately 80-feet west of Admiral Way the drainage system was modified in 2004 to include a water quality facility. This construction changed the system profile and added a swirl concentrator water quality treatment facility. While water quality has been improved with this facility, a disadvantage is that it backs up water (about five -feet high) upstream of its location so much of the system is constantly under water. The intersection for Dayton Street and SR 104 is low-lying and the low point of the road is at about elevation 10, whereas high tides are often in the range of 9 to 11-feet (NAVD88) and sometimes higher during extreme tides. The intersection receives flow from both the north and the south. Drainage from the north includes both SR 104 to about Main Street as well as drainage from the Washington State Ferry's north queuing area. The drainage from the south includes overflows from a wetland area on the east side of SR 104 that enters a pipe system located between SR 104 and the City of Edmonds wastewater treatment plant. One of the smaller contributing pipe systems that connect to the Dayton Street system near its west end (west of Admiral Way) collects runoff from low-lying paved parking areas. The low-lying parking areas were subject to ponding during very high tides, so the City installed both a small (approximate 0.5 cfs) pump station and a tide flex valve where it connects to the Dayton Street system. The small pump station only operates during very high tides and discharges directly west to Puget Sound. There are two small areas that lie adjacent to Dayton Street but to do not drain to the Dayton Street drainage system. These include a portion of the Salish Crossing property which is located north of Dayton Street and west of SR 104 (See Subbasin 420 on Figure 1-6) and Harbor Square which is located south of Dayton Street and west of SR 104 (See subbasin 410 on Figure 1-6). The drainage from the southwestern portion of Salish Crossing is directed south across Dayton Street and connects to a pipe system within Harbor Square. The Harbor Square drainage system includes storm drains that extend south and west to the Edmonds Marsh. File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 1-7 Packet Page 172 of 456 Section 1 This page intentionally left blank. 1-8 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Altematives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 173 of 456 n il 300 0 300 600 figure -5 —O Scale Feet Stud Area Drainage System SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLTNiiiiiiiiiiii • Y 9' Y Packet Page 174 of 456 130 4201 \;....�10�I 1 l I 140 400 � �see� y 20 34( 1� A 300 Legend N Dayton Street Shellabarger Creek Willow Creek 0 625 1,250 2,500 Feet r-1 Edmonds Marsh Q WSDOT/Edmonds Way I JI IF ,I 1. I' I � I � cubed, USDE.11IUSG'S' ity Figure 1-6. Stormwater System HSPF Basins Streams and Ditches City of Edmonds Dayton St and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Study INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE In addition to recurrent flooding, stormwater quality within the Dayton Street system is also a concern. While the treatment system near the outfall has certainly resulted in some improvements, the City has noted that heavy oil accumulations have been observed in the drainage system in catch basins near the intersection of SR 104 and Dayton Street. A likely contributing factor is the ferry system holding lanes that have a high volume of cars (that often have engines idling as they move through the queuing lanes or are parked for extended periods waiting for the next ferry boat). The Edmonds Marsh is generally bound by Harbor Square to the north, the BNSF railroad to the west, SR 104 to the east, and the Union Oil Company of California (Unocal) property to the south. Union Oil Company of California is a wholly owned subsidiary of Chevron. For the purposes of this report, the property ownership will be referred to as the "Unocal" property. The marsh is owned by the City. It receives drainage from Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek plus adjacent local area that drain directly to the marsh. Most of the basin lies within the City of Edmonds. However, a portion of the Willow Creek basin lies within the Town of Woodway. Shellabarger Creek enters the marsh through two parallel 48-inch by 72-inch arch culverts under SR 104, located about 1,000-feet south of Dayton Street. Willow Creek enters the marsh through a culvert at Pine Street west of SR 104 near the Trout Unlimited hatchery. It joins with Shellabarger Creek within the marsh. Both Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek historically flowed in defined channels that joined and ran northwest along the Unocal property. However, over time sediment deposition and extensive cattail growth has choked and filled in these former creek alignments, such that the creeks disperse and spread out as they enter the south and east sides of the marsh. This has eliminated an open creek channel that would allow fish to move between the creeks and the downstream estuarine marsh. The sediment built up has affected the Shellabarger Creek culverts crossing of SR 104 such that they have approximately 1.3-2-feet of sediment built up at the inlet and outlet. It was also noted that the elevations of the sediment build up downstream of the culvert (at elevation 9.2 +/-) is higher than the pipe system that connects the fresh water wetland on the east side of SR 104 to the Dayton Street system (See node 18 on Figure 1-5). As a result, Shellabarger Creek low flows are often diverted north to the Dayton Street system rather than follow its historic path into the marsh. The sediment deposition also reduces the culverts conveyance capacity. The western side of the marsh predominately estuarine and is drained by Willow Creek as it extends south approximately 600-feet between the Unocal property and the BNSF railroad. Along this section of open stream channel, the creek receives drainage from the Unocal property which includes discharges from two stormwater detention ponds under the Unocal property industrial stormwater permit SO-002953C (Chevron, 2013). The Unocal site has residual contamination resulting from historic operations, and is being managed under an Agreed Order with the Washington State Department of Ecology. Near the south end of this open channel, Willow Creek passes through a short embankment that has two culverts including a 36-inch CMP culvert and a 22-inch diameter steel culvert. The two culverts are placed within a short berm crossing File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 1-13 Packet Page 176 of 456 Section 1 Willow Creek (See Nodes 29 and 30 on Figure 1-5). The purpose of these culverts and gates is not specifically known and the ownership of these culverts and gates, although located on the Unocal property, is being evaluated. One of the gates is partially closed and the other is fully closed. At the outlet of these culverts, Willow Creek turns west and crosses the railroad through dual 42-inch diameter culverts. These culverts discharge to a short section of open channel on the west side of the railroad where the creek enters a 600-foot-long 48-inch diameter CMP pipe extending south to a stormwater vault south of the Edmonds marina. The pipe in the vault is equipped with a 48-inch tide (flap) gate which is controlled by a manually operated pulley system (see node 34 on Figure 1-5 and Figure 1-7). During the wet season from November to mid -March, the tide gate is closed to prevent flow entering the system during high tides and exacerbating high water levels in the winter. The tide gate is opened during the drier part of the year, mid -March to November. From this tide gate vault, the 48-inch pipe system extends another approximate 1000-feet to outfall in Puget Sound. The overall tributary to the marsh is 833 acres with approximately 378 acres from the Shellabarger Creek basin and 393 acres from the Willow Creek basin. The Shellabarger Creek basin is heavily developed with single and multifamily land use, the stream passes through culverts in many locations, and most of the open reaches are located in landscaped residential areas. The Willow Creek basin is less densely developed than the Shellabarger basin. The marsh offers a unique, valuable and diverse salt water habitat community. There have been a number of studies regarding the marsh. Some of these include: ■ Biological Condition of the Edmonds Waterfront and Preliminary Feasibility Considerations for Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration (2009, People For Puget Sound) ■ Evaluation of Habitat Benefits and Impacts Associated with the Proposed Daylighting of the Outlet from Edmonds Marsh (1998, Pentec) ■ Edmonds Stream Inventory and Assessment (2002, Pentec) ■ Marsh Topographic Surveys (2008, WSDOT) A separate system, the WSDOT Edmonds Way pipe drainage system, extends west crossing underneath Willow Creek near its entrance to the 48-inch diameter outfall pipe. At this location, the Edmonds Way pipe system is 72-inch diameter and roughly parallels the Willow Creek outfall pipe to outfall in Puget Sound. The Edmonds Way drainage basin comprises 870 acres and collects runoff from Edmonds Way east of the Shellabarger and Willow Creek basins (shown as basin 700 on Figure 1-6). One of the manhole structures along this pipe system is located near Willow Creek as it enters its outfall pipe system. This system is of interest to Willow Creek because it is known to overflow into Willow Creek during storm events. The manhole has been observed to be "geysering" and the City also notes that its manhole cover is often off the manhole following large storms. It is of interest to Willow Creek and the marsh because it can contribute runoff volume. 1-14 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 177 of 456 INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Figure 1-7. Tide Gate at Edmonds Marsh Outfall to Puget Sound (open) As previously noted there is a separate ongoing study to explore the feasibility of maximizing Chinook salmon rearing habitat in Edmonds Marsh through daylighting the connection between Willow Creek and Puget Sound. The Willow Creek Daylighting Study, (S&W, 2013) reports that pocket estuaries, such as the Edmonds Marsh, can provide invaluable juvenile Chinook with rearing, feeding, shelter, and physiological transition zones. However, the current system outlet conditions, that include a tide gate and long pipe, severely limit fish passage into the creek/marsh system. The Willow Creek Daylighting project represents a rare restoration opportunity, and further, that the Willow Creek Daylighting Project is currently on the Water Resource Inventory Area (WIRA) 8 three-year habitat work schedule (LD. M3223) and is listed as a Tier 1 project. Tier 1 designation includes the highest quality remaining habitat, and the greatest Chinook use (S&W, 2013). Other notable features are bridge crossings of the BNSF/Sound Transit Railroad in anticipation of the Willow Creek Daylighting Project. The bridge crossings were constructed around 2010 by Sound Transit as part of mitigation for loss of wetland and streams filled as a result of Sound Transit's third commuter rail improvements with BNSF for the Sounder Train. The location of the culverts is shown on Figure 1-1. These culverts are not in use at the present time. File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 1-15 Packet Page 178 of 456 Section 1 Investigations and Findings This section includes a discussion of the study findings with respect to the existing flooding conditions. The identification of possible alternatives to reduce flood hazards is discussed in the next section. Field Survey In order to provide data for hydraulic modeling of the Dayton Street and Edmonds Marsh systems, field survey was necessary. The City had some information from prior engineering studies and system designs. However, additional information was necessary. The field survey work included some cross sections through the Edmonds Marsh in order to validate a prior 2008 survey that was completed by the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) as well as specific pipe system information where City as -built information was unavailable. The specific data source and supplement survey information collected is described in Appendix A. The actual survey results are contained within Appendix B. Hydrologic and Hydraulic Modeling The Hydrologic Simulation Program - FORTRAN (HSPF) model was developed to generate a long term time series of runoff tributary to both the Dayton Street drainage system and the Edmonds Marsh. Major tributary systems include Shellabarger Creek, Willow Creek and portions of urban drainage systems north of Dayton Street. The time series of runoff from the different systems was developed in order to be routed through an unsteady state hydraulic model, XP-SWMM, to examine historical coincidence of high tides, high rainfall events and flooding, and to examine the performance of alternative improvements to reduce flood hazards within the study area. The advantage to using long-term hydrology with unsteady state hydraulic modeling is that it can inherently account for the interaction of tidally influenced flood events by using historical tides along with historical precipitation. HSPF is a continuous hydrologic model for watersheds that produces a long-term time history of runoff based upon historical precipitation and runoff from different soil types and land uses. HSPF routes flow downstream through stream reaches (defined as FTABLEs that include relationships between stage, storage and discharge) that account for attenuation from system storage but do not account for the effects of dynamic routing such as tidal impacts on the Edmonds Marsh and Dayton Street systems. Thus the application of HSPF for this study is to develop long-term time history of flows to both the Dayton Street drainage system and the Edmonds Marsh which are then routed through the XP-SWMM hydraulic model. Appendix A contains a complete description of the hydrologic and hydraulic model development. The detailed system modeled is shown on Figure 1-5 and includes both the Dayton Street system west of the intersection with SR 104 and Edmonds Marsh from where Shellabarger Creek enters the low-lying wetland on the east side of SR 104 to the Willow Creek outlet. 1-16 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 179 of 456 INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The area contributing runoff to the Edmonds Marsh and Dayton Street systems was divided into sixteen subbasins using GIS maps showing aerial photographs, contours and the City of Edmond surface water drainage system. The subbasins are presented on Figure 1-6. The Edmonds Way Basin was also included in order to assess the potential for overflows from the WSDOT trunk line near Willow Creek. Precipitation data used in the hydrology model was obtained from the Alderwood rain gauge located approximately 5.5 miles northeast of the intersection of Dayton St/SR 104. The City of Edmonds has daily rain gage data from 2000 to the present. This data was compared with the Alderwood rain gage and it was concluded that the data from the Alderwood gauge is acceptable for the analysis (See discussion in Appendix A). Other input data (such as evaporation data, runoff parameters from soil characteristics, soil water storage, and soil interflow) were taken from the Scriber Creek HSPF model in the City of Lynnwood. The Scriber Creek HSPF modeling was undertaken as a significant modeling effort initially by Snohomish County, and then later updated by the City of Lynnwood. Land use and subbasin characteristics were developed using GIS analysis tools and GIS shapefiles for soil, slope and vegetation and impervious cover. Each subbasin is described by a unique combination of soil, slope and land cover. Tables A-1 and A-2 in Appendix A list the subbasins and their areas with the unique soil, slope and land cover combination. Once the HSPF model was complete, continuous runoff hydrographs were developed and exported so that they could be routed by the SWMM hydraulic model. In addition to flow as data input, the SWMM model requires tidal data. Tidal data was downloaded from NOAA's historic database at the Puget Sound station 9447130 located in Seattle. The datum for these elevations is NAVD88. In order to determine whether an adjustment for elevation differences between Seattle and Edmonds was necessary, both a comparison of NOAA predicted tides for one year was done and a comparison between gaged tides were done. The NOAA predicted tides comparison generally predicted a difference of about 0.4 ft lower tide in Edmonds than in Seattle. However, as a part of the Willow Creek Daylighting project, a gage was installed in the Port of Edmonds Marina. A comparison of gaged Edmonds and Seattle tides showed the Edmonds high tides being closer to the gaged Seattle tide than the 0.4 ft reduction. As a result, the Seattle gaged tidal data was used in the analysis. One of the key elements of the SWMM model is that the outflows from the marsh are controlled by a tide gate in the system (See Figure 1-5 for location and Figure 1-7 for Photograph). As previously noted the gate is manually operated by the City and is set in the closed position between November and mid -March and in the open position the remainder of the year. Once the SWMM model was set up and HSPF flows were routed through the model, specific storm periods were run in order to provide a validation of model results. To do this a review of historical observed high water marks and comparison with simulated model results was performed. Identifying historical observed high water levels included a review of flooding records, discussions with maintenance staff, obtaining input from Washington State Department of Ferries, and reviewing gage File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 1-17 Packet Page 180 of 456 Section 1 data available from the Willow Creek Daylighting Project. In general, there were limited historical events having clearly accurate known elevations of flooding. These included the following: ■ December 3, 2007 Flood. Two records of high water marks were obtained which matched well with each other. These included anecdotal reports of flooding just above the finish floor of the ferry toll booths (which were subsequently surveyed), and surveyed elevation collected by Reid Middleton in the vicinity of the Harbor Square buildings (documented in a November 12, 2009 memorandum to the City of Edmonds). ■ December 12, 2010 Flood. A photograph taken during the storm was used to get an approximate high water mark. It was noted that following this storm event, the City determined that some debris in the pipe might have affected the system response. This storm was still used for validation, recognizing that there is some uncertainty about the system performance and the time the photo was taken. ■ November 19, 2012 Flood. As a part of the Willow Creek Daylighting Project, three gages had been installed at various locations in the project vicinity. These locations are shown on Figure 1-5. One of the locations is on Shellabarger Creek on the east side of SR 104; one is in the west portion of the marsh, and one in the Edmonds Marina. In addition, field measurements of flooding depth were taken by SAIC staff during this flood. Table 1-1 provides the validation results. Table 1-1: SWMM Model Validation Runs Simulated Simulated Observed Maximum Simulated Flooding at Low point at Depth Storm Date High Water High Tide Elevation in OHWM Intersection of Flooding Mark (NAVD88) the Marsh Location at Intersection 12/3/2007 12.4 31 / 12.42 11.34 11.93 12.26 10.1 2.16 12/12/20103 10.544 10.52 9.66 11.26 10.1 1.16 11 /19/2012 11.55 11.21 10 11.42 10.1 1.32 11 /19/2012 11.856 11.21 10 11.95 10.1 1.32 11 /19/2012 10.397 11.21 10 10 10.1 1.32 (1) Based on data collected by Reid Middleton (11/12/09) in vicinity of Harbor Square Buildings (2) Based on reported standing water in WSDOT ferry toll booth (inches above floor); floor surveyed at 12.2 (3) Note there may have been partial blockages in Dayton System that could have affected flows (4) Observed high water from Dayton Roadway Shoulder, photograph and survey by Perteet 2012 (5) Based on field measurement by SAIC staff on Dayton Street south of Salish Crossing (6) Gaged flow with data logger (LTC#3) near the SR 104 culvert inlet (7) Gaged flow with data logger (LTC#2) on the west side of the marsh 1-18 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 181 of 456 INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Figure A-4 in Appendix A shows a graph of the simulated water levels in the marsh and Shellabarger Creek in comparison to the gaged water levels for the 11/19/12 flood. While there are some differences between the marsh water levels (0.4 ft at the peak), the water levels at the Shellabarger Creek entrance to the SR 104 culvert were very close (within 0.1 ft). In addition, the simulation response through the overall storm event shows a good representation of the gaged data. While some improvements in the system response could be made, it would be difficult without more gaged data of storm events. Therefore, for the purposes of this study, it was concluded that the model reflects a valid representation of the system and can be used for evaluating alternatives. Upon concluding that the model simulations reflect a reasonable simulation of the system in comparison with historical observations, the SWMM model was then used to simulate 30 years of flows to conduct frequency analysis of water levels in the marsh. The frequency analysis was done at three locations within the model: ■ Node 60. Representing the marsh west of SR 104 ■ Node 40. Representing Shellabarger Creek east of SR 104 ■ Node 15. Representing the intersection of Dayton Street and SR 104 The results are presented in Table 1-2. This table also includes the high tide during each flooding event and its time of occurrence for comparison with the time of maximum water surfaces at other locations. File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 1-19 Packet Page 182 of 456 Section 1 Table 1-2: SWMM Model Results HY Hide Tide* Time of High Tide Max WSE at Inter- section Time of Max at Intersection Max WSE at SR 104 culvert Max WSE in Marsh Time of Max in Marsh Gate Open? 2012 10.96 11 /19/2012 10:00 AM 11.42 11/19/2012 2:15 PM 11.95 10.00 11/19/2012 9:30 PM No 2011 10.35 12/12/201010:00 AM 11.26 12/12/201012:15 PM 11.68 9.66 12/12/2010 2:45 PM No 2010 9.27 5/28/2010 7:00 PM 10.38 5/28/2010 3:00 PM 11.21 8.77 5/28/201010:00 PM Yes 2009 2008 9.78 11.34 11/12/2008 3:00 PM 12/3/20071:00 PM 10.48 12.26 11/12/2008 3:00 PM 12/3/2007 3:00 PM 11.25 12.35 8.71 11.93 11/12/2008 5:00 PM 12/3/2007 3:00 PM No No 2007 8.42 12/15/2006 3:00 AM 10.66 12/15/2006 6:15 PM 11.53 9.11 12/15/2006 6:00 AM No 2006 11.42 1/30/2006 6:00 AM 11.17 1/30/2006 7:30 AM 11.38 10.19 1/30/2006 5:45 PM No 2005 9.21 11/2/2004 9:00 AM 10.45 11 /2/2004 10: 00 AM 11.26 8.94 11/2/20041:00 PM No 2004 9.85 10/20/2003 3:00 PM 10.87 10/20/2003 5:00 PM 11.60 9.12 10/20/2003 8:00 PM No 2003 11.24 1/2/2003 6:00 AM 10.42 1/2/2003 7:00 AM 11.05 8.68 1/2/2003 5:15 PM No 2002 10.96 1/7/200211:00 AM 10.49 1/7/200212:15 PM 11.35 9.15 1/7/2002 2:30 PM No 2001 9.81 8/22/2001 8:00 PM 10.35 8/22/2001 8:00 PM 11.03 8.62 8/22/2001 10:00 PM Yes 2000 9.63 11/12/1999 8:00 AM 10.33 11 /12/1999 10:00 AM 10.93 8.50 11/12/1999 6:00 PM No 1999 10.76 12/1/1998 2:00 PM 10.41 12/1/1998 3:00 PM 11.09 8.64 12/1/1998 6:00 PM No 1998 9.23 1/23/199812:00 PM 10.40 1/23/19981:30 PM 11.20 8.91 1/23/1998 5:30 PM No 1997 11.66 1/1 //1997 10:00 AM 11.14 1/1 /1997 12:30 AM 11.63 11.04 1/1 /1997 12:30 AM No 1996 10.08 4/23/199611:00 PM 10.82 4/23/1996 4:00 PM 11.51 9.52 4/24/19961:30 AM No 1995 11.04 12/20/1994 7:00 AM 10.47 12/20/1994 8:00 AM 11.11 9.07 12/20/199410:30 AM No 1994 10.72 12/13/1993 6:00 AM 10.34 12/13/1993 7:00 AM 11.03 8.93 12/13/1993 9:00 AM No 1993 8.96 8/23/199310:00 PM 10.37 8/23/199310:30 PM 11.06 8.45 8/24/199312:00 AM Yes 1992 10.01 1/31/1992 4:00 AM 10.35 1/31/1992 5:00 AM 10.88 8.81 1/31/1992 3:00 PM No 1991 11.05 12/4/1990 7:00 AM 10.84 12/4/1990 9:00 AM 11.23 9.05 12/4/1990 6:15 PM No 1990 9.57 1/9/1990 2:00 PM 10.37 1/9/1990 2:30 PM 11.02 8.89 1/9/1990 5:15 PM No 1989 10.00 1/9/1989 7:00 PM 10.25 1/9/1989 8:00 PM 10.74 7.94 1/9/198910:30 PM No 1988 11.02 12/6/1987 7:00 AM 10.50 12/6/1987 9:00 AM 11.06 9.21 12/6/1987 6:30 AM No 1987 11.86 2/1/1987 7:00 AM 10.62 2/1/1987 9:00 AM 10.92 8.75 2/1/1987 7:00 AM No 1986 10.30 1/18/1986 10: 00 AM 11.24 1/19/19861:00 AM 11.77 10.48 1/19/19861:00 AM No 1985 10.36 12/14/198410:00 AM 10.48 12/14/1984 3:00 PM 11.24 8.30 12/14/198410:15 PM No 1984 10.19 11/20/1983 5:00 AM 10.38 11/20/1983 6:30 AM 11.02 9.05 11/20/1983 5:30 AM No 1983 11.16 12/3/1982 7:00 AM 10.41 12/3/1982 8:30 AM 10.90 8.90 12/3/1982 7:00 PM No 1982 11.08 12/5/1981 11:00 AM 10.40 12/5/1981 12:30 PM 10.95 8.62 12/5/1981 2:30 PM No 'Nearest high tide to time of max at intersection. 1-20 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 183 of 456 INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Using the elevations in Table 1-2, frequency analysis was performed for each the three locations. The frequency analysis was done using the log -Pearson Type III probability distribution best -fit line through the yearly simulated water levels. The log -Pearson Type III distribution is a statistical technique used in hydrologic studies for fitting a best -fit curve through a series of yearly peak data (e.g. elevations or flows) to predict the design flood for a site. Typically, it is desirable to have a long (e.g., 30-year record of peak elevations) to be used as the input data for a high level of confidence in the analysis results. The probabilities of floods of various magnitudes can hence be extracted from the log -Pearson Type III best -fit curve. Additionally, this curve enables the extrapolation of the values for events with return periods beyond the observed flood events. The frequency analysis results and the predicted 2-year, 10-year, 25-year and 100-year elevations at the three study points are shown in Table 1-3 (Figures of the frequency plot are included in Appendix A). Table 1-3: Frequency Analysis for Design Events Water Surface Elevations (ft, NAVD88) Node Location 2-year 10-year 25-year 100-year 60 Marsh West of SR 104 8.95 10.20 10.93 12.11 40 Marsh/Wetland East of 11.19 11.73 12.00 12.40 SR 104 15 Intersection of Dayton 10.53 11.21 11.62 12.27 St/SR 1040) Flooding begins to occur at elevation 10.0. Some of the conclusions that can be drawn from these results and a review of the modeling are as follows: ■ The intersection floods frequently. The simulations indicate some ponding occurred in all of the 30 years and it is likely that it occurred multiple times in any given year (the results only show the worst flooding of the year). ■ The marsh west of SR 104 is simulated to have water surface elevations, in particular between the 2-year and 25-year event are lower than east of the SR 104 Shellabarger Creek crossing. The conclusion that can be drawn from this is that if the Shellabarger SR 104 culvert was cleaned and/or upsized and the channel downstream of the culvert was restored to allow free flow west of the culvert it would reduce the overflows from Shellabarger Creek that extend north to the intersection that exacerbates flooding. ■ Marsh flooding is not necessarily always coincident with extreme high tides. Only three of the top seven floods (in terms of elevations in the marsh) coincide with high tides in excess of 10-feet. Storm events having significant runoff volume can result in the severe flooding without high tides. ■ The WSDOT pipe system overflows into the marsh. However, the overflows (which are in the range of a maximum 10 to 15 cfs), do not have much effect on increasing water levels in the main area of the marsh. File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 1-21 Packet Page 184 of 456 Section 1 Selection of Design Event The frequency analysis was used to develop design events that are specific to this system. The design events are needed to be used to the evaluation of potential alternative improvements. Design events were selected for the 25-year and 100-year recurrence intervals. Node 60, representing the water levels in the marsh west of SR 104, was selected as the location of interest. This is because its location is less impacted by the capacity restrictions at the Shellabarger crossing of SR 104, and thus more accurately reflects the relationship between tides and storage build up in the marsh. The design event is created by taking a historical precipitation event that produces a maximum flood level that is close to the flood level predicted by the frequency analysis. When these elevations vary, the historical precipitation is factored up or down as required until the simulated water surface elevation matches the frequency analysis. Table A-5 presents the results of this analysis. Table 1-4: Design Events Water Surface Design Event Date Maximum Simulated Elevation Predicted Factor Needed to WSE (NAVD88) by Frequency Apply to Flows Analysis (NAVD88) 25-year 1-1-97 11.04 10.93 No correction' 100-year 12-3-07 11.93 12.11 1.05 No correction factor was applied because the values were very close 1-22 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 185 of 456 Section 2 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION Screening of Potential Alternatives Following the modeling and assessment of the existing drainage system, the Consultant team began the process of identifying potential solutions to reduce flood hazards. This process is summarized in Appendix C and included developing an initial preliminary listing of potential alternatives and then presenting these potential alternatives to a group of affected agencies and property owners (stakeholders). The meeting with the potential stakeholders including several City department representatives and the Washington State Department of Transportation WSDOT (both Roads and Ferries), Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW), Port of Edmonds, and a representative of the Salish Crossing property (one of the adjacent properties west of SR 104 and north of Dayton Street subject to recurrent flooding). Appendix C contains a summary of the meeting minutes and presentation materials. Using this stakeholder meeting input, the draft preliminary list of alternatives was narrowed down with input from City staff to a reduced set of four alternatives shown in Table 2-1. The development of the alternatives considered the future planned project for daylighting Willow Creek between the Edmonds Marsh and Puget Sound. Because ultimate funding and implementation of this separate project are not certain, it was important to consider some alternatives that do not include daylighting the creek. Conversely, combining the daylighting of the creek with other improvements can result in mutual benefits that simultaneously reduce flooding and offer synergies by improving habitat and restoring the natural ecosystem. For example, removing cattails and performing some excavation in the south sides of the marsh that has built up over time could increase available flood storage and also expand the portions of the salt water marsh and restore fish access to Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek. Alternative Descriptions Four alternatives were identified through the screening process described above. Each alternative consists of an array of elements that would work together to help reduce the existing flood hazard at the intersection and along Dayton Street. In addition, some alternative elements include environmental benefits such as fish habitat restoration in the Edmonds Marsh and water quality improvements to the Dayton Street drainage system. File:001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Packet Page 186 of 456 Section 2 This page intentionally left blank. 2-2 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Altematives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 187 of 456 Section 2 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION Table 2-1: Alternatives For Detailed Alternative Evaluation Alternative Preliminary Description Alternative Dayton Pump Station and Shellabarger Creek Use berming and/or plugging pipe System on east side of SR 104 to isolate Dayton System from Shellabarger Creek and to isolate Harbor Square from marsh. 1 Restoration with Edmonds Marsh Expansion Add small pump station to evacuate Dayton system during high tides and high flows ■ Divert drainage from the southwest portion of Salish Crossing to the Dayton system (to reduce flows to marsh and take advantage of new pump station capacity) ■ Restore Shellabarger Creek between SR 104 and Willow Creek. This would include lowering channel, re-establishing a steeper gradient to Willow Creek, and channel restoration with habitat and planting features. To be consistent with the Willow Creek Daylighting Study, it also includes restoring Willow Creek and realigning both creeks into a more natural entry into the salt water portion of the marsh. ■ Excavate areas on east side of marsh and cattail removal to create more flood storage. This could include areas deep enough to provide salt marsh habitat. This would also include habitat and planting features. ■ Incorporate in -line sediment trap on Shellabarger creek just upstream of the SR 104 culvert crossing (to capture larger sediment prior to marsh)(this element included in all alternatives) ■ Install overflow systems from Harbor Square to Dayton to allow Harbor Square to drain to the Dayton pump station during high water levels in the marsh. ■ Water quality improvements to address very poor water quality in the Dayton System (primarily coming from ferry queuing lanes)(this element included in all alternatives) ■ Remove the existing 36-inch/22-inch culverts near the Willow Creek crossing of the BNSF railroad (an abandoned drainage feature that causes a hydraulic restriction) (this element included in all alternatives) Alternative Alternative 1 Improvements Plus Daylighting Same elements as Alternative 1, Plus: 2 Willow Creek Daylight Willow Creek to existing BNSF/Sound Transit bridge and construct new channel outfall to Puget Sound (consistent with Willow Creek Daylighting study) ■ Include manual/automated tide gate to function during combination of high tides and storm events ■ Keep existing outfall to act as outlet from marsh. This would act as a second outlet when water levels in marsh are higher than tide. This could be done with the construction of a weir. Alternative Daylighting Willow Creek and Edmonds Marsh Daylight Willow Creek to existing BNSF culvert and construct new channel outfall (same as Alternative 2) 3 Pump Station (Without Significant Marsh Include manual/automated tide gate to function during combination of high tides and storm events (Same as Alternative 2) Expansion) ■ Large pump station for the marsh that uses existing outfall as discharge piping. A fish screen would be required to prevent fish access to pump system. ■ Restore Shellabarger Creek between SR 104 and Willow Creek (same as in Alternative 1) ■ Pipe Improvements between Dayton Street system and marsh (modify connection between Dayton System and marsh to allow Dayton system to overflow to marsh during high flows) ■ Incorporate in -line sediment trap on Shellabarger creek just upstream of the SR 104 culvert crossing ■ Water quality improvements to address very poor water quality in the Dayton System ■ Use berming and/or plugging pipe System on east side of SR 104 to isolate Dayton System from Shellabarger Creek ■ Remove the existing 36-inch/22-inch culverts near the Willow Creek crossing of the BNSF railroad Alternative Large Dayton Street Pump Station and Minor Large pump station on Dayton Street closer to intersection that pumps flows from both Dayton and marsh overflows to Puget Sound. This would include a new force main and outfall to Puget Sound 4 Marsh Modifications Conveyance upgrade near the intersection of Dayton Street and SR 104 to allow more flow to extend north from marsh to pump station. ■ Restore Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek (same as Alternative 1) ■ Incorporate in -line sediment trap on Shellabarger creek just upstream of the SR 104 culvert crossing ■ Water quality improvements to address very poor water quality in the Dayton System (primarily coming from ferry queuing lanes)(this element is included in all alternatives) ■ Remove the existing 36-inch/22-inch culverts near the Willow Creek crossing of the BNSF railroad File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIL. Packet Page 188 of 456 Section 2 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION This page intentionally left blank. File:001712 1 26512110002 SAIL. Packet Page 189 of 456 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION Each of the alternatives was modeled by making modifications to the existing hydraulic model described in Section 1. Hydraulic modeling was used to size the alternative elements and to evaluate the effectiveness of the alternative. Both the 25-year and 100-year events were used for the analysis. The following paragraphs describe the alternatives in greater detail. Alternative 1. Dayton Street Pump Station and Shellabarger Creek Restoration with Edmonds Marsh Expansion In general, this alternative includes a combination of stormwater conveyance improvements, water quality enhancements, stream habitat restoration, and modifications to the Edmonds Marsh that would add flood storage and increase habitat by expanding the salt water portions of the marsh and improving fish access. It is presented on Figure 2-1 (located at the end of this section) and includes the following elements: Isolating the two main drainage systems, the Dayton Street system and the Edmonds Marsh by a combination of improvements: — Plugging the existing 24-inch pipe that extends along the east side of SR 104 along with some berming near the inlet of this pipe to reduce the extent of overflows from Shellabarger Creek to the north and into the Dayton Street System. In addition, a short berm (0.5 to 1 ft) is included for a short distance along the east side of SR 104 near this culvert entrance. — Berming or use of a short concrete flood wall (1 to 2 ft) near the west end of the Harbor Square property to reduce the potential for marsh overflows into the Harbor Square development. Construct a new pump station to evacuate the Dayton Street drainage system during high tides and high flows. Even if the Dayton Street drainage system is isolated from the marsh system, it was determined that the intersection would flood during high tides and large storms. The pump station capacity would need to be about 13 cfs to provide flood protection for the 100-year event. It would be designed to only be used during high tides so that the existing gravity system would be used during most times. A potential location for the pump station is the Beach Place parking lot jointly owned by the City and the Port of Edmonds, more specifically, within existing paved areas (and landscaped island) west of the BNSF railroad. A below grade pump station would be proposed to avoid eliminating as much parking as possible. For the analysis, it was assumed the pump station would include a new 18-inch diameter force main and outfall to the Sound located near the existing outfall. Two other options are mentioned here but neither appear to be as favorable as a new outfall adjacent to the existing outfall. These are discussed below but further investigations would be needed to assess their viability. — The first option is to use the existing 48-inch Willow Creek outfall pipe once Willow Creek is daylighted and the pipe outfall is no longer needed. The File:001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 2-5 Packet Page 190 of 456 Section 2 advantage of this is that permitting a new outfall would not be needed. The disadvantage is that it would require 1,500 lineal -feet of additional outfall pipe, and that the pump station improvements could not be implemented until after the daylighting project, which due to its complexities, is not expected for several years. — The second option is to use the Dayton Street system's former 24-inch outfall abandoned when the City installed the water quality swirl concentrator and new outfall in the 1990s. The advantage of this option is it might be easier to permit because it could be considered as an existing outfall upgrade. The disadvantage is that it is reported to be in very poor condition and would be very costly to repair. It is also noted that some initial investigation was done to consider the possibility diverting a portion of the basin tributary to the pump station to another drainage system in order to reduce the size of the pump station. Initial investigations indicated that some portion of the Dayton Street system (approximately 33.5 acres) may be diverted to the north to discharge to the Main Street outfall. Such a diversion would require the construction of approximately 600-feet of new pipe. Diverting some flow from the Dayton Street System could reduce the size of pump for the proposed pump station (e.g., from 13 cfs to 11 cfs). The reduction in pump size is likely not large enough to change other elements of the pump station design (such as the forcemain), so it was not proposed as a part of this element, however, it could be considered in the future. ■ Divert drainage from Salish Crossing to the Dayton system. Currently an approximately 2.2-acre area within the Salish Crossing drains to a pipe system that crosses Dayton Street without connecting to the Dayton Street system. Rather, it continues south connecting to the Harbor Square pipe system then discharges to the marsh. The rationale for this element is that with the proposed pump station, it can be size to easily handle the extra flow from this small area and reduce flood volumes to the marsh. ■ Restore Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek connection to the marsh. As previously noted, the southeastern portion of the marsh has been subject to significant deposition and buildup of vegetation over time. This channel choking is a contributing factor in flooding of the Dayton Street intersection and also preventing natural stream flows from entering the marsh. Even during low flow periods, a portion of Shellabarger Creek flows is diverted north to the Dayton drainage system. This element would include excavation and re- alignment of the two creeks to be reconfigured into a more natural estuary confluence configuration with large wood installed to maintain the channels and provide habitat features. The area would be replanted with native species adapted to conditions associated with the revised elevations, expected resulting tidal exchange, and proximity to the streams. This element of the alternative is consistent with what is being proposed as part of the Willow Creek Daylighting Study. Included in this element is the assumption that the SR 104 culvert 2-6 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Altematives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 191 of 456 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION crossing would be maintained to the new "lowered" depth of Shellabarger Creek. ■ Cattail Removal and excavation of southeast portion of marsh. This element would include removal of cattails and excavation in the southeastern portion of the marsh to both increase flood storage and extend the area of salt marsh. One concept for this approach is to generally have the restored Shellabarger and Willow Creek grades fairly constant through this portion of the marsh to maintain flow velocities and sediment transport, but have the adjacent excavation of the freshwater emergent at a bit deeper elevation to provide additional flood storage and salt water marsh habitat. The excavation would leave a bench between the channel and excavated area, similar to a natural stream bench. The excavated areas would be replanted with native species adapted to conditions associated with the revised elevations. Habitat structure such as rootwads and perches would be added. The preliminary analysis looked at the excavation of approximately 19,000 cy of material (12 ac-ft). Most of the excavation material would be between elevation 6 and 8. ■ Incorporate an in -line sediment trap on Shellabarger Creek upstream of the SR 104 culvert crossing. The goal of this element would be to capture larger sediment prior to being transported into the marsh and allow a location for easy access for maintenance. For cost estimating purposes, the size of the pond was assumed to be 40-feet wide by 60-feet long and a depth of 3-feet. The proposed location is immediately upstream of the culvert. This would require a portion of the pond to be on private property and the City would need to get a permanent easement (approximately 0.25 acre). ■ Install two system overflow connections from Harbor Square drainage system to the Dayton Street system. Under existing conditions, the Harbor Square pipe system drains to the marsh and the outlets are equipped with backflow preventers. The objective of this element is to take advantage of the Dayton Street pump station capacity included in this alternative. This could help reduce runoff volumes to the marsh. This element could be accomplished by adding four catch basins, two of which would contain overflow weirs. The overflow elevation would be set at about elevation 9. ■ Water Quality improvements to the ferry queuing lanes prior to discharging to the Dayton Street system. As noted previously, this area is known for very poor water quality. On a preliminary basis, the water quality improvements include a coalescing plate oil/water separator followed by media type filtration. The selection of treatment type must consider that the media will frequently be inundated when tides are high (and prior to when the pump station is engaged for Alternative 1). One system that is Ecology approved is the Ecostorm Plus filter system (an up -flow system). For cost estimates, it was assumed that the system would include a coalescing plate oil/water separator (in an underground vault) followed by an Ecostorm Plus filter system in an underground vault). Some consideration was given to adding treatment retrofits to the intersection of File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 2-7 Packet Page 192 of 456 Section 2 SR 104 and Dayton Street as well. However, this system is very low and is inundated with water continuously (because of the downstream treatment near the outfall). As such, it is more difficult to treat with typical filter treatment systems that require some head drop. ■ Remove the existing 36-inch/22-inch culverts and gates near the existing Willow Creek crossing of BNSF railroad. This is a current capacity restriction and the culverts/gates are believed to be abandoned and not used. The work would include removal of the culverts as well as the existing embankment and restoring approximately a 30 foot section of creek. Alternative 2. Alternative 1 Improvements Plus Daylighting Willow Creek In general, this alternative would include all of the elements of Alternative 1 plus the daylighting of Willow Creek as proposed under the Willow Creek Daylighting Study. Figure 2-2 (located at the end of this section) presents the different elements of Alternative 2. Additional details about the Willow Creek Daylighting are provided below. ■ Willow Creek would be daylighted from its current location of where it crosses the BNSF railroad south along the railroad to the existing BNSF/Sound Transit bridge crossing. Based on the Willow Creek Daylighting study, the daylighted channel would be trapezoidal with a 14-ft bottom width and 2H:1 V side slopes. Between the BNSF/Sound Transit bridges and the Sound, the new channel alignment would have to extend through either the Marina Beach Park or the off leash dog park area (Figure 2-2 only shows the alignment through the north edge of the dog park. For either alignment, the work would need to include a new pedestrian crossing to provide public access to the existing City Park area. More detailed information about this daylighting the Creek is presented in the Willow Creek Daylighting Study (S&W, 2013). It was noted that an existing water line crosses the proposed channel approximately 100-feet northeast of the BNSF bridges. This line serves the Marina and the Point Edwards Development, and would likely have to be relocated at a deeper depth underneath the new channel. The portion of the channel upstream of the BNSF/Sound Transit bridges to be located on the Unocal site. It is understood that Unocal entered into an escrow agreement to transfer the ownership of the property to WSDOT upon completion of the site remediation. The City would need to work with WSDOT to obtain approvals for this portion of the channel work. Additional research is recommended to more fully understand the requirements for property acquisition. ■ A tide gate is assumed to be included along the daylighted channel to reduce potential for aggravating flooding during the combination of high tides and large precipitation events. The Willow Creek Daylighting study identified the potential of having a self-regulating (SRT) tidegate at the pedestrian bridge crossing. This would be fitted onto a large diameter culvert(s). For modeling purposes, a 4-foot diameter culvert was assumed for this culvert. This was 2-8 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Altematives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 193 of 456 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION based on expected peak flows through the system and sizing the culvert to have a reasonable low headloss. ■ The existing 48-inch outfall pipe for Willow Creek could be kept in place and function as an overflow (for example by placing a weir at its entrance), or be temporally capped. The Willow Creek Daylighting study indicates that the existing outfall would be abandoned, however, there could be some advantages to keeping it functional, such as for use as an overflow, or possibility a future pumped system outfall as sea level rise impacts the system into the next century. For cost estimating, it was assumed that a weir would be placed upstream of the system entrance. Alternative 3. Willow Creek Daylighting and Edmonds Marsh Pump Station. In general, this alternative would include the Willow Creek daylighting and a new stormwater pump station near the existing Willow Creek entrance into the outfall pipe system. It would not include the significant excavation planned for the southeast portion of the wetland. The idea of this alternative is that it presents an option that weighs the cost and environmental impacts of the large marsh excavation versus a stormwater pump station. The regrading of Shellabarger Creek would still be necessary to remove the current vegetation and sediment build blockages on the Shellabarger Creek culvert crossing of SR 104. The elements of Alternative 3 are presented on Figure 2-3 (located at the end of this section), and our further described below. ■ Willow Creek would be daylighted very similar to the Alternative 2 description. Again, for this analysis a tide gate was assumed. ■ A new pump station would be constructed near the inlet location of the existing 48-inch outfall pipe system within the Port of Edmonds property. The capacity of the pump station (50 cfs) was determined using the hydraulic model and sizing it to provide a 100-year level of protection. Under normal conditions, it would not be used. It would initiate pumping during high tides and large precipitation events. The approximate footprint of the pump station facility would be about 40-feet by 20-feet. To prevent fish from entering the pump station, a fish screen would be required. Based on preliminary criteria from National Marine Fishery Service (for fry), the screen length would need to be about 140-feet long. The screen would need to be constructed of stainless steel. The overall area that could be taken up by the screen would be about 70-feet by 20-feet. It is assumed that the pump station would be a below grade type using submersible pumps to reduce the loss of existing parking. Diesel or natural gas pumps would be an option however, they would require above grade structures and additional loss of parking. The fish screen would need to be an open channel arrangement of some type to allow for easier access. This would eliminate some parking and possibly the Port of Edmonds access driveway to a parking lot. File:001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 2-9 Packet Page 194 of 456 Section 2 For cost estimating, it was assumed that the City would purchase an emergency generator as a part of this alternative to ensure system reliability during power outages. ■ Restore Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek connection to the marsh as presented in Alternative 1. ■ Plugging the existing pipe system on the east side of SR 104 to prevent high flows from Shellabarger Creek extending north to the intersection as presented in Alternative 1. ■ Pipe system improvements between Dayton Street and the marsh. Under this alternative, the Dayton Street system would not include its own pump station. Therefore, to solve flooding of Dayton Street, conveyance improvements to the marsh are needed. Initially, consideration was given to conveyance improvements along the west side of SR 104. However, this wouldn't reduce water levels in Dayton Street sufficiently. A second approach consisted of replacing an existing storm drain through Harbor Square with a 30-inch pipe and providing an overflow connection from the Dayton Street system. This approach provided more reduction in water levels in the Dayton Street System since the overflow connection was to the lower portions of the marsh (i.e. elevation 6-feet) rather than through the ditch along SR 104. ■ Water Quality improvements to the ferry queuing lanes as described in Alternative 1. ■ Incorporate an in -line sediment trap on Shellabarger creek upstream of the SR 104 culvert crossing as described in Alternative 1. Alternative 4. Large Dayton Street Pump Station and Minor Marsh Modifications This alternative would include a larger Dayton Street pump station located closer to the intersection with SR 104 and not include the Willow Creek Daylighting or the large excavation in the marsh. The reasoning behind this alternative is that it presents an option that does not include the significant excavation in the marsh and that could also be pursued should the Willow Creek daylighting not be viable. It does include minor marsh modifications as the regrading of Shellabarger Creek would still be necessary to remove the current vegetation and sediment buildup on the Shellabarger Creek culvert crossing of SR 104. The removal of the existing 36-inch/22-inch culverts near the marsh outlet would also be necessary to provided better drainage from the marsh. The elements of Alternative 4 are presented on Figure 2-4 (located at the end of this section), and are further described below. ■ A new pump station would be constructed near the intersection of Dayton Street and SR 104. The proposed location is within Harbor Square west of the intersection. An easement would be required. The capacity of the pump station (30 cfs) was determined using hydraulic modeling and was sized to provide a 100-year level of protection. Under normal conditions, it would not be used. It would initiate pumping when system elevations exceed elevation 9-feet. The approximate footprint of the structure would be about 35-feet by 15-feet. It is 2-1 0 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 195 of 456 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION assumed that a submersible pump station would be used to limit the amount of parking to be eliminated. An 1,100-feet long force main would be required from the pump station to the outfall in the Sound. The force main was sized at 30-inches in diameter. It would cross the BNSF railroad and likely require boring and jacking this crossing and possibly a carrier pipe. The alignment assumed is along Dayton Street adjacent to the existing storm drain. For cost estimating, it was assumed that the City would purchase an emergency generator as a part of this alternative to ensure system reliability during power outages. ■ Conveyance improvements would be included along SR 104 and from the intersection to the pump station. The 24-inch pipe on the east side of SR 104 would be extended to connect to the Dayton Street system so that overflows from Shellabarger Creek and the freshwater wetland are picked up by the pump station. Within this segment of pipe one of the existing manhole would be modified to include a weir (elevation 9.5) so that under most conditions Shellabarger Creek would be conveyed across SR 104 into its channel. ■ Restore Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek connection to the marsh as presented in Alternative 1. ■ Water Quality improvements to the ferry queuing lanes as described in Alternative 1. ■ Incorporate an in -line sediment trap on Shellabarger creek upstream of the SR 104 culvert crossing as described in Alternative 1. ■ Remove the existing 36-inch/22-inch culverts and gates near the existing Willow Creek crossing of BNSF railroad. As noted previously, this is a current capacity restriction and the culverts/gates are believed to be abandoned and not used. The work would include removal of the culverts as well as the existing embankment and restoring approximately a 30 foot section of creek. Alternative Evaluation This section includes an evaluation of the alternatives described above. Alternatives were reviewed using several evaluation criteria which are described below. Evaluation Criteria a briefly summarized in Table 2-2. Following this table is a brief discussion comparing the alternatives for each criteria. File:001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 2-11 Packet Page 196 of 456 Section 2 Table 2-2: Alternative Evaluation Criteria Hydraulic Performance Effectiveness in reducing flood hazards — This criteria generally presents how the combined set of alternative elements act together to reduce flooding. Data presented includes the predicted flood elevations at 3 locations for the 25-year and 100-year flood events. The locations include the Intersection of Dayton Street and SR 104, Shellabarger Creek east of SR 104, and within the Edmonds Marsh. Costs Cost estimates were developed for each alternative. This was done by estimating costs for each alternative element and adding them together. Costs include both estimated capital costs and soft costs (design and construction engineering, permitting, management, and land acquisition). Cost estimates are included in Appendix D. Unit costs were developed based on recent bid prices where data was available. The cost estimate includes a significant contingency (30 percent), considered appropriate for the conceptual level of the alternatives. Soft cost include 20 percent for survey and design, 10 percent for permitting, 5 percent administration, and 15 percent for construction management and inspection. Environmental This criteria weighs some of the key environmental considerations with respect of each Implications and alternative and discusses permit requirements. Permitting Constructability This criteria weighs some of the risks associated with constructability, such as the potential for encountering contaminated materials, or other construction challenges. Maintenance This criteria qualitatively considers the increase of long-term maintenance demands likely anticipated from the alternative improvements. An example of a larger maintenance demand is what would be required for a pump station. Utility Conflict Potential This criteria considers the potential for risks that utility conflicts would preclude or significantly increase the cost of alternative implementation. Compatibility with This criteria considers how proposed site improvements would be compatible with other other Site Uses site uses within the specific areas impacted. Future Compatibility In recognition that current studies project continued increases in sea level, this criteria with Sea Level Rise was included in recognition that some of the alternative may be better suited to address future sea level rise. Other Considerations this criteria was intended to provide a category to capture other major advantages, disadvantages, or other considerations not covered by the other criteria. An example of an advantage is if one alternative has higher potential to receive grant/loan funding. Hydraulic Performance Table 2-3 summarizes the results of the alternative modeling for each alternative. Results are presented for both the 25-year and 100-year events at 3 locations: the Dayton Street/SR 104 intersection, the main area of the marsh, and Shellabarger Creek upstream of the SR 104 crossing. Some of the key observations developed during the modeling are described below. All alternatives provided protection up to the 100-year storm. However in order to accomplish this, some of the alternatives had to include a short berm/wall along the east side of SR 104 near the north end of the fresh water wetland. The highway is relatively low in comparison to the Shellabarger Creek culvert. While the culverts are not a hydraulic restriction (assuming cleaned), their relatively high elevation makes it difficult to lower water levels on the east side 2-12 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 197 of 456 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION of SR 104. The analysis assumed that when cleaned the bottom one -foot of the culvert would be filled with streambed sediment (in accordance with WDFW fish passage for culverts). One option available to consider is working with WDFW to see if an approach could be used to allow the culverts to be more fully open. This would help lower the water levels on the east side of SR 104. ■ The Willow Creek daylighting would result in significant water level reduction in the marsh reduction in the marsh (approximately 1.3 to 1.5-feet during significant events). ■ The alternative element that includes significant excavation in the marsh to provide flood storage does not result in a significant reduction in marsh water levels. This is due in part because most of the added flood storage volume is obtained within the elevation range of 6 to 8-feet. During the simulation for the 100-year event, the marsh becomes filled to elevation 8 prior to the time of the peak storm inflows. This element has a significant cost, so an option to look at could be to eliminate it from Alternative 1 and 2. ■ Under Alternative 3, the pump station needs to be large enough to lower the marsh levels below the other alternatives. This is in order to create enough fall for the Dayton Street system to be able to drain. ■ Removing the 36-inch/22-inch culvert near the existing Willow Creek entrance to the BNSF culvert crossing results a pretty significant benefit in lowering marsh water levels compared to its cost. As such this element was included in all alternatives. File:001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 2-13 Packet Page 198 of 456 Section 2 Table 2-3: Results of Alternative Modeling 25-Year Storm 100-Year Storm Max WSE at Max Max Max WSE at Max Max Alternative Description Dayton 1 SR WSE in WSE Dayton I SR WSE in WSE 104 Marsh East of 104 Marsh East of Intersection SR 104 Intersection SR 104 Existing Conditions 11.14 11.04 11.63 12.32 12.14 12.41 1 Dayton Street Pump Station and 9.10 10.15 10.98 9.32 12.08 12.14 Shellabarger Creek Restoration with Edmonds Marsh Expansion 2 Alternative 1 Improvements Plus 9.10 8.81 10.98 9.32 10.65 11.10 Daylighting Willow Creek 3 Willow Creek Daylighting and 9.21 8.23 11.15 9.86 9.84 11.31 Edmonds Marsh Pump Station 4 Large Dayton Street Pump Station 9.10 10.48 10.64 9.29 11.77 11.89 with Minor Marsh Modifications Cost Estimates A cost estimate summary by alternative and alternative element is presented in Table 2-4 Appendix D contains more detailed cost breakdown for each alternative element. For elements being proposed as part of the Willow Creek Daylighting study, cost estimates prepared by Shannon & Wilson were incorporated to this study. As previously noted, there has been some contaminated soil and groundwater at the former Unocal site. One of the assumptions made in the Willow Creek Daylighting Study was that approximately "one half' of the excavated material within the marsh and associated with the Willow Creek daylighting will need special disposal requirements. 2-14 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 199 of 456 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION Table 2-4: Cost Estimate Summary Alternative Element Description Cost 1 Dayton Street Pump Station and Shellabarger Creek Restoration with Edmonds Marsh Expansion Isolating Marsh System from Dayton $167,000 Dayton Street Pump Station 1,173,000 Shellabarger Creek Sediment Pond 323,000 Divert Salish Crossing to Dayton Street System 73,000 Restore Shellabarger and Willow Creek to Marsh (1) 421,000 Remove Cattails and Excavate South Portion of Marsh 3,525,000 Divert Harbor Square Overflows to Dayton Pump Station 112,000 Ferry Queuing Area Water Quality Treatment 442,000 Remove 36"/22" Culverts and Embankment 122,000 Total $6,236,000 2 Alternative 1 Improvements Plus Daylighting Willow Creek Isolating Marsh System from Dayton 135,000 Dayton Street Pump Station 1,173,000 Shellabarger Creek Sediment Pond 323,000 Divert Salish Crossing to Dayton Street System 73,000 Restore Shellabarger and Willow Creek to Marsh 421,000 Remove Cattails and Excavate South Portion of Marsh 3,525,000 Divert Harbor Square Overflows to Dayton Pump Station 112,000 Ferry Queuing Area Water Quality Treatment 442,000 Remove 36"/22" Culverts and Embankment 122,000 Daylight Channel Construction (1) 5,032,000 Self -Regulating Tide Gate and Structure (1) 567,000 Existing 48-inch Willow Creek Outlet Pipe Modifications 55,000 Total $11,980,000 3 Willow Creek Daylighting and Edmonds Marsh Pump Station Isolating Marsh System from Dayton 93,000 Shellabarger Creek Sediment Pond 323,000 Restore Shellabarger and Willow Creek to Marsh 421,000 Ferry Queuing Area Water Quality Treatment 442,000 Daylight Channel Construction (1) 5,032,000 Self -Regulating Tide Gate and Structure (1) 567,000 Edmonds Marsh Pump Station 3,695,000 Pipe Improvements Between Dayton and Marsh 576,000 Total $10,573,000 File:001712 126512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 2-15 Packet Page 200 of 456 Section 2 Table 2-4: Cost Estimate Summary Alternative Element Description Cost 4 Large Dayton Street Pump Station with Minor Marsh Modifications Dayton Street/SR 104 Pump Station $2,944,000 Shellabarger Creek Sediment Pond 323,000 Restore Shellabarger and Willow Creek to Marsh (1) 421,000 Ferry Queuing Area Water Quality Treatment 442,000 Berming Marsh at Harbor Square and SR 104 161,000 Remove 36"/22" Culverts and Embankment 122,000 Pipe Improvements At Intersection of Dayton Street and SR 104 186,000 Total $4,413,000 Notes: (1) Source Shannon & Wilson, 2013. It is noted that for land cost, several of the alternatives would involve construction work within the Port of Edmonds property or WSDOT property. Costs of easement acquisition have not been included at this time. In general, the improvements implemented would help alleviate flooding within Port of Edmonds properties, so there may be incentives for the Port of Edmonds to be flexible with easements. It is noted that the same soft costs were used on each alternative element (i.e., 20 percent for survey and design, 10 percent for permitting, 5 percent administration, and 15 percent for construction management and inspection). If an alternative element is implemented as a standalone design and permitting project, these percentages could very significantly, in particular for small projects where the costs of design and permitting become higher. For Alternatives 2 and 3 that include large pump stations, the cost of a portable generator is included. Overall, the Cost of Alternative 2 is higher than the other alternatives. Alternatives 1 and 4 are significantly lower than Alternatives 2 and 3. One of the higher cost elements is the large excavation in the marsh for Alternatives 1 and 2, which, as previously noted discussed, did not result is significant water level reduction. Part of the high cost of this element is the assumption of contaminated materials. Further investigation as to whether this is an appropriate assumption is recommended. Environmental Implications and Permitting In general, the most significant permitting aspects of the alternatives being considered are the grading actions proposed within Edmonds Marsh (which is included in all alternatives). Due to the area of impact (over 1/2 acre) and as a project goal is to reduce flooding, dredging in the marsh (either to re-establish Shellabarger Creek and 2-16 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 201 of 456 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION Willow Creek or to conduct major excavation in the marsh) will exceed the impact area permissible under the Corps of Engineers' (COE) Nationwide Permit criteria for compliance with the Clean Water Act (Section 404). As such, the City would be required to apply for an Individual Permit. The requirements for an individual permit are more stringent than Nationwide permits, including a public comment period and an alternative analysis that demonstrates that the preferred alternative is the least environmentally damaging practicable alternative (LEDPA). The alternatives presented would provide the structure for this analysis. As one of the primary purposes and needs of the proposal is to reduce flooding and not restore the marsh, other alternatives with fewer wetland impacts would be prioritized by the COE. However, given the significant restoration benefits of the proposal, the application of the alternatives may be more flexible than the rigid structure applied to projects without significant restoration components. The application of this discretion is within the authority of the COE project manager. Therefore, early discussions with the COE are essential to understand what actions would be permissible/permittable under the COE's jurisdiction for all alternatives. All of the alternatives would also replace, add, or modify outfalls to Puget Sound. By themselves, these modifications would comply with COE Nationwide Permit 7. However, combined with other project elements (see above), these components would be included in the overall permit for the project (Individual Permit). All of the alternatives would also require the following permits. Local ■ Shoreline ■ City of Edmonds Critical Areas Ordinance (Title 23). Clearing and Grading (Chapter 19) ■ SEPA Compliance State ■ NPDES Construction Stormwater General Permit ■ DOE Section 401 Water Quality Certification ■ Hydraulic Project Approval (from Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife) ■ Section 106 National Historic Preservation Act Compliance Federal ■ COE Section 404, Section 10 Permits ■ ESA Compliance In terms of restoration benefits, several components of the proposed alternatives have significant ecological restoration benefits. Re-establishing the channel of Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek within Edmonds Marsh will enhance riparian habitats, improve fish access, and increase the habitat File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 2-17 Packet Page 202 of 456 Section 2 diversity by creating a range of water depths, downed wood, and species diversity by replacing a cattail area with a riparian shrub and tree plantings. The features will enhance habitat conditions for salmonids, primarily for juvenile fish rearing. Regrading the marsh (Alternatives 1 and 2) by the removal of accumulated sediment to reestablish grades that will be inundated by salt water during high tides will dramatically increase the area of salt marsh within Edmonds Marsh. Salt marshes are highly critical for salmonid rearing, particularly for Chinook, a key target species for the marsh. Salt marsh habitat has been significantly reduced throughout Puget Sound, compared to historical conditions, resulting in limitations in the area's ability to support salmonid populations. This has been a key factor in the decline of many species, especially Chinook, which are heavily dependent on salt marshes for juvenile rearing. As such, the habitat benefits of expanding the salt marsh, although already significant within the local context, would improve regional habitat conditions, and support the recovery of protected salmonids. Daylighting Willow Creek from the lower end of Edmonds Marsh to Puget Sound would provide significantly improved fish access to the marsh. Currently fish must navigate the 1600-feet of culvert to reach the marsh. Re-establishing a surface water connection to the marsh will significantly reduce the barriers to fish accessing the site, as well as adding a vegetated riparian corridor to the marsh outlet. The following paragraphs provide some of the key findings associated with each alternative. Alternative 1: This alternative includes the re-establishment of the Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek channels and the regrading of the marsh. Habitat conditions will be significantly improved. However, fish access to the area will still be impaired by the maintenance of the existing marsh outlet (a very long culvert). Alternative 2: This alternative includes all three restoration components described above: the re-establishment of the Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek channels, the regrading of the marsh, and the daylighting of the Willow Creek outlet. Habitat conditions and fish access to the site will be significantly improved. As such, this alternative provides the highest level of habitat restoration among the alternatives. Alternative 3: This alternative includes the re-establishment of the Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek channels and the daylighting of Willow Creek. Habitat conditions will be improved and fish access to the site will be significantly improved. However, there will be only minor increases in salt marsh habitat (along the Willow Creek outlet channel), representing only about 5 percent of the salt marsh increases associated with Alternative 2. As such salt marsh functions, including Chinook rearing, would only be modestly improved. Alternative 4: This alternative only includes the re-establishment of the Shellabarger Creek channel. Although it will improve habitat conditions within the Creek, this alternative lacks the expansion of the salt marsh and fish access enhancements. As such, this alternative provides the lowest level of habitat improvements. 2-18 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 203 of 456 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION Constructability All alternatives are considered constructible using generally accepted construction methods. Some of the constructability challenges are listed below. All alternatives have to account for the potential to encounter contaminated soils during excavation. This is a typical consideration in a formerly industrial area such as the Edmonds waterfront. Monitoring for contaminants during construction would be recommended. The elements that involve Daylighting Willow Creek (Alternative 2 and 3) and the large excavation within the marsh (Alternatives 1 and 2) have the greatest risk of encountering contaminated material. The large marsh pump station and fish screen in Alternative 3 requires a fairly significant footprint, which would ideally be kept to a minimum to reduce impacts to the Port of Edmonds. The pump stations of Alternative 1 and 4 have a similar issue but to a lesser extent since they do not include the fish screen. The Dayton Street Corridor west of SR 104 has a very high number of utilities. For example in terms of sewer system alone, there is the main 36-inch outfall from the treatment plant, two smaller gravity lines and one force main. Designing the alignment for the Alternative 4 force main would be challenging, but likely doable as it is a force main and can vary its depth. The proposed water quality improvements (in all alternatives) would require construction of two vaults that would require tight space requirements to maintain vehicular access for ferry traffic (or possibly work at night). Maintenance Common to all alternatives are the water quality facility for the ferry queuing lanes and the Shellabarger Creek sediment pond. These would involve annual maintenance. It is assumed that WSDOT would maintain the water quality facility and that the City would maintain the sediment pond Access agreements could be required by WSDOT. Alternative 1 would include the Dayton Street pump station that would require significant maintenance. Measures to keep cattails from returning to the excavated portions of the marsh could also be a concern. Alternative 2 would include the tide gate which would likely require annual maintenance. Alternative 3 is considered to have the highest maintenance demands due to the large pump station and fish screen. In particular, the fish screen could be prone to plugging and require frequent maintenance. Even with an automated cleaning system, it would likely have high maintenance needs. In summary, Alternative 2 is considered to have the least increase in maintenance demands. Alternative 3 would result in the highest maintenance requirements. Alternatives 1 and 4 would similar to each other and less than Alternative 3. Utility Conflict Potential The research to potential utility conflicts was preliminary and limited to City utilities including water, sewer and storm. In general, potential utility conflicts are not File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 2-19 Packet Page 204 of 456 Section 2 anticipated to be a significant risk to any of the alternatives or significantly increase their costs. The alternatives with the pump stations and new force mains have the ability to vary the depth of force mains to avoid conflicts. Alternatives 2 and 3 with the Willow Creek Daylighting will need to relocate a watermain, but this a pretty insignificant cost element. Alternative 4 would likely have the most significant utility conflict challenges associated with the 1,100-feet of 30-inch force main along Dayton Street due to the number of other utilities using this corridor. Compatibility with other Site Uses While many of the alternative elements appear to be generally compatible with existing uses, several areas of potential conflicts exist. For Alternative 1, the Dayton Street pump station would increase noise in the area around the intersection of Dayton Street and Admiral Way. For Alternatives 2 and 3, the Willow Creek Daylighting from the BNSF bridges to the Sound will need to co -exist within the City Park property. This section of creek is probably of greatest concern. An alignment through the park would need to address potential loss of parking spaces and park landscapes. Also for Alternative 3, the large pump station facility could be located in areas within the Port of Edmonds property requiring an easement. While the pump station could be located in vaults to allow for continued site use for parking, the fish screen would likely need to be constructed in an open channel to allow for easier maintenance access and this would require the loss of some existing parking. It would also ideally be location to not impact one of the Port of Edmonds parking lot driveway access adjacent to where the fish screen would be located. The sediment pond, included in all of the alternatives, would be within existing wetland areas. Typically it is undesirable to locate stormwater facilities in wetlands. However, given that this would result in benefits to the downstream marsh and that its permitting would be included with other project elements that result in an overall environmental benefit, locating the facility in a wetland appears reasonable. Future Compatibility with Sea Level Rise To provide some perspective on sea level rise and the future compatibility with alternatives, some information gathering about sea level rise projections was completed and summarized below. One projection of sea level rise from the "Sea Level Rise in the Coastal Waters of Washington State" (January 2008, Climate Impacts Group and Ecology), is presented in the Table 2-5 below. 2-20 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 205 of 456 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION Table 2-5: Low Medium and High Sea Level Rise Projections (Source: January 2008, Climate Impacts Group and Ecology) SLR Estimate 2050 2100 Low 3" 6" Medium 6" 13" High 22" 50" A second recent study conducted analyses on the increases in coastal storm surges. According to Sea Level Rise Impacts on Storm Surges along US Coasts (March 2012, Climate Central/NOAA), substantial changes are projected in the frequency of what are now considered extreme water levels from storm surges. That is, according to the study, it projects that by 2050, the current 100-year maximum storm surge could be experienced 2 times per year. For the marsh system, both the sea level rise and increase storm surges will impact the potential for flooding. The increased frequency of extreme tides would result in an increase in the occasions when high tides are coincident with heavy storms. It is noted that Snohomish County is currently completing the Snohomish County Coastal Study which will be producing projected 100-year elevations that include storm surge based on sophisticated modeling. A draft of the result are expected sometime within late 2013 or 2014. This information, when available, should be consulted with respect to the alternative analysis and modeling assumptions. This study, however, will not include estimates of sea level rise. In general, should sea level rise fall in the high estimates, it would have drastic affects to much of the near shore development, so that the Dayton Street and marsh vicinity would not be the only problem area. Nevertheless, when comparing alternatives Alternative 3 and 4 are probably most compatible with future sea level rise. This is because pumping could just be over a longer period but it would be able to keep water levels about the same as modeled in this study. However, it should also be noted that if the surge level generally exceeds the elevation of the BNSF railroad (about 13 to 14- feet NGVD), most of the developed area around the intersection, Harbor Square, Salish Crossing property would become inundated in any case. It should also be noted that Alternative 2 does not preclude that a future pump station could be added and use the existing 48-inch outfall piping. Thus it is not considered entirely incompatible. Other Considerations See Table 2-6 for a listing of other considerations for each of the alternatives. Probably one of the biggest considerations not covered in other criteria is the ability to successfully obtain project funding from grants, loans, or stakeholder participation. Daylighting Willow Creek (Alternatives 2 and 3) has been of interest for a number of years and has potential for grant funding. As previously mentioned, the Willow Creek Daylighting Project is currently on the Water Resource Inventory Area (WIRA) 8 File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 2-21 Packet Page 206 of 456 Section 2 three-year habitat work schedule (I.D. M3223) and is listed as a Tier 1 project. Tier 1 designation includes the highest quality remaining habitat, and the greatest Chinook use (S&W, 2013). The water quality treatment facility (in all alternatives) for the ferry queuing lanes may also be a candidate project for both grant funding (Ecology Water Quality Retrofit Grants) and stakeholder participation (WSDOT). Summary and Recommendations Table 2-6 includes a summary of the alternative evaluation. City staff reviewed the alternative evaluation and identified a preliminary recommended alternative. The preliminary recommended alternative consisted of Alternative 2 with some modifications (described below). This preliminary recommended alternative was then presented to City Council on May 28, 2013 and to the public at a project open house discussion on June 20th, 2013. Meeting presentation materials from both meetings are included in Appendix E. Appendix E also contains a sign-up sheet listing meeting attendees for the open house discussion as well as questions that were asked and answered during the meeting. Based on input from the City Council and public meeting, City staff concluded that the preliminary recommended Alternative 2 be adopted as the final recommended alternative with modifications described in the next section. 2-22 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 207 of 456 Section 2 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION Table 2-6: Alternative Evaluation Summary Alt. Description Hydraulic Performance Costs Environmental Implications Constructability Issues Maintenance Utility Conflict Compatibility of Site Uses Future Compatibility with Other Considerations (assessment of Considerations Considerations Sea Level Rise (SLR) (advantages or effectiveness in reducing disadvantageous) flood hazard) 1 Dayton Street Pump Station 6,236,000 Habitat conditions will be Some potential for Some increase in Utility conflicts are not Some compatibility issues Does not significantly lower and Shellabarger Creek Solves Flooding for 100-year significantly improved. contaminated material maintenance needs with considered a major factor. with pump station on Port of water levels in marsh so as Restoration with Edmonds event. However, fish access to the (marsh expansion). Dayton pump station, Edmonds property. tides increase, flood Marsh Expansion area will still be impaired by Shellabarger Creek sediment protection decreases. the maintenance of the pond, and water quality However, this is not existing marsh outlet (a very facility (ferry queuing) inconsistent with SLR long culvert). because a pump station could be added to marsh in future. 2 Alternative 1 Improvements Solves Flooding for 100-year 11,980,000 Habitat conditions and fish Greatest potential for Same as Alternative 1 plus Utility conflicts are not More compatibility issues This alternative does a good Much community support for Plus Daylighting Willow event. More reduction in access to the site will be contaminated material new tide gate and Willow considered a major factor. than Alternative 1 due to job of lower water levels in daylighting Willow Creek. Creek marsh water levels than significantly improved. As because includes both Willow Creek channel outfall. Willow Creek daylighting marsh to better than The environmental benefits Alternative 1. such, this alternative Creek daylighting and marsh through either the Marina Alternative 1. It is also not of the creek may make it provides the highest level of expansion. Beach Park or the Off -Leash inconsistent with SLR easier to permit other habitat restoration among the Dog Park. because a pump station alternative elements. alternatives. could be added at the Probably highest potential for existing 48-inch Willow Creek grant/loan funding. outfall in the future. Willow Creek Daylighting and Edmonds Marsh Pump Station Large Dayton Street Pump Station with Minor marsh Modifications Solves Flooding for 100-year event. Most significant reduction in marsh water levels. (which is needed to lower water levels at Dayton/SR 104 Intersection). Solves Flooding for 100-year event. 10,573,000 Habitat conditions will be improved and fish access to the site will be significantly improved. However, there will be only minor increases in salt marsh habitat (along the Willow Creek outlet channel). 4,413,000 Minor improvement from re- establishing Willow and Shellbarger Creek, but this alternative lacks the expansion of the salt marsh and fish access enhancements. As such, this alternative provides the lowest level of habitat improvements. Some potential for contaminated material (Willow Creek daylighting). Construction of fish Screen and marsh Pump station in small footprint will be challenging. This would reflect a large fish screen that is uncommon construction. Least potential for encountering contaminated material. The corridor for the 30-inch force main along Dayton Street to outfall is highly congested with other utilities and will be challenging. Highest level of new maintenance needs from large pump station and fish screen. Fish screen would likely require frequent inspections during flood events. Roughly same as Alternative 1 or slightly higher since the pump station would be larger Utility conflicts are not considered a major factor Most challenging in terms of dealing with potential utility conflicts for the 30 -inch force main between SR 104 and Sound due to the highly congested corridor with other utilities. Has the greatest impact to existing uses: ■ Willow Creek daylighting through Marina Beach Park or the Off -Leash Dog Park. ■ Large pump station and large fish screen in Port of Edmonds property resulting in loss of parking Some compatibility issues with pump station on Port of Edmonds property. This alternative is the most compatible since it includes the large pump station directly draining the marsh. Nearly same as Alternative 1. File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIL Packet Page 208 of 456 Section 2 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION This page intentionally left blank. File: 001712 126512110002 SAIE. Packet Page 209 of 456 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION Recommended Alternative The recommended alternative includes Alternative 2 with modifications as follows; ■ Removal of the element "cattail removal and excavation of southeast portion of the marsh" ■ Added element of "Willow Creek 48-inch CMP pipe rehabilitation" ■ Added element of "Clean and/or lower Shellabarger Creek culvert crossing of SR 104" ■ Added element of "Harbor Square pipe outfall modifications" ■ Added element of "Raise WSDOT Overflow (or seal the MH lid)" The following paragraphs describe these modifications. The large marsh excavation of Alternative 2 had a high cost and did not result in significant flood reduction benefit based on the modeling efforts. It was initially envisioned that a significant marsh excavation would add flood storage to the system that would help lower water levels. However, during the flood simulation of the 100-year event only a modest reduction in flood levels was observed. Further investigation revealed that most of the added storage would be in the elevation range of 6 to 8-feet. During the 100-year simulation, the marsh fills up to elevation 8-feet, using all of the added storage, prior to the time that the peak of the storm enters the marsh. As a result, when the peak volume is in the system, the additional storage is used and not able to attenuate the peak. The Willow Creek 48-inch CMP pipe rehabilitation was added to the recommended alternative. This 600 foot pipe segment between the tide gate and the intake vault is reported to be in poor condition. Lining the pipe would improve its hydraulic performance by reducing the roughness which modeling efforts show help lower marsh water levels. In addition, the lining would ensure the pipe's long-term structural integrity for future use. Future uses maybe using the pipe as a secondary outlet if Willow Creek is daylighted, or using the pipe as a pumped outlet to mitigate for sea level. It is also noted that this project is included in the City's Storm and Surface Water Management Comprehensive Plan (Project #213). Cleaning and/or lowering the SR 104 Shellabarger Creek culvert was added to the recommended alternative. While this culvert is not a hydraulic restriction, it increases water levels on the east side of SR 104 due to its high elevation in relation to the grade of the highway. It is also a potential plugging concern due to the internal posts that line the culverts (See Figure A-3). Given its current condition, it will likely need replacement at some point. Replacing it at a lower depth would help to reduce water levels. Replacing it at a lower depth could also help to reduce both the extent and height of the berms/walls on the eastside of SR 104. Cleaning out the culvert entirely (without leaving a foot depth for fish passage) would also be a benefit and the City could investigate this option. This element could also include maintenance/excavation of channel downstream of the culvert (and removal of associated cattails) that has built up with sediment. That is, prior to the implementation of the full channel restoration, File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & In$astructure, LLC 2-25 Packet Page 210 of 456 Section 2 the City could perform channel maintenance to partially restore the channel downstream of culvert and provide positive drainage on an interim basis prior to the future channel relocation and restoration project. The Harbor Square pipe outfall modifications were added to the recommended alternative because it became apparent that the outflow from the two existing outfalls is severely affected by sediment accumulation around the outfalls. This element of work would include maintenance to remove sediment as well as adding flap gates (or Tideflex valves) to the outlets. Flap gates would prevent now going into Harbor Square during extreme marsh water levels. The raising or sealing the WSDOT overflow manhole will be included in the recommended alternative if monitoring shows that the overflow volume is large and contributes to increased water levels in the marsh. During large storms, flows exceed the capacity of the WSDOT system and overflow into the marsh. Although current modeling shows the overflows have a small impact on upstream marsh levels, monitoring of the system may reveal a larger impact. Since the inclusion of this element is based on monitoring data and effort is relatively inexpensive, a cost estimate was not prepared. If the item is implemented, WSDOT approval is required. Implementation of Recommended Alternative Implementing the full recommended alternative will likely take many years based on the additional data that needs to be collected, the processes for securing funding, property and permit approvals. As such, this section of the report includes both a discussion of phased implementation as well as recommendations for further studies and data collection. For the purpose of this report, the recommended alternative is proposed to be implemented in three phases: ■ Early action (approximately within one to two years) ■ Short term (approximately with two to three years) ■ Long term (approximately three to ten years) The time periods are estimates because of the several unkowns about future funding. The elements of the recommended alternative are listed in Table 2-7 by implementation category. This table also shows the cost for each element. In addition to the early action projects shown on Table 2-7, it is recommended that the City collect additional data/analysis that will be helpful for future design and implementation of the recommended alternative. These recommendations are summarized below. ■ Maintain the existing gages installed as a part of the Willow Creek Daylighting study. In addition, gauging should be added to the WSDOT pipe system where it overflows to the marsh in order to better assess the volumes of overflows. The information could be used to perform further hydraulic model validation and refinements upon obtaining data for a few large events. Consideration should also be given to a flow gage in the outlet pipe system that measures depth and 2-26 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 211 of 456 ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION velocity. While the current water level gages are very helpful, they do not provide actual flow rate data. ■ Research the anticipated ownership of the Unocal site to better understand the availability of the site for Willow Creek Daylighting. ■ Conduct topographic survey of the entire marsh area. The current data available included a combination of topographic survey and cross sections. A complete topographic survey could be used to more accurately quantify available storage volumes in the marsh. ■ Consider conducting some sediment sampling in the marsh and along the proposed Willow Creek daylighting alignment to assess the assumption that one-half of the excavation will require special disposal. According to the Willow Creek Daylighting study, most contamination within the existing Willow Creek has been removed, however Ecology may require further sampling of the creek as part of a Compliance Monitoring Plan for the Unocal site. Table 2-7: Recommended Alternative Implementation and Cost Estimate Summary Element Description Cost Early Action (1-2 years) Clean/Lower Shellabarger Creek/SR 104 Culvert (and maintenance of outlet channel) (1) $132,000 Remove 36"/22" Culverts and Embankment 122,000 Harbor Square Pipe Outfall Modifications 44,000 Willow Creek 48-inch Pipe Rehabilitation 518,000 Short Term (2 — 3 years) Dayton Street Pump Station 1,173,000 Raise or Seal WSDOT Overflow Manhole (2) Isolating Marsh System from Dayton 135,000 Divert Salish Crossing to Dayton Street System 73,000 Divert Harbor Square Overflows to Dayton Pump Station 112,000 Long Term (3.10 years) Ferry Queuing Area Water Quality Treatment 442,000 Restore Shellabarger and Willow Creek to Marsh 421,000 Shellabarger Creek Sediment Pond 323,000 Daylight Channel Construction 5,032,000 Self -Regulating Tide Gate and Structure 567,000 Existing 48-inch Willow Creek Outlet Pipe Modifications (weir for marsh overflow) 55,000 Total $9,149,000 Notes: (1) Cost includes only culvert and channel clearing for early action activities. Replacing the culvert at a lower elevation would likely be in later years and at WSDOT expense. (2) Cost not included at this time. See report text. File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC 2-27 Packet Page 212 of 456 Section 2 This page intentionally left blank. 2-28 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 213 of 456 Puget Sound Existing WSDOT System Existing Willow Creek Outfall H Existing Willow Creek Tide Gate Existing BNSF/Sound Transit Bridge Crossing V Reroute Salish f �'T Crossing Drainage to Dayton Street System Dayton System Pump Station (13 cfs) and FYI, New 18" Outfall Pipe i° ■ tray r- U ti 140/ Add High Flow Bypass Connections (Two) From Harbor Square to Dayton System �< a4 New Berm +e" dbL j J Remove Existing Culverts 0. N x Excavate Portions of Freshwater Emergent Wetland (— 12 acre-ft) TIP Stormwater Oil Control and v �■ ,. Treatment System for Ferry Queuing Area ■ftift r I � r Plug Pipe to Dayton System and Add Short Berm (1' +/-) Sediment Pond Re -grade and Re-establish Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek in New Location (1) i�I s Cn X O n N Legend Figure 2-1. Forested Upland Freshwater Emergent Parcels Existing Storm Drain Proposed Storm Drain/Berm Alternative 1 Feet Forested Wetland Mudflat and Salt Marsh ---- Existing Channel - — Proposed Channel �= =- = = 2 oc 0 162.5 325 Note: 1 As proposed under separate Willow Creek Da li htin Study, and Wilson, 2013. ■ Proposed Water Quality or () p p P Y 9 9 Y From Science to Solutions (2) Marsh wetland designations are approximate and taken from Shannon and Wilson, 2013. Conveyance Facility P:\ECI\1798-SEA\001772 Edmonds WA, City of\2651211002 Dayton St SR104 Alternatives Study\Data Analytical\GIS 1 7-18-2013 Packet Page 214 of 456 N Legend Figure 2-2. Forested Upland Freshwater Emergent Parcels Existing Storm Drain Proposed Storm Drain/Berm Alternative 2 Feet Forested Wetland Mudflat and Salt Marsh ---- Existing Channel - — Proposed Channel - = =- 0 162.5 325 Note: 1 As proposed under separate Willow Creek Da li htin Study, and Wilson, 2013. ■ Proposed Water Quality or () p p P Y 9 9 Y From Science to Solutions (2) Marsh wetland designations are approximate and taken from Shannon and Wilson, 2013. Conveyance Facility P:\ECI\1798-SEA\001772 Edmonds WA, City of\2651211002 Dayton St SR104 Alternatives Study\Data Analytical\GIS 1 7-18-2013 Packet Page 215 of 456 Existing WSDOT System Puget Sound Pump Station (50 cfs) with Fish Screen at Intake (Pumps to Existing Outfall Pipe) 1111111161 % WA Remove Existing Culverts Existing Willow ` 7*' Creek Outfall In risi /' Daylight Channel Excavation (1) Pedestrian Bridge with Culvert Existing Willow Creek and (SRT) Tide Gate (1) "" �••� Tide Gate ` Existing BNSF/Sound Transit �. Bridge Crossing • •-1 Daylight Channel Excavation (1) `•� !r" ` n. - Nqw Stormwater Oil Control and i.�.r ■ F • ' Treatment System for f Ferry Queuing Area 'V"WAi � '• _ .�i��s�iw � � � ,� +! Fry i , ' 010, - Dayton St r. �.+ kkk Conveyance Upgrades (Pipe Replacement within .■ }� Harbor Square)IT - Plug Pipe to Dayton System J and Add Short Berm (0.5' +/-) IL 1 rf f Sediment Pond �r Re grade and Re-establish Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek in New Location (1) 40k- Cn S, N Legend Forested Upland Freshwater Emergent Parcels Existing Storm Drain Proposed Storm Drain/Berm Figure 2-3. Alternative 3 Feet Forested Wetland Mudflat and Salt Marsh ---- Existing Channel - — Proposed Channel - = =- 0 162.5 325 Note: 1 As proposed under separate Willow Creek Da li htin Study, and Wilson, 2013. ■ Proposed Water Quality or () p p P Y 9 9 Y From Science to Solutions (2) Marsh wetland designations are approximate and taken from Shannon and Wilson, 2013. Conveyance Facility P:\ECI\1798-SEA\001772 Edmonds WA, City of\2651211002 Dayton St SR104 Alternatives Study\Data Analytical\GIS 1 7-18-2013 Packet Page 216 of 456 Existing WSDOT System Existing Willow Creek Outfall Puget Sound IAW + .a StormwaterOil Control and 5�� '- 1r•� �r Treatment System for Ferry Queuing Area „may i r- r J Pump Station (30 cfs) with �i■p 30" Forcemain to Sound. Pipe Improvements wr New Berm ell ' ti . ►� +�` / `- Add Short Berm (1' +/-) Sediment Pond Tom■ Remove Existing Culverts Existing Willow Creek Tide Gate Existing BNSF/Sound Transit r Bridge Crossing 4 Re -grade and Re-establish Shellabarger - Creek and Willow Creek in New Location (1) iw_ N Legend Figure 2-4. Forested Upland Freshwater Emergent Parcels Existing Storm Drain Proposed Storm Drain/Berm Alternative 4 Feet Forested Wetland Mudflat and Salt Marsh ---- Existing Channel - — Proposed Channel - = =- 0 162.5 325 Note: 1 As proposed under separate Willow Creek Da li htin Study, and Wilson, 2013. ■ Proposed Water Quality or () p p P Y 9 9 Y From Science to Solutions (2) Marsh wetland designations are approximate and taken from Shannon and Wilson, 2013. Conveyance Facility P:\ECI\1798-SEA\001772 Edmonds WA, City of\2651211002 Dayton St SR104 Alternatives Study\Data Analytical\GIS 1 7-18-2013 Packet Page 217 of 456 .M•• Reroute Salish Crossing Drainage to Dayton System Y Puget Sound Dayton Street System ! ' Pump Station (13 cfs) ' and New 18" Outfall Pipe t' Add High Flow Bypass Connections .;. (Two) From Harbor Square to Dayton System New Berm � ti Excavate so Outfalls have Y Free Discharge into Marsh and Add Flap Gates to Outfalls Add Weir to Existing Willow Creek �dr► Outfall to Function as Overflow Remove Existing Culverts (1) Willow Creek 48-inch CMP Pipe Rehabilitation Eliminate WSDOT System Overflows Daylight Channel Excavation (1) Pedestrian Bridge with Culvert and (SRT) Tide Gate (1) Existing BNSF/Sound Transit 4' Bridge Crossing D•• Approxiamte Location of,'.. Daylight Channel Excavation (1) 7swealishi rossing r f l"� . ANEW Stormwater Oil Control and Treatment System for Ferry Queuing Area 1 Dayton St' Plug Pipe to Dayton System and Add Short Berm (0.5' +/-) Clean and/or Lower Culvert Sediment Pond Re -grade and Re-establish Shellabarger _ Creek and Willow Creek in New Location (1) rs: 11 44 tipY7 . ;t4.. , N Legend Figure 2-5. Forested Upland (2) Freshwater Emergent Parcels Existing Storm Drain Proposed Storm Drain/Berm Recommended Alternative Feet Forested Wetland Mudflat and Salt Marsh ---- Existing Channel - — Proposed Channel - = =- = = oc 0 162.5 325 Proposed Water Quality or 2wo fir«`® Notes: (1)As proposed under separate Willow Creek Daylighting Study, Shannon and Wilson, 2013. Conveyance Facility From Science to Solutions (2) Marsh wetland designations are approximate and taken from Shannon and Wilson, 2013. P:\ECI\1798-SEA\001772 Edmonds WA, City of\2651211002 Dayton St SR104 Alternatives Study\Data Analytical\GIS 1 7-18-2013 Packet Page 218 of456 REFERENCES Army Corps of Engineers, 1994. TN SD-CP-2.2 "Effects of Vegetation on Hyrdraulic Roughness and Sedimentation in Wetlands", May 1994. Chevron, 2013, Personal communication between Kim Jolitz (Chevron Corporation) and Jerry Schuster (City of Edmonds) regarding comments on Draft Early Feasibility Study for Willow Creek Daylight, Written comments provided May 6th, 2013. Climate Impacts Group and Ecology, 2008. Sea Level Rise in the Coastal Waters for Washington State, January 2008. King County, 2009. King County Surface Water Drainage Manual, January 2009. Pentec, 1998. Evaluation of Habitat Benefits and Impacts Associated with the Proposed Daylighting of the Outlet from Edmonds Marsh, 1998. Pentec, 2002. Edmonds Stream Inventory and Assessment, 2002. People for Puget Sound, 2009. Biological Condition of the Edmonds Waterfront and Preliminary Feasibility Considerations for Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration, 2012. R.W. Beck, 1991. City of Edmonds Drainage Basin Studies, May 1991. Shannon and Wilson, Inc., 2013. Tidal Marsh Hydrodynamics Report Willow Creek Daylight Early Feasibility Study, May 2013. Snohomish County, 2002. Drainage Needs Report, December 2002. Snohomish County, 2010. Snohomish County Drainage Manual, September 2010. WSDOT, 2008. Marsh Topographic Surveys, 2008. File:001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Packet Page 219 of 456 Appendix A HYDROLOGIC I HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAID Packet Page 220 of 456 Appendix A HYDROLOGIC I HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS Introduction An HSPF model was developed to generate a long term time series of runoff tributary to both the SR 104/Dayton Street drainage system and the Edmonds Marsh. Major tributary systems include Shellabarger Creek, Willow Creek and portions of urban drainage systems north of Dayton Street. The time series of runoff from the different systems was developed to route flows through an unsteady state hydraulic model, XP-SWMM to examine historical coincidence of high tides, high rainfall events and flooding, and to examine the performance of alternative solutions to flooding problems within the study area. The advantage to using long-term hydrology with unsteady state hydraulic modeling is that it can inherently account for the interaction of tidally influenced flood events by using historical tides along with historical precipitation. This appendix describes the analysis under two major parts, HSPF Hydrologic Model Development and XP-SWMM Hydraulic Model Development. HSPF Hydrologic Model Development The Hydrologic Simulation Program - FORTRAN (HSPF) is a continuous hydrologic model for watersheds that produces a long-term time history of runoff based upon historical precipitation and runoff from different soil types and land uses. HSPF routes flow downstream through stream reaches (defined as FTABLEs that include relationships between stage, storage and discharge) that accounts for attenuation from system storage but does not account for the effects of dynamic routing such as tidal impacts on the Edmonds Marsh and Dayton Street systems. The following paragraphs describe the model development. Some of the model parameters for the Edmonds HSPF model were taken from a model developed for a nearby basin, Scriber Creek by Snohomish County. The Scriber Creek HPSF model was developed by Snohomish County as part of the Drainage Needs Report (2000), and later updated by SAIC for the City of Lynnwood. These assumptions include the various parameters controlling infiltration, soil water storage, overland flow and groundwater. Unique to the model created for this study are the basins contributing flow to Edmonds Marsh, the basin characteristics and the stage - storage relationship of the conveyance within the basins. Basin Delineations and Model Schematic The area contributing runoff to the Edmonds Marsh and Dayton Street systems was divided into sixteen subbasins using GIS maps showing aerial photographs, contours and the City of Edmond surface drainage system. Field visits and as -built information File:001712 1 26512110002 SAIC, Packet Page 221 of 456 Appendix A were also used. Figure A-1 shows the HSPF subbasins as well the City's storm drainage system. Another basin, the Edmonds Way basin, was added to the model because it was determined that it could overflow into the Edmonds Marsh. Figure A-2 shows the network schematic of the subbasins and conveyance reaches (RCHRES) within the HSPF model. Subbasin areas are shown on the network schematic and in Table A-1. It is important to note that the HSPF model routes the flow from subbasin 140 to subbasin 400. However, during actual high flows, runoff from Subbasin 140 will travel north to Subbasin 120. This change in flow direction is included in the hydraulic component of the analysis, but is not reflected in the HSPF model. Precipitation/Evaporation Precipitation data used in the hydrology model was obtained from the Alderwood rain gauge located approximately 5.5 miles northeast of the intersection of Dayton St/SR 104. The Alderwood rain gauge is located at the Alderwood Water District offices and is owned and operated by Snohomish County. The Alderwood gauge has 15 minute recorded data from November 20, 1987 to present. The dataset was extended with nearby stations by Snohomish County in its Drainage Needs Report (DNR) effort to provide a composite record for the station which extended the record back to October 1, 1948. The precipitation record used in this analysis is 15-minute data from October 1, 1980 to December 31, 2012. Extensions of the record for this precipitation station since the 2002 DNR study were obtained directly from Snohomish County Public Works staff. The City of Edmonds has daily rain gage data from 2000 to the present. A comparison between the rain gage at the Edmonds Wastewater Treatment Plant (Edmonds WWTP) and the Alderwood station shows that on average the Alderwood rain gage is 27 percent higher than Edmonds WWTP station for annual totals of precipitation (correcting for days of missing data). The percent annual difference between the two stations was 51 percent to 14 percent with the Edmonds station always being lower. Although the difference between two stations is relatively high, the decision was made to use the Alderwood precipitation as -is, i.e. not scaled down. There are four reasons for this decision: 1. The Edmonds rain gage data had several days when data was not recorded (excluding zero precipitation days) which indicates that the measuring equipment may not read data accurately, 2. The Edmonds WWTP is located at the downstream end of the basin, while many of subbasins modeled are at higher elevations similar to the Alderwood station, 3. The higher elevation modeled subbasins and the Alderwood station are in the same isopluvial curve for the mean annual precipitation 2-year, 10-year and 100-year 24 hour storms (Appendix III -A, Snohomish County Drainage Manual, 2010), and A-2 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 222 of 456 HYDROLOGIC 1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS 4. Comparison of individual storms within the period showed that for some individual storms the 24-hr precipitation was at times very similar. For example, for the 2007 storm, the largest storm on record, the precipitation totals from the two stations were nearly identical. File:001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC A-3 Packet Page 223 of 456 Appendix A This page intentionally left blank. A-4 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 224 of 456 130 4201 \;....�10�I 1 l I 140 400 � �see� y 20 34( 1� A 300 Legend N Dayton Street Shellabarger Creek Willow Creek 0 625 1,250 2,500 Feet r-1 Edmonds Marsh Q WSDOT/Edmonds Way I JI IF ,I 1. I' I � I � cubed, USDE.11IUSG'S' ity Figure A-1. Stormwater System HSPF Basins Streams and Ditches City of Edmonds Dayton St and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Study Appendix A Willow Creek 320 340 (137.3 acres) (23.2 acres) % e 300 (227.6 acres) �O 120 130 (25.4 acres) (2.87 acres) 100 (5.1 acres) O O Marina Outfall Soo (18.4 acres) O O Willow Creek Inlet to DS Pipe Figure A-2. HSPF Model Schematic File: 001712 1 26512110002 47-0 (2.2 acres) O Q E(1 45.2 acres] 0 N Q E00 (45.40 acres) 0 a Q Willow Creek Inlet to DS Pipe 600 (16.9 acres) O O Willow Creek Inlet to DS Pipe HYDROLOGIC 1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS Shellabarger Creek 220 240 260 (106.9 acres) (33.1 acres) (118.7) N O �O O y &, ltle-, 200 (81.3 acres) 140 1n4 (11.4 acres) 700 (954.6 acres) V O O WSDOT Outfall KEY Subbasin 100 (acres) (5.1 acres) RCHRFS 100 Outlet Marina Outfall SAIE. Packet Page 226 of 456 Appendix A The evaporation data used in the model is the same data set used in the DNR effort. As discussed in DNR documentation, the evaporation data input to the HSPF model is in the form of pan evaporation data. The nearest Class A pan is located in Puyallup at the Washington State University Experimental Field Station. Puyallup is approximately 40 miles south of the Edmonds, but because evaporation does not vary greatly in the Puget Sound lowland watersheds, the distance from the study area is not significant. The Puyallup station was used for pan evaporation data in this study. The period of record was October 1948 to September 2001. Record extensions for this evaporation since the 2000 DNR study were obtained directly from Snohomish County Public Works staff. Subbasin Characteristics Using GIS analysis tools and GIS shapefiles for soil, slope and vegetation, each subbasin is described by a unique combination of soil, slope and land cover. Table A-1 lists the subbasins and their areas with the unique soil, slope and land cover combination. Soil information was obtained from USDA/NRCS soil maps and further classified for use within the HSPF model platform in accordance with Table 3.1 in the 2010 Snohomish County Drainage Manual (SCDM). The soil maps were obtained from the City of Edmonds in GIS format. Slope information was obtained from LiDAR data from the Puget Sound LiDAR Consortium using GIS analysis. Land covers (types of vegetation and impervious surfaces) were obtained from both City of Edmonds Zoning GIS and USDS/NRSC vegetation aerial maps. The impervious area with each subbasin was calculated with the use of the City's zoning GIS data and aerial photos, impervious area estimates (Table 3.2 in SCDM) and effective impervious fraction guidelines (Table 3.2.2.E, King County Surface Water Design Manual, 2009). The impervious area estimates and the effective fractions in the design manual were used as guidelines, but for some land use types these values were modified based on specific information in the study area such as areas of known connectivity to the drainage system (decreases effective fraction from design manual tables), typical landscaping practices (decreases impervious fraction from design manual tables), and larger than typical homes (increases impervious fraction). Table A-2 shows the impervious fraction, effective impervious fraction, and the resulting effective impervious as applied to the study area. Where there has been a change in fractions given in the drainage design manual, the reason has been noted in the table comments. A-8 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 227 of 456 HYDROLOGIC 1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS Table A-1: HSPF Basin PERLND, IMPLND and Total Areas Basin ID Till Forest Flat Till Forest Mod Till Forest Steep Till Grass Flat Till Grass Mod Till Grass Steep Outwash Forest Outwash Grass Saturated Forest Saturated Grass Effective Imper- vious Total 100 0.14 0.13 0.09 0.34 0.14 0.09 4.22 5.15 120 1.43 0.59 0.32 2.03 1.20 0.45 19.77 25.45 130 - - - 0.13 0.02 - - - - 2.72 2.87 140 0.38 0.29 0.08 0.86 1.03 0.34 - 0.29 0.23 0.81 7.08 11.39 200 0.44 0.48 0.15 4.79 4.91 1.95 7.89 24.13 0.00 0.27 36.32 81.33 220 0.09 0.19 0.13 23.28 21.58 12.76 0.30 12.68 0.27 0.67 34.95 106.89 240 - - - 3.63 7.90 5.35 - 3.70 - - 12.51 33.10 260 0.83 0.29 0.14 11.55 18.96 11.24 - 8.18 - 0.22 67.24 118.66 300 25.33 28.60 14.16 25.40 28.90 14.65 31.87 41.42 0.98 0.98 15.30 227.59 320 0.13 0.23 0.07 13.77 12.49 7.99 2.44 46.08 0.08 1.03 53.03 137.34 340 0.00 0.02 - 0.00 0.02 - 0.21 11.50 - - 11.41 23.18 400 2.21 1.52 1.42 3.27 1.66 1.42 0.63 0.63 13.83 13.94 24.38 64.91 410 - - - 0.67 0.08 - - - - 0.01 14.48 15.24 420 - - - 0.10 0.01 - - 2.11 2.22 500 0.79 0.75 1.05 1.43 1.85 2.54 - - 10.04 18.45 600 3.11 1.13 1.03 3.38 1.67 1.76 0.06 0.06 - 4.70 16.91 700 - - - 243.09 180.25 120.00 - 73.59 - 0.48 337.23 954.64 Total 34.87 34.22 18.63 336.82 282.57 180.55 43.41 222.26 15.39 18.40 638.22 1825.36 File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC A-9 Packet Page 228 of 456 Appendix A Table A-2: Impervious and Effective Impervious Fractions for Study Area Zoning Types Edmonds Effective Resultant Resultant Resultant Zoning Description Impervious Impervious Effective Pasture Wood Comments (except Fraction Fraction Impervious Fraction Fraction where noted) BD1, BD2, Business, 0.95 1 0.95 0.05 0 Impervious Fraction reduced BD3, BD4, Commercial from 1 to 0.95 for Edmonds BD5, BC, BP, based on Edmonds typical CG, CW commercial area landscaping RM-1.5, RM- Multi Family 0.75 1 0.75 0.25 0 Impervious Fraction 2.4, RM-3, calculated from GIS analysis MP1 of sample MF parcels 0.9 0.378 0.622 0 Impervious Fraction based on RS-6 Single Family 0.42 (6,000 sq.ft. 4.0 DU/GA, Effective Fraction lot) based on typical Edmonds connectivity RS-8 Single Family 0.34 0.9 0.306 0.694 0 Impervious Fraction based on (6,000 sq.ft. 3.0 DU/GA, Effective Fraction lot) based on typical Edmonds connectivity RS-10 Single Family 0.3 0.9 0.27 0.73 0 Impervious Fraction based on (6,000 sq.ft. 2.5 DU/GA, Effective Fraction lot) based on typical Edmonds connectivity RS-MP Single Family 0.3 0.9 0.27 0.73 0 Impervious Fraction based on - Master Plan 2.5 DU/GA, Effective Fraction based connectivity to drainage system. 0.5DU Woodway 0.09 0.4 0.036 0.48 0.48 Impervious fraction based on (Town of Residential larger than typical home size. Woodway (0.5 Dwelling zoning) Unit/ Gross Acre) 0.6DU Woodway 0.12 0.66 0.08 0.46 0.46 Impervious fraction based on (Town of Residential larger than typical home size. Woodway (0.6 Dwelling Effective fraction based on zoning) Unit/ Gross connectivity to drainage Acre) system. 0.8DU Woodway 0.14 0.66 0.09 0.45 0.45 Impervious fraction based on (Town of Residential larger than typical home size. Woodway (0.8 Dwelling Effective fraction based on Zoning) Unit/ Gross connectivity to drainage Acre) system. P Public Use 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 No changes from Design Manual MP2 Master Plan - 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 No changes from Design Mixed Use Manual OS Open Space 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 No changes from Design Manual A-10 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 229 of 456 HYDROLOGIC 1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS Runoff Routing (FTABLE Development) The storage contained in conveyance systems is estimated by a hydraulic function table (FTABLE). The FTABLEs define the depth -area -volume -flow relationships used for routing runoff through the stream or pipe reaches represented in the HSPF model. The FTABLEs developed for the Edmonds HSPF model are based on normal depth (Manning's equation) and represent a single stream or ditch in each basin rather than the actual network of streams, ditches, culverts and pipes. This simplified approach is reasonable for this study because the subbasins upstream of the marsh area are generally moderately steep to steep and do not provide significant storage volume. The significant storage volume occurs in the lower portions of the system in the area of the marsh which is modeled using the dynamic hydraulic model. HSPF Model Results Peak flow analyses were performed for each of the HSPF subbasins. The annual peak flows were developed for each year of record simulated and were plotted using an Extreme Value Type I scale. Table A-3 shows the peak flow rate for various return intervals. It is important to note that these HSPF peak flow predictions do not account for backwater affects from system hydraulics and tidal conditions and therefore overstate the peak flows in the lower system that is modeled with the hydraulic model. The peaks are shown here to demonstrate relative impact of the subbasin within the study area. Peak flows and water levels from the hydraulic model do account for these affects and are used for system analysis. It is also noted that the analysis of the Edmonds Way basin was simplified because it was outside the original study area. The simplifications are that the entire basin is treated as one large subbasin (as opposed to breaking it into several smaller basins) and the FTABLE storage was simply estimated using the storage of the Edmonds Way trunk storm drain. File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC A-11 Packet Page 230 of 456 Appendix A Table A-3: Peak Flow Predictions for 2-, 10-, 25- and 100-Year Return Intervals, cfs HSPF Reach Location 2-yr pow 1� cfs 10-yr pow 1� cfs 25-yr peak flow, cfst 100-yr peak flow, cfst 100 Dayton Street and Railroad Ave 6.7 10.3 12.2 14.9 120 Dayton Street and SR 104 5.9 9.2 10.8 13.4 130 Xx Stand XX St 0.7 1.0 1.2 1.4 140 East of SR 104 between Dayton Street and Pine St 2.2 3.4 4.0 4.9 200 Shellabarger Creek at inlet to SR 104 culvert crossing 31.9 47.7 55.8 67.9 220 3rd Ave between Walnut St and Howell Way 7.7 11.6 13.7 16.9 240 East end of Homeland Dr 4.5 7.4 8.9 11.1 260 East end of Homeland Dr 14.5 22.2 26.1 31.8 300 Willow Creek crossing of Pine St (near Willow Creek Hatchery) 20.8 32.7 38.9 48.5 320 Willow Creek crossing of Edmonds Way near 5t" Ave S 13.8 21.4 25.3 31.2 340 Edmonds Way and Pine St 3.3 5.4 6.4 8.0 400 Willow Creek at outlet from Edmonds Marsh 39.1 50.3 55.1 61.7 410 Dayton Street and 3.3 4.9 5.8 7.1 420 Dayton Street and 0.5 0.8 0.9 1.1 500 Near Willow Creek inlet to Outlet pipe system 2.7 4.4 5.2 6.5 600 Willow Creek tributary basin adjacent to Edmonds Marsh 1.2 2.0 2.4 3.1 700 WSDOT & Edmonds Way 148.6 233.2 275.1 336.8 (1) These peak flow predictions are based on a frequency analysis of runoff with simplified FTABLEs and do not account for backwater/tidal effects and therefore likely overstate actual flows, particularly in the areas modeled with the hydraulic model. Refer to the Hydraulic model results. XP SWMM Hydraulic Model Development Model Extents and Data Sources The hydraulics of the Dayton Street /Edmonds Marsh system were modeled using XP-SWMM (SWMM). The SWMM model extents include the Dayton Street System from the intersection of SR 104 to Puget Sound and the Edmonds Marsh system from the east side of SR 104 where Shellabarger Creek enters the wetland, through the marsh to Puget Sound. The two systems are connected via pipes and channels on both the east and west sides of SR 104. Figure 1-4 in the main body of the report presents the extent of the model. Several data sources were used: A-12 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 231 of 456 HYDROLOGIC 1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS Existing Data ■ As -built drawings of the drainage system along Dayton Street (SR 104 to Railroad Avenue) ■ As -built drawings of the Willow Creek outfall extension (2004) ■ Prior surveys along Dayton Street and SR 104 (by the City) ■ Edmonds Antique Mall Boundary & Topographic Survey (2009 Pace) ■ Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drainage Replacement Project (1991) ■ Shellabarger Creek SR 104 culvert crossing (prior to cleaning)(DHA) ■ Storm and Sewer Improvements Railroad Ave & Dayton Street Topographic Survey (sheet 1 of 3). ■ A 2008 survey by WSDOT throughout the salt water portions of marsh. This survey includes multiple spot elevations throughout the marsh and was validated as described below. ■ A 2008 survey of the Willow Creek outlet channel from the downstream end of the marsh to the pipe outlet system (CH2M Hill) Supplemental Survey A 2012 survey by Perteet was conducted as part of this project in order to both collect new data and validate prior 2008 WSDOT survey within the marsh. The 2008 survey of the marsh included a topographic survey of the salt water portions of the marsh. Rather than re -surveying this area, three cross sections were surveyed across the saltwater portions of marsh in order to compare and validate the 2008 survey. The 2008 survey (and multiple other prior surveys were in the MLLW (Mean Lower Level Water) datum which is 2.25-feet lower than NAVD88 (the City's current elevation datum). As a result, the 2008 elevations were converted to NAVD88. The elevations in the 2008 and 2012 surveys matched well which allowed the more extensive 2008 topography survey of the saltwater portion of the marsh to be used to develop cross sections for the SWMM model. In addition to these cross sections, the supplemental survey included additional cross section in the marsh (beyond the saltwater portion) as well as ditch cross sections along SR 104, rim and invert elevations at the intersection of Dayton Street and SR 104, and culvert and pipe information downstream of the marsh. The survey also picked up known observed high water marks where this information was available. Drainage System Description The drainage system in the study area consists of the Dayton Street System and the Edmonds Marsh system. These systems are generally described in the main report, but are described below in more detail with respect to the hydraulic modeling effort. File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC A-13 Packet Page 232 of 456 Appendix A The Dayton Street System The Dayton Street system consists of approximately 1280-feet of 24-inch and 30-inch concrete storm drains between the intersection of Dayton Street and SR 104, and the Dayton Street outfall north of the Edmonds Marina. The outfall has a tide flex gate which prevents high tides from entering the system. The transition from 24-inch pipes to 30-inch pipes occurs at a manhole near the intersection of Dayton Street and Railroad Ave. At this manhole (referred to as "swirl concentrator type water quality treatment facility" in Section 1) the invert elevation of the outlet 30-inch pipe is 5.3-feet above the invert elevation of the incoming 24-inch pipe. This creates a high point in the system which has the potential to contribute to the flooding during extreme events. In addition, because a portion of the incoming storm drain is continuously under water, it may be subject to sediment accumulation if not regularly maintained. Along the east side of SR 104 there is a 24-inch diameter pipe system that extends south from the intersection along the west side of the City's wastewater treatment. This system extends to a low-lying wetland that also extends south to Shellabarger Creek. At the southeast corner of the intersection, this 24-inch diameter pipe system is joined by a system extending from the north and draining the ferry queuing area. At this point, an 8-inch diameter pipe connects it to the Dayton Street system. The southeast corner of the intersection is the general low point in the area and is often the sign of flooding. The ditch and culvert system on the west side of SR 104 south of the intersection is also included in the model. This system flows south to the marsh. While not much area is tributary to this system, it can serve as an overflow path when the intersection is flooded. An additional goal of the modeling effort that was specifically requested by the City was to determine how the WSDOT ferry queuing area east of SR 104 and north of Dayton Street connects to the City's drainage system. A field visit with City staff along with a review of City GIS files and WSDOT drainage plans revealed that that this area connects to the 24-inch storm drain in the Dayton Street system via an 8-inch direct connection as shown in Figure A-6. The east side of the ferry queuing area includes a series of 8-inch underdrains that connect to a 12-inch storm system that extends south along the west side of the ferry queuing area. The 12-inch pipe transitions to an 18-inch x 11-inch arch pipe where it enters Dayton Street. It extends south, crossing above the east -west running 24-inch system in Dayton Street to connect to a catchbasin at the southeast corner of the Dayton St/SR 104 intersection. This catchbasin has a pipe connection from the south that receives overflow from Shellabarger Creek. The catch basin also has a short 8-inch connection to another catch basin a few -feet away. This catchbasin includes an 8-inch outlet that extends north to connect directly to the 24-inch Dayton Street system. A-14 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 233 of 456 HYDROLOGIC 1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS Edmonds Marsh The Edmonds Marsh drainage system receives runoff from Shellabarger Creek (crossing SR 104) from the east and Willow Creek from the south and locally adjacent areas. The dual arch culverts that cross SR 104 have approximately 1.3 to 2-feet of sediment built up at the inlet and outlet. In addition, sediment accumulation and extensive cattail growth has filled in the former creek alignment downstream of the culvert, such that the creek now flows in a southerly direction along the west side of SR 104 then extends west to join with Willow Creek. Willow Creek flows into the marsh after crossing under Pine Street near the Willow Creek Salmon Hatchery. It flows north and west joining Shellabarger Creek and then flows in a clearly defined channel that extends west along the south side of the marsh. This channel continues west and then south approximately 0.5 miles along the railroad to turn west and crosses the railroad in dual 42-inch diameter culverts. These culverts discharge to a short section of open channel on the west side of the railroad where the creek enters a 600-foot-long 48-inch diameter pipe extending south to a stormwater vault south of the Edmonds marina. The pipe in the vault is equipped with a 48-inch tide (flap) gate which is controlled by a manually operated pulley system. During the wet season from November to mid -March, the tide gate is closed to prevent seawater from entering the system during high tides and exacerbating high water levels in the winter. The tide gate is opened during the drier part of the year, mid -March through October. The weight and size of the tide gate is likely causing some headloss at the pipe outlet. Approximately 1000-feet of 48-inch pipe comprises the remainder of the Willow Creek outfall system from the tide gate to the Sound. In addition to the tide gate, there are two smaller gates attached to culverts that can affect the marsh outflows. These two parallel culverts are located just upstream of the dual 42-inch diameter railroad culverts (See Nodes 29 and 30 on Figure 1-5). The two culverts include a 36-inch CMP culvert and a 22-inch diameter steel culvert, both placed within a short berm crossing Willow Creek. The height of the berm allows it to be overtopped during significant events. The purpose of these culverts and gates is not specifically known, however, anecdotal information from the City suggests that Unocal may have installed these gates in order to provide a method of cutting off flow in case there was a spill within the Unocal property. One of the gates is partially closed and the other is fully closed. Model Setup and Key Assumptions In SWMM, a node represents a manhole, connection point between pipes or channels, a location for water enter or leaving the system, or an outfall. A SWMM link represents a pipe or channel (it can also represent a pump). The SWMM model includes all of the drainage systems described in the section above. The marsh is modeled through links and nodes and the large amount of flood storage is represented by wide cross sections (rather than a storage unit). Elevations at flow line nodes with no survey data were interpolated based the 2008 survey. File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC A-15 Packet Page 234 of 456 Appendix A The Manning's roughness coefficients for the model cross sections were determined based on photos taken from the site visit and aerials for areas that could not be accessed (such the creek channel downstream of the marsh on BNSF property). The following coefficients were used: ■ 0.07 for the channel on the east side of SR 104 due to the heavy vegetation and brushes. The overbank towards the east being even more vegetated was assigned a roughness of 0.1 while the SR 104 overbank was assigned a roughness of 0.016 for asphalt. ■ 0.07 for the channel on the west side of SR 104 south of the Harbor Square driveway culvert and 0.045 north of the culvert due to a less vegetative growth. The overbank towards the west was assigned a roughness of 0.05 while the SR 104 overbank was assigned a roughness of 0.016. ■ 0.3 for the portion of the marsh with heavy cattail growth and sediment buildup and where no clear flow path is defined. This rather high value is based on a technical note TN SD-CP-2.2 (May 1994) by the US COE. ■ 0.05 for the channel through the marsh downstream of the Willow Creek inflow point. A lower roughness coefficient was used since the aerial shows a clearly defined flowpath with less vegetative cover. The overbank north of this channel was assigned a coefficient of 0.07 and the left overbank along the embankment to the Unocal stormwater detention pond was assigned a coefficient of 0.06. ■ 0.04 for the channel downstream of the marsh southeast of the railroad and 0.045 along the overbank. Tidal data at both the Dayton Street and Willow Creek outfalls was downloaded from NOAA's historic database at the Puget Sound station 9447130 located in Seattle. The datum for these elevations is NAVD88. The NOAA tides generally indicate a 0.4 ft lower tide in Edmonds than in Seattle. However, as a part of the Willow Creek Daylighting project, a gage was installed in the Port of Edmonds Marina. A comparison of gaged Edmonds and Seattle tides showed the high tides being closer to the gaged Seattle tide than the 0.4 ft reduction. As a result, the Seattle gaged tidal data was used in the analysis. Additionally, no modification to the model or the tidal elevation was applied to account for the larger density of seawater due to salinity. It is believed that this factor does not have a noticeable impact upon the modeled water elevations. Overflow links were used to simulate runoff on the surface above the rim elevations of the catch basins. The cross section for these links was virtually flat with a roughness coefficient of asphalt (roadway surface). Overflow links were added to the model between open grate catch basins on the Dayton Street system as well as between the SR 104 ditches and the Dayton/SR 104 intersection. In order to simulate the "bathtub -like" flooding at the intersection of Dayton Street and SR 104, all open grate catch basins were connected using overflow links so that the model equalizes the ponding elevation. A-16 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 235 of 456 HYDROLOGIC 1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS The effect of sediment build up in the arch culverts crossing SR 104 was accounted for by using the sediment top elevation as in the invert elevation for the culvert. Then the remaining open area along with the span (width) of the 47-inch x 71-inch arch culverts were used to pick new culvert dimensions. The total area and dimensions of these culverts reflect the area and approximate dimensions of the culverts with sediment. Hence, a 33-inch x 49-inch and a 38-inch x 57-inch culvert were used in SWMM instead of the actual dimensions. It was also noted that these culverts have an unusual internal support system using timber beams and posts. Figure A-3 includes a photo taken from one of the culverts outlets. It is likely these were installed to provide structural support due to differential settlement across the road. The roughness coefficient for the culverts was 0.035 in order to account to the sediment along the streambed and timber support system. File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC A-17 Packet Page 236 of 456 Appendix A I Figure A-3. Shellabarger Creek - SR 104 Culvert Another key element of the model set up was the use of additional pipe length to simulate the head loss at the tide gate located at the outlet of the 600-ft 48-inch diameter Willow Creek outfall pipe. Literature review regarding head loss due to tide (flap) gates suggests that the gates have a relatively minor effect on the discharge capacity of pipes. However, manufacturers also acknowledge that heavy- duty flap gates or flap gates with significant weight may have a more pronounced effect on the discharge capacity. A head loss of 0.8-feet was hence estimated during the peak of the storm, which is equivalent to 179-feet of additional pipe length using the Hazen -Williams equation. Similarly, a head loss of 0.1-feet was estimated for the tide flex gate valve at the Dayton Street outfall, which amounts to 33-feet of equivalent pipe length. As previously discussed in the main body of the report, a pump with a capacity of about 0.5 cfs was installed in the parking lot of the shopping plaza northwest of the intersection of Dayton Street and Admiral Way. It is engaged only during high tides and heavy rains. Due to the low pumping rate, this pump was not included in the model. Fifteen -minute flow data from the delineated subbasins was computed using HSPF (see hydrology section above) for numerous historical high precipitation and high tide events. The flows are entered into the hydraulic model at select nodes (See Figure 1-5): ■ Subbasin 140 inflows were inserted at node 40, the inlet to the SR 104 arch culverts. A-18 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 237 of 456 HYDROLOGIC 1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS ■ Subbasin 200 inflows were inserted at node 24 where Shellabarger Creek enters the ditch along the east side of SR 104. ■ Subbasin 300 inflows were inserted at node 51 where Willow Creek drains into the marsh. ■ Subbasin 120 inflows were distributed among nodes 14, 79 and 81 near the intersection of Dayton Street and SR 104. ■ Subbasin 100 inflows were distributed along nodes 7 and 10 along Dayton St. ■ Subbasin 500 inflows were inserted at node 31, upstream of the railroad culvert crossing and downstream of the marsh. WSDOT overflows were also inserted at this node where applicable. ■ Subbasins 400, 410 and 420 inflows were distributed among multiple nodes between the SR 104 culvert outlet (node 23) and downstream end of the marsh (node 59). ■ Subbasin 600 was split in half between the marsh (nodes 51 and 26) and the downstream end of the channel southeast of the railroad (node 29). ■ Subbasin 700 inflows were inserted in the WSDOT system which was modeled generally from near upstream of the manhole that can overflow into Willow Creek to its outfall. An orifice overflow link was added at Node 31. This orifice was meant to model the overflows from the top of the WSDOT manhole. It is noted that during initial modeling, the WSDOT pipe system was not included in the model. However, it was deemed important to get an understanding of how much the overflows from this system affect flooding at the intersection. System pipe sizes and invert elevations were obtained from the 1991 Edmonds Way basin study (RW Beck, 1991). Model Validation and Observed High Water Marks In order to provide some validation of model results, a review of historical observed high water marks and a comparison with simulated model results were performed. Identifying historical observed high water marks included review of flooding records, discussions with maintenance staff, and obtaining input from Washington State Department of Ferries. In general, there were limited historical events having clearly accurate known elevations of flooding. These included the following: ■ December 3, 2007 Flood. Two records of high water marks were obtained which matched well with each other. These included anecdotal reports of flooding just above the finish floor of the ferry toll booths (which were subsequently surveyed), and surveyed elevation collected by Reid Middleton in the vicinity of the Harbor Square buildings (documented in an 11/12/09 memorandum to the City of Edmonds). ■ December 12, 2010 Flood. A photograph taken during the storm was used to get an approximate high water mark. It was noted that following this storm event, the City determined that some pipe plugging may have affected the system response. This storm was still used for validation, recognizing that there is File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC A-19 Packet Page 238 of 456 Appendix A some uncertainty about the system performance and the time the photo was taken. ■ November 19, 2012 Flood. As a part of the Willow Creek Daylighting Project, three gages had been installed at various locations in the project vicinity. These locations are shown on Figure 1-5. One of the locations is on Shellabarger Creek on the east side of SR 104, one is in the west portion of the marsh, and one in the Edmonds Marina. In addition, SAIC staff took field measurements of flooding depth during this flood. Table A-4 provides the validation results. Table A-4: SWMM Model Validation Runs Observed Maximum Simulated Simulated Simulated Storm Date High Water High Tide Elevation in Flooding at Low point at Depth Mark (NAVD88) the Marsh OHWM Intersection of Flooding Location at Intersection 12/3/2007 12.431 / 12.42 11.34 11.93 12.26 10.1 2.16 12/12/20103 10.544 10.52 9.66 11.26 10.1 1.16 11 /19/2012 11.55 11.21 10 11.42 10.1 1.32 11 /19/2012 11.856 11.21 10 11.95 10.1 1.32 11/19/2012 10.39' 11.21 10 10 10.1 1.32 (1) Based on data collected by Reid Middleton (11/12/09) in vicinity of Harbor Square Buildings (2) Based on reported standing water in WSDOT ferry tollbooth (inches above floor); floor surveyed at 12.2 (3) Note there may have been partial blockages in Dayton System that could have affected flows (4) Observed high water from Dayton Roadway Shoulder, photograph and survey by Perteet 2012 (5) Based on field measurement by SAIC staff on Dayton Street south of Salish Crossing (6) Gaged flow with data logger (LTC#3) near the SR 104 culvert inlet (7) Gaged flow with data logger (LTC#2) on the west side of the marsh Based on the validation simulations, the model appeared to simulate reasonably the system response. Since the November 2012 had an the most reliable data regarding observed flooding and included continual water level recording, it was used as the basis for model validation efforts. Note that as part of these efforts, 0.5 ft of elevation was added to the bottom of the cross sections through a portion of the eastern part of the marsh. Without this modification, the simulation results tended to under -simulate marsh water levels. The reasoning behind adding the 0.5-feet was to account for some of the reduced available storage from the very dense cattails throughout the eastern side of the marsh and there was some uncertainty in the bottom elevations in the northeastern portion of the marsh because of the limited cross sections obtained in this area. Once the bottom elevation was raised, the system response improved. Figure A-4 shows a time series of the elevations modeled and measured during the November 2012 event. While there are some differences between the marsh water levels (0.4 ft at the peak), the maximum water level at the Shellabarger Creek A-20 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 239 of 456 HYDROLOGIC 1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS entrance to the SR 104 culvert was very close (within 0.1 ft). In addition, the simulation response through the overall storm event shows a good representation of the gaged data. While some improvements in the system response could be made, it would be difficult without more gaged data of storm events. For the purposes of this study, it was concluded that the model reflects a valid representation of the system and can be used for evaluating alternatives. File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC A-21 Packet Page 240 of 456 Appendix A 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 -2 -4 -6 -8 0 0 0 N r-I O N tD ci ci r-I HYDROLOGIC 1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS Marsh Measured Marsh Modeled Tide Node 40 Measured Node 40 Modeled 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N fV N N N N N N N N r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I O O O O O O O O O O \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ N \ \ �--I r1i N N N N N r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I r-I Figure A-4. Model Validation with the November 2012 Storm File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIE. Packet Page 241 of 456 Appendix A Frequency Analysis Upon concluding that the model simulations were validated by historical observations, the SWMM model was then used to simulate 30 years of flows in order to conduct a frequency analysis of water levels in the marsh. While the SWMM model can run very long simulations, it does not have the capacity to run 30 years of complex data including multiple inflow points and varying downstream tidal elevations.. This is because internal tables for holding tidal data have limits to the extent of input data. As such, individual simulations were run for the largest storms occurring within each hydrologic year (October 1 to September 30) for the 30 year period from 1982 to 2011 to obtain annual predicted maximum elevations. The simulated storm period for each year was selected by reviewing flow data (HSPF runoff) in tandem with tidal data to select the period in which there were both high runoff rates and high tides. Most often, the selection of the worst storm for each year was very evident. In some cases, however, there was some uncertainty which particular storm period was the worst for the year. For example, a given year might have one high runoff event with a moderate tide level and another event with a lower runoff rate but a higher tide. In such a case, the period of the simulation was extended to cover both events. Maximum water surface elevations were extracted at three locations within the model: ■ Node 60. Representing the marsh west of SR 104. It is noted that the simulated water level in this node is often the same as several other nodes in the marsh (72, 26, 61, 60, 70 and 59). ■ Node 40. Representing Shellabarger Creek east of SR 104 ■ Node15. Representing the intersection of Dayton Street and SR 104 The results are presented in Table A-5. This table also includes the high tide during each flooding event and its time of occurrence for comparison with the time of maximum water surfaces at other locations. Using the elevations in Table A-5, frequency analysis was performed for each the three locations. The frequency analysis was done using the log -Pearson Type III probability distribution best -fit line through the yearly simulated water levels. The log -Pearson Type III distribution is a statistical technique used in hydrologic studies for fitting a best -fit curve through a series of yearly peak data (e.g. elevations or flows) to predict the design flood for a site. Typically, it is desirable to have a long record (e.g., 30-year record of peak elevations) to be used as the input data for a high level of confidence in the analysis results. The probabilities of floods of various magnitudes can be extracted from the Log -Pearson Type III best -fit curve. Additionally, this curve enables the extrapolation of the values for events with return periods beyond the observed flood events. The frequency analysis results and the predicted 2-year, 10-year, 25-year and 100-year elevations at the three study points are shown in Figure A-4. File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC A-23 Packet Page 242 of 456 Appendix A Peak El Intersection � z.o 10.0 m 8.0 IM 6.0 0 4.0 2.0 0.0 1.01 1.25 2 5 10 25 50 100 Recurrence Interval (Years} ❑ Peak El Intersection -Log -Pearson Fit Peak El 5R-104 Culvert 14.0 12.0 10.0 u m 8.0 6.0 O 4.0 2.0 0.0 1.01 1.25 2 5 10 25 Recurrence Interval (Years) ❑ Peak El SR-104 Culvert -Log -Pearson Fit Peak El Marsh 14.0 12.0 10:0 �i w 8.0 E' m 6.0 a 4.0 2.0 0.0 5o 100 1.01 1.25 2 5 10 25 50 100 Recurrence Interval (Years) 0 Peak El Marsh-LagPearson Fit Figure A-5. SWMM Frequency Plots 2-YR 10.53 10-YR 11.21 25-Y R 11.62 100-YR 12.27 2-YR 11.19 10-YR 11.73 25-YR 12.00 100-YR 12.40 2-YR 8.95 10-YR 10.20 25-YR 10.93 100-YR 12.11 A-24 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 243 of 456 HYDROLOGIC / HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS Table A-5: SWMM Model Results HY Hide Tide* Time of High Tide Max WSE at Inter- section Time of Max at Intersection Max WSE at SR 104 culvert Max WSE in Marsh Time of Max in Marsh Gate Open? 2012 10.96 11 /19/2012 10:00 AM 11.42 11/19/2012 2:15 PM 11.95 10.00 11/19/2012 9:30 PM No 2011 10.35 12/12/201010:00 AM 11.26 12/12/201012:15 PM 11.68 9.66 12/12/2010 2:45 PM No 2010 9.27 5/28/2010 7:00 PM 10.38 5/28/2010 3:00 PM 11.21 8.77 5/28/201010:00 PM Yes 2009 2008 9.78 11.34 11/12/2008 3:00 PM 12/3/20071:00 PM 10.48 12.26 11/12/2008 3:00 PM 12/3/2007 3:00 PM 11.25 12.35 8.71 11.93 11/12/2008 5:00 PM 12/3/2007 3:00 PM No No 2007 8.42 12/15/2006 3:00 AM 10.66 12/15/2006 6:15 PM 11.53 9.11 12/15/2006 6:00 AM No 2006 11.42 1/30/2006 6:00 AM 11.17 1/30/2006 7:30 AM 11.38 10.19 1/30/2006 5:45 PM No 2005 9.21 11/2/2004 9:00 AM 10.45 11 /2/2004 10: 00 AM 11.26 8.94 11/2/20041:00 PM No 2004 9.85 10/20/2003 3:00 PM 10.87 10/20/2003 5:00 PM 11.60 9.12 10/20/2003 8:00 PM No 2003 11.24 1/2/2003 6:00 AM 10.42 1/2/2003 7:00 AM 11.05 8.68 1/2/2003 5:15 PM No 2002 10.96 1/7/200211:00 AM 10.49 1/7/200212:15 PM 11.35 9.15 1/7/2002 2:30 PM No 2001 9.81 8/22/2001 8:00 PM 10.35 8/22/2001 8:00 PM 11.03 8.62 8/22/2001 10:00 PM Yes 2000 9.63 11/12/1999 8:00 AM 10.33 11 /12/1999 10:00 AM 10.93 8.50 11/12/1999 6:00 PM No 1999 10.76 12/1/1998 2:00 PM 10.41 12/1/1998 3:00 PM 11.09 8.64 12/1/1998 6:00 PM No 1998 9.23 1/23/199812:00 PM 10.40 1/23/19981:30 PM 11.20 8.91 1/23/1998 5:30 PM No 1997 11.66 1/1 //1997 10:00 AM 11.14 1/1 /1997 12:30 AM 11.63 11.04 1/1 /1997 12:30 AM No 1996 10.08 4/23/199611:00 PM 10.82 4/23/1996 4:00 PM 11.51 9.52 4/24/19961:30 AM No 1995 11.04 12/20/1994 7:00 AM 10.47 12/20/1994 8:00 AM 11.11 9.07 12/20/199410:30 AM No 1994 10.72 12/13/1993 6:00 AM 10.34 12/13/1993 7:00 AM 11.03 8.93 12/13/1993 9:00 AM No 1993 8.96 8/23/199310:00 PM 10.37 8/23/199310:30 PM 11.06 8.45 8/24/199312:00 AM Yes 1992 10.01 1/31/1992 4:00 AM 10.35 1/31/1992 5:00 AM 10.88 8.81 1/31/1992 3:00 PM No 1991 11.05 12/4/1990 7:00 AM 10.84 12/4/1990 9:00 AM 11.23 9.05 12/4/1990 6:15 PM No 1990 9.57 1/9/1990 2:00 PM 10.37 1/9/1990 2:30 PM 11.02 8.89 1/9/1990 5:15 PM No 1989 10.00 1/9/1989 7:00 PM 10.25 1/9/1989 8:00 PM 10.74 7.94 1/9/198910:30 PM No 1988 1987 11.02 11.86 12/6/1987 7:00 AM 2/1/1987 7:00 AM 10.50 10.62 12/6/1987 9:00 AM 2/1/1987 9:00 AM 11.06 10.92 9.21 8.75 12/6/1987 6:30 AM 2/1/1987 7:00 AM No No 1986 10.30 1/18/1986 10: 00 AM 11.24 1/19/19861:00 AM 11.77 10.48 1/19/19861:00 AM No 1985 10.36 12/14/198410:00 AM 10.48 12/14/1984 3:00 PM 11.24 8.30 12/14/198410:15 PM No 1984 10.19 11/20/1983 5:00 AM 10.38 11/20/1983 6:30 AM 11.02 9.05 11/20/1983 5:30 AM No 1983 11.16 12/3/1982 7:00 AM 10.41 12/3/1982 8:30 AM 10.90 8.90 12/3/1982 7:00 PM No 1982 11.08 12/5/1981 11:00 AM 10.40 12/5/1981 12:30 PM 10.95 8.62 12/5/1981 2:30 PM No 'Nearest high tide to time of max at intersection File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC A-25 Packet Page 244 of 456 Appendix A Some of the conclusions that can be drawn from these results and a review of the modeling are as follows: ■ The intersection floods frequently. The frequency analysis shows the intersection floods annually. In addition, the simulations indicate some ponding occurred in all of the 30 years and it is likely that it occurred multiple times in any given year (the results only show the worst flooding of the year). ■ The marsh west of SR 104 is simulated to have a 2-year water level less than the intersection low point (10.1) while east of SR 104; Shellabarger Creek is higher than the intersection low point indicating the creek overflows towards the intersection. The conclusion that can be drawn from this is that if the Shellabarger SR 104 culvert was cleaned and/or upsized and the channel downstream of the culvert was restored to allow free flow west of the culvert it would reduce the overflows from Shellabarger Creek that extend north to the intersection that exacerbates flooding. ■ Marsh flooding is not necessarily always coincident with extreme high tides. Only three of the top seven floods (in terms of elevations in the marsh) coincide with high tides in excess of 10-feet. The others occur at lesser high tides. Storm events having significant runoff volume can result in the severe flooding without high tides. ■ The WSDOT pipe system overflows into the marsh. That is not the main driver of flooding at the intersection but this occurrence causes some loss of storage in the marsh and loss of capacity in the piped outfall system at high flows, which impacts the hydraulics of the Dayton Street system. In fact, there were no overflows in approximately half of the years modeled for the frequency analysis. Peak overflows amounted to 14.2 cfs during the 25-year event and 19.7 cfs during the 100-year event. Selection of Design Event The design event is created by taking a historical runoff event that produces a maximum flood level that is closest to the flood level predicted by the frequency analysis. When there is a significant difference with the closest flood level, the simulated runoff is factored up or down as required until the simulated water surface elevation matches the predicted elevation by the frequency analysis. Table A-6 presents the selected design events. A-26 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 245 of 456 HYDROLOGIC / HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS Table A-6: Design Events Water Surface Design Event Date Maximum Simulated Elevation Predicted Factor Needed to WSE (NAVD88) by Frequency Apply to Flows Analysis (NAVD88) 25-year 1-1-97 11.04 10.93 No correction' 100-year 12-3-07 11.93 12.11 1.05 No correction factor was applied because the values were very close. Modeling of Alternatives The existing condition XPSMM model was modified and used to size the alternatives elements and to evaluate the effectiveness of alternatives. Both the 25-year and 100- year events were used for the analysis. Alternative modeling was done incrementally. That is, individual elements of each alternative listed in Section 2 were added to the XPSWMM model in a stepwise manner. Once a model included all the alternative elements, it was used to report the results and evaluate the alternative. The Alternative 1 model (Dayton Street Pump Station and Shellabarger Creek Restoration with Edmonds Marsh Expansion) was built in six steps: ■ Alternative 1.1: This model run consisted of isolating the marsh system from the Dayton Street system by removing the links between them in order to simulate the plugging/removal of the system on SR 104. ■ Alternative 1.2: This model was built by starting from the Alternative 1.1 model. Flows from the south half of the Salish Crossing were diverted to Dayton Street and high flows from Harbor Square were also diverted to Dayton Street (when the water level within Harbor Square reached elevation 9). An overflow weir simulated the diversion from Harbor Square to Dayton Street. This step is only meant to precede the addition of a pump station and take advantage of the added capacity along Dayton Street. ■ Alternative 1.3: This model was built by starting from the Alternative 1.2 model. A pump station was added at Node 10 with a force main to Puget Sound. The pump station capacity was determined such that the force main is no larger than 18-inches in diameter and such that the freeboard at the low point of the intersection of Dayton Street and SR 104 is at least one foot during the 25-year event and at least 0.5 ft during the 100-year event. A 13 cfs pump satisfies those parameters. ■ Alternative 1.4: This model was built by starting from the Alternative 1.3 model. The cross sections and the links in the south portion of the marsh at the downstream end of the SR 104 culvert were updated by adding the restored Shellabarger and Willow Creek channel as designed by Shannon and Wilson (triangular section with 2:1 side slopes). The restored channel results in a File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC A-27 Packet Page 246 of 456 Appendix A positive grade from the downstream face of the SR 104 culvert to the confluence point of Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek. ■ Alternative 1.5: This model was built by starting from the Alternative 1.4 model. The cross sections and the links in the south portion of the marsh at the downstream end of the SR 104 culvert were updated by adding the excavated areas as shown on Figure 2-1 and as described in Section 2. The Manning's roughness coefficient was reduced to 0.05 in the areas where cattail removal and excavation took place. The added storage was hence simulated in the cross sections. ■ Alternative 1.6: This model was built by starting from the Alternative 1.5 model. The 36-inch culvert, 22-inch culvert and embankment downstream of the marsh were removed from this model. This model represents Alternative 1 as a whole since all the elements of this Alternative have been included. The Alternative 2 model (Alternative 1 Improvements plus Daylighting Willow Creek) was built by starting from the Alternative 1.6 model. The daylighted Willow Creek alignment as shown on Figure 2-2 was added to the model. The geometry of the daylighted was obtained from a Civil 3D surface by Shannon and Wilson (Trapezoidal section with 14 bottom width and 2:1 side slopes). The Manning's roughness coefficient for the daylighted channel was assumed to be 0.04. The dimensions of the BNSF/Sound Transit railroad box culvert crossing were obtained from as -built drawings. The tide -gate was simulated at this stage by adding a 48-inch culvert at the downstream end of the railroad box culvert with a flap gate (i.e. downstream flows only). Two additional alternative model scenarios were done. The first, referred to as "2A" reflects Alternative 2 with the exception that the Willow Creek tide gate is not included. Removing the tide gate improves fish passage but lessens the flood protection. Additional analysis including running multiple storms would be necessary to understand fully the effects of not including the tide gate. The other model scenario referred to as 2.1 reflects the recommended alternative, Alternative 2.1, includes the lining of the existing 48-inch Willow Creek outfall (to reduce roughness and improve conveyance), the removal of WSDOT overflows and the exclusion of the marsh excavation element due to its limited benefit. It also includes the tide gate in operation. The Alternative 3 model (Daylighting Willow Creek and Edmonds Marsh Pump Station Without Significant Marsh Expansion) was built in four steps: ■ Alternative 3.1: This model was built by starting from the existing conditions model and adding the daylighted Willow Creek alignment as described above for Alternative 2 (with a tide gate simulated by a 48" culvert with downstream flows only). ■ Alternative 3.2: This model was built by starting from the Alternative 3.1 model. A pump station was added near Node 33 to pump high flows into the existing 48-inch Willow Creek outfall. The pump engages when the water level upstream of the outfall reaches Elevation 9 and the pump capacity was 30 cfs. A-28 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 247 of 456 HYDROLOGIC 1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS ■ Alternative 3.3: This model was built by starting from the Alternative 3.2 model and adding the restored Shellabarger and Willow Creek channels through the marsh as described in Alternative 1.4. Alternative 3A This model was built by starting from the Alternative 3.3 model and isolating Shellabarger Creek east of SR 104 from the Dayton Street system by removing the links between them in order to simulate the plugging/removal of the system on SR 104. Additionally, a 30-inch pipe system was added from Dayton to the marsh (through Harbor Square) to allow Dayton to overflow to the marsh at high flows (above Elevation 8.5). The pump station was also upsized to 50 cfs to improve conveyance and handle the excess flows from Dayton. The Alternative 3.4 model thus represents the model for Alternative 3 as a whole since all the elements have been included. The Alternative 4 model (Large Dayton Street Pump Station with Minor Marsh Modifications) was built by adding a 30 cfs pump station at Node 13 near the intersection of Dayton Street and SR 104 with a 30-inch 1100-feet long force main system to Puget Sound. Overflows from Harbor square were directed to Dayton above Elevation 9.5. The restored Shellabarger and Willow Creek channels through the marsh were added to this model as described in Alternative 1.4 Additionally, the 24- inch system along the east side of SR 104 was directly connected to the Dayton system (Node 16 to Node 14) to allow overflows from Shellabarger Creek to more easily reach the pump station. The 36-inch culvert, 22-inch culvert and embankment downstream of the marsh were also removed from this model. Table A-7 lists the detailed results of the different models gradually constructed for each Alternative. File:001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC A-29 Packet Page 248 of 456 Appendix A HYDROLOGIC 1 HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS Table A-7: Alternative Modeling Results Altemative Description 25-Year Storm 100-Year Storm Marc WSE at Intersection Max WSE in Marsh Max WSE East of SR-104 Max WSE at Intersection Max WSE in Marsh Max WSE East of SR-104 - Existing Conditions 11.14 11.04 11.63 12.32 12.14 12.41 Isolate Marsh System from Dayton by plugging the 1.1 system on SR-104 10.88 11.4 11.93 11.5 1221 12.96 1.1 + Divert high Flows from Harbor Square and 12 south half of Salish to Dayton St 10.89 11.32 11.99 11.75 12.2 12.95 1.2+Add 13 cfs pump station to evacuate Dayton 1.3 St system during high tides and high flows 9.1 12.31 11.89 9.32 12.19 12.95 1.3+ Restore Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek 14 to Marsh 91 11.31 11.39 9.32 12.51 12.65 1.4 + Remove Catta lls and Excavate South Portion 1.5 of Marsh 9.1 11.28 11.35 9.32 12.37 12.49 1.5+Remove 36"/22" Culverts and Embankment 1.6 downstream of the Marsh 91 10.15 10.98 9.32 12.08 12.14 15+ Ex1st1ng48-inch Willow Creek Outlet Pipe 1-6T1 Modifications(Lining) 9-1 9-48 10.98 9.32 11_87 11-95 1.GT2 1.5+ No WSDOT Overflows 9.1 10.11 10.98 9.32 11.82 12.88 1.6 + Daylight Wilow Creek to Existing BNSF 2 Culvert and Construct New Outfall with a Self- 9.1 5.81 10.98 9.32 10.65 11.1 Regulating Tide Gate 2A Alternative 2 without tide gate 9.1 11.38 11,39 9.32 11,38 12.54 Alternative 2 with Existing 48-inch Willow Creek Outlet Pipe Modifications (Lining), Removing 21 WSDOT Overflows and Not Including Marsh 9.1 8.92 11.1 9.32 10.43 11.26 Excavation ! 1 Daylight Willow Creek to Existing BNSF Culvert and 3.1 Construct New Outfall with a Self -Regulating Tide 10.76 8.95 11.56 1232 10.45 12.41 Gate 3.1+30 cfs pump station that uses existing Dutfall 3.2 as discharge pipe 10,75 8 11.56 12.32 9,95 12.4 3.2+ Restore Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek 3.3 to Marsh 10.39 8.18 11.03 11.18 10.17 11.21 3.3 + Isolate Marsh System from Dayton + Pipe Improvements to Allow Dayton to Overflow to 3.4 Marsh at High Flows (above El 8.51+Upsize pump 9,21 8.23 JF 11,1 9; 9,94 11.31 station to 50 cfs Pump Station on Dayton l30 cfs), Restore Shellabarger Creek and willow Creek to Marsh, Direct Overflows from Harbor Square and from 4 5hellabarger Creek to Dayton (above El 9.5), 9.1 10.48 1D.54 9.29 11.77 11.89 Restore Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek to Marsh and Remove 36"/22" Culverts and Embankment downstream of the Marsh. File:001712 1 26512110002 Note$: Indicates final Alternative model on 1. This table shows simlation results from various alternative runs as alternative elements were "added" to the Alternative. Note that these results, in particular the "benefit' Overall recommended Allternative run from each alternative element, should be considered preliminary and approximate. This is because the elements are added to the modeling in sequence building off of other elements_ If the order of elements were modified, the benefit from the individual elements would vary. 2. Each row corresponds to one model run. For example, 1.1 reflects Alternative 1 with modeling scenario land 1,2 reflects Alternative 1 with modeling scenario 2. SAIL Packet Page 249 of 456 — - y_► �-7,.. yr» '� ice. AF., ZAP 1 % 14. F I e ■ r r 12" SD + � ■ ldgk:Ct - 8" Underdrain 0000,/► System 24" SD 18"x11" Arch SD ■, 8" SD I rce: Esn i-cu S E�X tmapp ng e i A, � C, 8" SD a GIS _se Comm, y "' ILEnr . - lallli � 7 14r i � F7i]177 Sc+ence fa Solutions L"" -;: N Legend • ■ STORM CB Figure A-6 Feet STORM LINE Ferry Queuing 0 50 100 Area Drainage STORM DITCH CREEK P:\ECI\1798-SEA\001772 Edmonds WA, City of\2651211002 Dayton St SR104 Alternatives Study\Data Analytical\GIS 1 7-18-2013 Packet Page 250 of 456 Appendix B FIELD SURVEY RESULTS File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Packet Page 251 of 456 ioP"MAccY aeyX°i 1.76 To a awxEnEs-z. s-107 OUT -ME 116 VCK ASRMLI- bCK wwx-lxsa- IMGK wALx.13A6 r�� 2.1 vWLI N57 bSB xr GWK u0.n.ws _ O o7 WATER-.!B1 (3-21-12 - PM) (...To.TAL) POSOgx HITN'S (HCH WAER w/fM5) ARE IKIN/OEBRS WFJ (WG ONOTBE e<CET'4 T ...E K EIILREME HIGH WMER UTELS. •• (SOI-EG .B ) ASRMLT-1x37-- A6Px1Li. n. TOP eACH cuRw-Ix11 �- z- P41E T -n.71 4KE OP[HIHG 16TOIT_ 8.5' 1WOE a .33' xGx TOP BeCK CU-2.16 ROCKS EAST OFOPEHOPEMIIG FORM a FUTTW TOP 6RCK WRB-tT.. 40 HG IER TxAT 'x ER wLr C- A I.]' S0 .6] WMf BOTTOM D< THE OPExWG, x uNK x.- ER yO 11 3' 12O SET.'S3 E-..6 W! K 481 vi _COxc I \sO ,� Q 1 1 4 cREEx \ xx s E•..19 OUT) EEL ,•, TOP BRCK wRB-12n �y5 MW=--"E 0 1 �. E•SM IN os ///h�`J6• c1A= w/ eERr. cIRWIAR SLRING �P S-.AT N ).3 LOSE0 33' STEEL W/ CLOSED GATE -xxx our AYLv J6• CPEPOUT 1PASx RACK LEGEND XXX X SET MAG NAIL & POINT NO. (TYP) XXX 0 SET HUB & TACK, HUB OR SCRIBED "X" & POINT NO. (TYP) HORIZONTAL DATUM: WASHINGTON STATE PLANE COORDINATES, NORTH ZONE, USING NAD83 (CORS96) POSITIONS DERIVED FROM RTK OBSERVATIONS USING KUKER RANKEN, INC. RGPS NETWORK. CHECKED TWO PUBLISHED POINTS: SNOHOMISH COUNTY POINT ID 2074 MAG NAIL WITH SC TAG NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF ADMIRAL WAY & DAYTON STREET IN ASPHALT AT THE ENTRANCE TO OLYMPIC BEACH. WSDOT BM NO. 5 = 12.50 USC&GS BRASS DISC ON EAST SIDE ADMIRAL WAY SOUTHEASTERLY OF ANTHONYS RESTAURANT. IN CURB. VERTICAL DATUM: HAND 1986 DERIVED FROM RTK OBSERVATION ON WSDOT SM NO. 5 = 12.50 USC&GS BRASS DISC ON EAST SIDE ADMIRAL WAY SOUTHEASTERLY OF ANTHONYS RESTAURANT, IN CURB. 20 10 0 20 SCALE IN FEET CONTROL TABLE PUBLISHED DATA % [DESCRIPTION NORTHING 1DO 29924 1259628.42 10.57 SET MAG NAL 787-26-01 101 102 298752.00 298455.37 1259553.21 1259624:24 12.06 11.97 SETMAG NAL787-26-02 SET MAG HAL 787-26-0 3 103 298115.62 12747 5961 13.57 SET MAG NAL 787-26-04 104 105 298069.1] 298270.28 1259616.56 1259245.93 13.43 15.45 SET MAG NAIL 787-28-01 SET MAG NAIL 787-28-02 106 298766.36 1258825.76 13.29 SET TACK 787-29-01 107 108 298737.91 299112.65 1258568.00 1258942.30 11.28 12.11 SET TACK 787-29-02 SET HUB & TACK 787-29-03 109 299460.59 1258483.90 12.91 SET TACK 787-29-04 110 111 299277.16 299547.86 12M 66.80 12M 84.16 12.88 13.35 SET TACK 787-29-05 SCRIBED •K• 787-29-06 112 298297.65 1258020.70 10.55 SET HUB & TACK 787-30-01 113 114 298096.35 297910.20 1257861.23 1257664.35 10.29 11.84 SET HUB & TACK 787-30-02 SET HUB & TACK 787-30-03 115 297422.41 1257146.64 15.56 SET MAD NAL 787-31-01 116 297671.08 1256980.09 15.76 SET MA; HAL 787-31-02 117 122 297420.32 297042.20 1256825.09 1259515.19 15.72 39.38 SET MAG NAL 787-31-03 FOUND PK & WASHER 787-33-02 123 297521.95 1259140.79 9.27 SET HUB & TACK 787-33-01 124 125 297101.97 297319.76 12593OIL'S 12592ST.'S 14.96 11.28 SET HUB & TACK 787-34-01 SET HUB & TACK 787-34-02 126 298109.84 1259546.54 14.01 SET MA; NAL 787-39-01 127 297969.49 125981172 14.50 SET HUB & TACK 787-39-02 20 }5 299334.85 1258697:58 13.15 FOUND MAG NAL W/SC TAG WCCS 2074 299334.624 1255697.392 13.09 NAD 83/91 2038 2481 298380.II 297922.57 1257835.92 1257588.33 12.50 12.14 FOUND WSDOT BM NO. 5 FOUND PK NAL 298380.174 1257835.946 12.667 NAD 83107 2535 297716.31 1259520.83 13.62 SET HUB & TACK 787-68-01 a DAYTON ST & SR 104 STORM DRAINAGE ALTERNATIVE STUDY TYPE: TOPOGRAPHY PLOTTED BY: C. Ulery DATE: 06-07-12 COMPUTED BY: J. Garvin DATE: 04/03/1 2 DRAWING NAME: 20120049 TOPO.dwg JOB NO. 20120049 FB: 787 PG's: 25-47 SHEET 1 OF 3 & 67-69 115 x t s1 �•�. 1G3 �,��°—.p x toa 127 Tr i/ ... 123 a / a 125 \m �S 124 122 X DAYTON ST & SR 104 STORM DRAINAGE ALTERNATIVE STUDY TYPE; TOPOGRAPHY PLOTTED BT: C. UIe y DATE:06-07-12 COMPUTED BY: J. Garvin DATE: 04/03/12 DRAWING NAME: 20120049 TOPO.d- JOB W. 20120049 FB: 787 PG", 25-47 SHEET 2 OF 3 & 67-69 Packet Page 253 of 456 r 2035 X (WCCS IG 2074) f p.� 100 IN _ _....� r �'. 0. ... 106 v X 107 mo Wa . w wv m.mv �® 105 x .t 'a ^'9..-i-� �f� `F...."{Y."e vI n ., W s4 "6x � . �..,,.I� •L '4. '1 vi'b '+Sh�;'�A�4 ..n ..m .... .... ... ..a ...« .... ..m DAYTON ST & SR 104 STORM DRAINAGE ALTERNATIVE STUDY TOPOGRAPHY TYPE: PLOTTED W: C. Ulery OATE:06-07-12 COMPUTED BY: J. Garvin DATE: 04/03/12 ORA—C NAME: 20120049 TOPO.d- JOB No. 20120049 FB: 787 PG',: 25-47 & 67-69 SHEET 3 OF 3 Packet Page 25 of 456 Appendix C PRELIMINARY SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIL Packet Page 255 of 456 Appendix C PRELIMINARY SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES Following the modeling and assessment of the existing drainage system, the Consultant team completed a process of identifying potential solutions to reduce flood hazards and screening these down to a manageable set of solutions that could be evaluated in detail. That is, because detailed evaluation of alternatives involves signification effort in terms of modeling, cost estimating and evaluation of other factors, it was desirable to have the analysis be limited to a fewer number of potential alternative that appear the most favorable for implementation. This began with the Consulting team and City staff working together to develop an initial draft list of alternatives that was presented to a broader audience. The preliminary alternatives were organized into near -term, medium -term, and long-term alternative solutions and shown on Table C-1. The table identified alternative components and associated pros and cons associated with the alternatives. This set of alternatives was then presented during a stakeholder meeting that included the following: ■ City Staff (public works, planning, maintenance, stormwater) ■ Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT) (Roads) ■ WSDOT Ferries ■ Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife ■ Port of Edmonds ■ Salish Crossing Property Representatives (one of the adjacent properties west of SR 104 and north of Dayton Street subject to recurrent flooding) Burlington Northern Santa Fe was also invited to the meeting but did not attend. During the meeting, each set of alternatives was presented and input was received from the group. A summary of the meeting minutes is included at the end of Appendix C. From this discussion and input from the City, the draft preliminary list of alternatives was narrowed with input from City staff to a reduce set of alternatives shown on Table 2-1 in the main body of the report. File:001712 1 26512110002 SAIC Packet Page 256 of 456 Appendix C This page intentionally left blank. C-2 SAIC Energy, Environment & Infrastructure, LLC Dayton SR 104 Drainage Alternatives Final draft 08-16-13 Packet Page 257 of 456 Appendix C PRELIMINARY SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES Short Term Table C-1: City of Edmonds Initial List (Draft) of Alternatives for Screening — December 6, 2012 Alternative Preliminary Description Comments — Pro Comments - Con Maintenance of Shellabarger Creek/SR 104 Culvert Add Monitoring Equipment to WSDOT Overflow Raise WSDOT Overflow (or Seal MH) Medium Term Isolate Dayton Street System from Marsh System Expand Dayton Street pump station system (Beach Place Pump Station) Divert drainage from Salish Crossing Divert upstream drainage from Dayton system Replace Shellabarger Creek SR 104 Culvert Remove sediment from culvert. If possible, include limited channel ■ excavation downstream of culvert to improve hydraulics. Add gage to assess and quantify overflows into marsh ■ Raise or seal manhole at overflow location to prevent overflows into Willow ■ Creek Use berming and/or plugging pipe System on east side of SR 104 to prevent/reduce Shellabarger Creek flows from extending north to Dayton System. Add pump capacity for Dayton System. This alternative would likely need to be combined with isolating the marsh system from Dayton Street system (alternative above) (otherwise pumps would need to be large). For longer term, would also need to add berming to isolate marsh from Harbor Square for the significant events. Divert some of the drainage from Salish Crossing to Dayton system. May only be effective if the Dayton street pump station is expanded. Divert some of the ferry lane and roadway areas to the north away from the Dayton Street system. Replace Culvert with larger (fish passage) culvert. Relatively minor permitting. Reduces overflows directed towards intersection. Be able to better assess frequency and duration of overflows. No permitting required, only coordination with WSDOT. Could be phased improvement if monitoring determines that overflows are significant Low Cost Very simple permitting. Primarily requires WSDOT buyoff. ■ Reduces flow to Dayton Street system (which is not designed to handle flows from Shellabarger Creek) ■ By forcing flow into Shellabarger Creek, helps keep velocities higher and reduce deposition ■ Low cost ■ Straightforward permitting (may affect some ditch wetlands) ■ Likely straight forward permitting ■ Low cost ■ Reduces flood volume to marsh system ■ Minimal permitting ■ Low cost ■ Reduce flood volume to Dayton system ■ Minimal permitting ■ Low cost ■ Additional modeling needed to evaluate benefit of upsizing culvert. ■ Could integrate sump in replacement culvert to help trap sediments. ■ Preliminary modeling indicates overflows may not have much impact on upstream marsh levels ■ Most of benefit wouldn't be achieved until marsh system is isolated from Dayton system ■ Need to assess impact to system receiving diverted flows File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIE. Packet Page 258 of 456 Appendix C PRELIMINARY SCREENING OF ALTERNATIVES Table C-1: City of Edmonds Initial List (Draft) of Alternatives for Screenina - December 6.2012 Alternative Preliminary Description Comments - Pro Comments - Con Long Term Restore Shellabarger Creek Channel downstream of SR 104 Excavate and restore Shellabarger Creek channel and possibly increase Eliminates current backwater effect on Shellabarger ■ Significant permitting. Goal would be to attempt grades from SR 104 to Willow Creek. Restore creek planting. Creek crossing of SR 104 to re-establish original conditions, grades and ■ Restores stream channel restore Shellabarger Creek channel. ■ Reduced sediment deposition in SR 104 culvert . Best if coordinated with Daylight Willow Creek, and Expand Marsh Flood Storage Volume actions for long-term sediment management. Daylighting Creek (similar to former People for Puget Sound Plan) Expand Marsh Flood Storage Volume Daylight creek to existing BNSF culvert and construct new channel outfall. Would likely require a manual/automated tide gate to function during combination of high tides and storm events Remove accumulated sediment from easterly portion of marsh and restore/expand brackish marsh area. ■ Increases marsh diversity ■ Improves fish and wildlife habitat ■ Increases salt marsh area ■ Adds significant flood storage ■ Expands salt water marsh area to increase habitat diversity. ■ Expanded brackish habitat would reduce cattail area. ■ Will need to assess impacts to dog park. ■ Likely needs tide gate to prevent loss of flood storage during storm events. ■ May involve significant permitting, but assisted by preliminary work already completed and that the goal is restoration. ■ Significant permitting. Goal would be to attempt to re-establish original conditions, grades and restore Shellabarger Creek channel. ■ Best if coordinated with Daylight Willow Creek, and restore Shellabarger Creek actions for long- term sediment management. Daylighting Creek (Similar to People for Puget Sound Plan) plus Daylight creek along east side of BNSF to existing BNSF bridge already ■ Increases marsh diversity ■ May involve significant permitting, but assisted marsh pumping system constructed and construct new channel outfall downstream of BNSF bridge. . Improves fish habitat by preliminary work already completed and that Would likely require a manual/automated tide gate to function during . Increases salt marsh area the goal is restoration. combination of high tides and storm events. Add pump to keep marsh ■ Will need to assess impacts to dog park. levels from flooding. Could use existing gravity outfall for discharge. Raise intersection and Dayton Street Raise road and intersection. This would also require isolation between ■ Would need to assess impacts on private properties. ■ Costly marsh system and Dayton System. If wanted to also prevent flooding of ■ No environmental permitting. ■ Impacts to adjacent properties (access, adjacent private properties, would need added pumping for Dayton Street . Long-term, structural solution flooding) system ■ Challenges may make this alternative not feasible. File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIL. Packet Page 259 of 456 STAKEHOLDER MEETING SUMMARY City of Edmonds Dayton Street and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Study 12-6-12 (1:30 — 3 pm) Meeting Attendees: ■ Phil Williams, City of Edmonds ■ Stephen Clifton, City of Edmonds ■ Jerry Shuster, City of Edmonds ■ Mike DeLilla, City of Edmonds ■ Tod Moles, City of Edmonds ■ Kernen Lien, City of Edmonds ■ Bob McCesney, Port of Edmonds ■ Erik Hansen, WSDOT ■ Jamie Bails, WDFW ■ Josh Wozniak, Herrera ■ Lindsey Echelbarger, Salish Crossing, LLC ■ Tom Castor, WS Ferries ■ Mike Giseburt, SAIC ■ Joe Farah, SAIC (Also see attached Sign-up Sheet) The following paragraphs summarize the meeting discussion: ■ Phil Williams and Jerry Shuster provided introductions and brief purpose for the meeting ■ Mike Giseburt provided some history of flooding and purpose of the Study; - Determine major causes of flooding - Identify best alternatives to reduce flood hazards ■ Joe Farah went into more depth at describing his recent account of the flooding that occurred on November 19th and showed several photographs. ■ Mike went over the desired meeting outcomes (objectives); generally to; - Introduce Project to Parties affected by flooding - Summarize Initial Study Findings - Present Some Initial Ideas for Alternative Improvements - Solicit Input From Group So That We Can Focus on Those Alternatives Most Promising For Detailed Evaluation ■ Mike and Jerry provided a description of the existing drainage systems that are the focus of the study. Pagel of 3 Packet Page 260 of 456 STAKEHOLDER MEETING SUMMARY City of Edmonds Dayton Street and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Study 12-6-12 (1:30 — 3 pm) ■ Jerry provided a discussion of the former "People for Puget Sound" project to daylight Willow Creek ■ Mike provided a brief overview of the hydrologic/hydraulic modeling analysis and results and described the major causes of flooding. Mike then provided a discussion of the approach to the alternative analysis process. ■ Mike touched on some of the recent sea level rise study information and noted that this would be one of the considerations when comparing alternatives. ■ The remainder of the meeting focused on a discussion of the preliminary alternatives being considered to reduce flooding. A list of the alternatives was passed around and the alternatives were organized by short term, medium term, and long term solutions. Short term solutions were those that were smaller in scale and could be implemented with relative ease. Long term alternatives were generally those that were larger, more complex, involving significant permitting and/or stakeholder agreement which would take longer to implement. The preliminary list of alternatives was intended to reflect the full range of alternatives that could be implemented, and the goal was to focus in on those alternatives thought to be more promising. The following comments were noted. Monitoring the WSDOT overflows was generally thought to be a good idea. - Raising the Rim (or sealing) of the WSDOT manhole would need to consider the effects on the upstream system. That is, would not want to create a new problem or move the problem upstream. - Regarding replacement of the Shellabarger Creek culvert crossing of SR 104, it was noted that creek takes a sharp turn to the north in order to enter the culvert. If replacing the culvert, consideration should be give to improving the alignment. It was also noted that this could be equipped with a downstream sump to help trap sediments at an acceptable location for maintenance. If it was elected that sediments be removed from the culvert as a short term solution, Jamie Bails indicated permitting could be obtained. It was also noted that the SR-104 culvert is probably towards the end of its service life and replacement could become more of a necessity. - Isolating the marsh drainage and keeping it separate from the Dayton Street drainage was thought to be a good alternative. It was noted that this should be coordinated with improvements to the Shellabarger Creek Culvert crossing of SR 104 (so it does not create a problem somewhere else). It was recommended that the reduction in flooding along Dayton St resulting from such isolation be further assessed so that the incremental impacts of such a solution are determined when combined with other solutions. - Re-establishing Shellabarger Creek between SR 104 and Willow Creek also was a favorable alternative, including combining this with large excavation to create more storage volume. The reestablishment of the Creek was noticeably an element of consensus among all attendees. As such, it was suggested that it might be considered as a short term rather than a long term alternative. Page 2 of 3 Packet Page 261 of 456 STAKEHOLDER MEETING SUMMARY City of Edmonds Dayton Street and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Study 12-6-12 (1:30 — 3 pm) - In general, excavating the marsh to create additional flood storage was considered favorable. Jamie noted that any dredging in the wetland will have a length permitting process and will need to involve Ecology and the possibly the USACE. In addition, the permitting process will need to highlight the habitat restoration aspects of such improvements. SAIC would also need to assess how much excavation is needed to achieve certain reductions in flooding. - Regarding pumping of the Dayton System, the City should consider the location does not have to be where the existing pump station is. We can choose the best location that makes sense. The existing location is not the best considering noise. The City does own some extra right-of-way near the intersection of Dayton/SR 104, but there are some potential utility conflicts with one of the WWTP systems. - It was noted that the WS Ferry's plan to sell the former Union Oil clean-up site just south of the marsh. - Raising the roads was not feasible. - Harbor Square is currently considering redevelopment. Such redevelopment plans should be coordinated with the approach to the flooding mitigation project. Page 3 of 3 Packet Page 262 of 456 ��vv �y ��777 PROJECT �® FILE NO. COMP. CHK. REV. PAGE OF PAGES DATE DATE DATE 6, L A/� j ( l ( f f 1,qJ� Z/ 1 1iUQ � u`IlG� �v�WOLLiS tA;�e,cle.��`tae'e�,�,o e-bQ �. f ✓ `2s 7T! 0ao V moo �ZG��$ v�r �� l C /►J�t�e. a cJi fowt-C s,q rc .�vsa. ZlJ�o �r1S= YlD7 �n2cc%�cCEn errnqy-\ LI Ve✓N, tot�ttc�es��ed,��►s,�o�� Y��=��y��i �,Es�e►.� s,wA.�s Y7,57-77/—o1-35 /J C 4Q0"A)sn�,n.Cae�,�e�movt>S�Jq,��U L%5`-771-v?a b l� 1��✓�fr�c�C,cb G1Y�/j y05- 77`f 7o�a C�!Tdg INJlc STvr-9 p3d/O-Y•P%/;Ii, 'IO✓ ;Z06 5'1f-,.372-7 C:Y,2 q -T6 e- Jose- k Packet Page 263 of 456 City of Edmonds Dayton Street SR104 Storm Drain Alternative Study NATIONAL SECURITY • ENERGY & ENVIRONMENT • HEALTH • CYBERSECURITY SAIE 0 SAIC. All rights reserved. Packet Page 264 of 456 November 2012 December 2007 2 SAIC.com Significant History of Flooding (minor flooding during small events, and major flooding during significant events) Study Purpose Define major causes of flooding Identify best alternatives to reduce flooding SAIL © SAIC. All rights reserved. Packet Page 265 of 456 • Introduce Project to Parties affected by flooding (Stakeholders) • Summarize Initial Study Findings • Present Some Initial Ideas for Alternative Improvements • Solicit Input From Group So That We Can Focus on Those Alternatives Most Promising For Detailed Evaluation 3 SAIC.Com SAIE © SAIC. All rights reserved. Packet Page 266 of 456 4 l{ 1� L L s Tributary Basins 260 140—� 400 r Edmonds Marsh � � �-_ r„�L 600 , 200 _L �~ 5 ShellabargerCreek Willow Creek 2 300 L � I t. n� Legend aaywn Smrmwamr S _._... Figure 5. Q sheuaearAer cr. — sneams and uaches City of Edmonds Dayton St SR 104 AHematives Analysis W II— cask HSP F Basins Ed—nda Marsh SAIC.com SAIC © SAIC. All rights reserved. Packet Page 267 of 456 Existing Drainage System -Dayton Street and Marsh Dayton St Outfall (with 71de Flex gate EA moods Bay Marina Willow Creek Outtall s w P OT Overflcw Structure 1111rMillow Creek at Plpe Intake torrnwater Vault Steel a Gate K•. ; , ,•q � .1 nD 11t j I MID h79�JIL =- � E I �d r yy( 1 "=325' 325 0 325 650 Creek/Ditch Figure 1 SAIC Scale Feet Pipe/Culvert Project Area SRIC Energy, Environment& Infrastructure, LL Packet Page 269 of 456 Methods Continuous hydrologic modeling Hydraulic modeling that takes into account history of flows and tides Simulate annual maximum water levels in marsh to establish flood frequencies Findings/Causes of Flooding Tides have major impact, but flooding can also occur during non -extreme tides, particularly with high volume events. Shellabarger Creek overflows to north towards Dayton system (which was not designed to handle this flow). Significant sediment build-up both in and downstream of SR 104/Shellabarger Creek crossing affects hydraulics Dayton System would flood even if Shellabarger Creek overflows were removed. Intersection floods at less then 2-year event (often multiple times per year) Predicted 100-year elevation is 13.1(2-3 feet depth) 7 SAIC.Com SAIE © SAIC. All rights reserved. Packet Page 270 of 456 Approximate 100-year Inundation Area (+/- 0.5 feet) wanna Beach Park%' Marina �eechi '. I h i L Paint •, Edwards Park s� ` Playfield d '� Imagery Streets f Edmunds v nder Ason Center a � I•'FI}# r� �� I � � •� r lam T, r JAR � rr r ■ ■ 'Cil IF f ,, • Edmonds 4L- ;a,= f �� • • +' ' �4t �City Park 't� _ �•�- "'_ '+r.,� "` L r et �* I G i I Jr�' Ir a •, - .r`r-+Y,... r. t. ,'; . i�o y � ,:`# w . - B ' � Playfield: '� .' ;. t�� '+•r��' ;" ' ' .1IN X .. r. -4 r yy y will.}'M r IF. r► 't,F Firs 10 I I • Alternative Screening (Preliminary list of full range of options) • Stakeholder Meeting (Solicit Your Input) • Council Meeting (Keep Edmonds Council Informed) - January 2013 • Public Meeting (Solicit Public Input) • Select Most Favorable Alternatives for Detailed Evaluation/Comparison (conduct H/H modeling, assess performance, benefits, cost, environmental impacts, sea level rise, etc.) • Complete a Draft & Final Report 9 SAIC.com SAIE. © SAIC. All rights reserved. Packet Page 272 of 456 M • FEMA is Completing Coastal Zone Flood Mapping Effort (Preliminary flood mapping in Dec. 2013) • Sea Level Rise Projections (Climates Impacts Group and Ecology, 2008) Low 3" 6" Medium 6" 13" High 22" 50" • Sea Level Rise Impacts on Storm Surges along US Coasts: (March 2012, Climate CentraVNOAA) Projects substantial changes in the frequency of what are now considered extreme water levels from storm surges. That is, it projects by 2050, the 100-year maximum storm surge could be experienced 2 x year. SAIC.corr SAIE © SAIC. All rights reserved. Packet Page 273 of 456 1 "=325' 325 U 325 654 Creek/Ditch Figure ? SAiCo Scale Feet Pipe/Culvert Project Area SAIC Energy, Environment& Infrastructure, LL Packet Page 274 of 456 Appendix D COST ESTIMATES File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIE. Packet Page 275 of 456 Cost Estimate Index Element Element Alternative Reference Description (See bottom of page) 1 Dayton Street Pump Station and Shellabarger Creek Restoration with Edmonds Marsh Expansion Isolating Marsh System from Dayton AMA Dayton Street Pump Station Altl.2 Shellabarger Creek Sediment Pond AIt1.3 Divert Salish Crossing to Dayton St System AMA Restore Shellabarger and Willow Creek to Marsh (1) Altl.5 Remove Cattails and Excavate South Portion of Marsh AIt1.6 Divert Harbor Square Overflows to Dayton Pump Station AIt1.7 Ferry Queing Area Water Quality Treatment AIt1.8 Remove 36"/22" Culverts and Embankment Altl.9 Alternative 1 Improvements Plus Daylighting Willow Creek Isolating Marsh System from Dayton AIt2.4 Dayton Street Pump Station Altl.2 Shellabarger Creek Sediment Pond AIt1.3 Divert Salish Crossing to Dayton St System AMA Restore Shellabarger and Willow Creek to Marsh Altl .5 Remove Cattails and Excavate South Portion of Marsh Altl.6 Divert Harbor Square Overflows to Dayton Pump Station Altl.7 Ferry Queing Area Water Quality Treatment AIt1.8 Remove 36722" Culverts and Embankment Altl.9 Daylight Channel Construction (1) AIt2.1 Self -Regulating Tide Gate and Structure (1) AIt2.2 Existing 48-inch Willow Creek Outlet Pipe Modifcations AIt2.3 Willow Creek Daylighting and Edmonds Marsh Pump Station Isolating Marsh System from Dayton AIt3.3 Shellabarger Creek Sediment Pond Altl.3 Restore Shellabarger and Willow Creek to Marsh Altl .5 Ferry Queing Area Water Quality Treatment AIt1.8 Daylight Channel Construction (1) AIt2.1 Self -Regulating Tide Gate and Structure (1) AIt2.2 Edmonds Marsh Pump Station Alt3.1 Pipe Improvements Between Dayton and Marsh AIt3.2 Large Dayton Street Pump Station with Minor Marsh Modifications Dayton Street/SR 104 Pump Station Alt4.1 Shellabarger Creek Sediment Pond AIt1.3 Restore Shellabarger and Willow Creek to Marsh (1) AIt1.5 Ferry Queing Area Water Quality Treatment AIt1.8 Berming Marsh at Harbor Square and SR104 AIt4.2 Remove 36"/22" Culverts and Embankment AIt1.9 Pipe Improvements At Intersection of Dayton St and SR104 AIt4.3 Recommended Alternative 2 with Modifications Clean/Lower Shellabarger Creek/SR104 Culvert (and maintenance of outlet channel) AIt2M.1 Remove 36"/22" Culverts and Embankment Altl.9 Harbor Square Pipe Outfall Modification AIt2M.3 Willow Creek 48-inch Pipe Rehabilitation AIt2M.2 Raise or Seal WSDOT Overflow Manhole NA Dayton Street Pump Station Altl.2 Ferry Queuing Area Water Quality Treatment Altl .8 Restore Shellabarger and Willow Creek to Marsh Altl .5 Shellabarger Creek Sediment Pond Altl.3 Isolating Marsh System from Dayton AIt2.4 Divert Salish Crossing to Dayton St System AMA Divert Harbor Square Overflows to Dayton Pump Station Altl.7 Daylight Channel Construction (1) AIt2.1 Self -Regulating Tide Gate and Structure (1) AIt2.2 Existing 48-inch Willow Creek Outlet Pipe Modifcations AIt2.3 Packet Page 276 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 1 DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Isolating Marsh System from Dayton Modification to East Side of SR104 South of Dayton Plug Existing Pipe 1 LS $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Berm Across East Side of Roadway Shoulder 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Roadside/Landscape Restoration 1 LS $ 500 $ 500 Temporary Cofferdam (bypass) 1 LS $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Short Concrete Curb with footing for floodwall (approx. 1 ft) 150 LF $ 80 $ 12,000 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 1 LS $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Berm on West Side of Harbor Square 150 LF $ 80 $ 12,000 Clearing and Grubbing 0.1 AC $ 4,000 $ 358 Fill Material 170 CY $ 25 $ 4,250 Short Concrete Curb with footing for floodwall (approx. 2 ft) 150 LF $ 100 $ 15,000 Roadside/Landscape Restoration 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Mitigation 0 AC $ 15,000 $ 3,000 Subtotal $ 61,108 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 6,111 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 10% $ 6,111 Traffic Control 0 LS $ - Subtotal $ 73,330 Mobilization 10% $ 7,333 Subtotal $ 81,000 Contingency 30% $ 24,300 Subtotal $ 105,300 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 10,004 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 115,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 23,000 Permitting 10% $ 11,500 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 17,250 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 167,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. So costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. AMA Page 1 of 22 Packet Page 277 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SIC PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 1 DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Dayton Street Pump Station Traffic Control 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Excavation 200 CY $ 35 $ 7,000 Shoring 800 SF $ 25 $ 20,000 Dewatering 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Pump Vault 1 LS $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Pump Vault Hatches 2 EA $ 2,500 $ 5,000 Foundation Preparation 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 6.5 cfs submersible pumps 2 EA $ 40,000 $ 80,000 Variable Frequency Drive 2 EA $ 12,000 $ 24,000 Pump Contols & MCC 1 LS $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Pump Controls - Panel and PLC 1 LS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Pump Controls - Cable Conduit, Instrumentation 1 LS $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Pump Controls - Commissioning 1 LS $ 30,000 $ 30,000 Check Valve Vault 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Swing Check Valve -12" 2 EA $ 14,000 $ 28,000 Eccentric Plug Valve - 12" 2 EA $ 6,000 $ 12,000 Power Service 1 LS $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Storm Drain - 30" 20 LF $ 150 $ 3,000 Manholes 2 EA $ 6,000 $ 12,000 Force Main - 18" 170 LF $ 150 $ 25,500 New 18-inch Outfalll through Seawall 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Pavement Removal 320 SY $ 15 $ 4,800 Pavement Restoration 320 SY $ 25 $ 8,000 Utility Relocations 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Subtotal $ 449,300 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 44,930 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 5% $ 22,465 Subtotal $ 516,695 Mobilization 10% $ 51,670 Subtotal $ 568,000 Contingency 30% $ 170,400 Subtotal $ 738,400 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 70,148 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 809,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 161,800 Permitting 10% $ 80,900 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 121,350 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 1,173,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. SD costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. 4. Land Acquisition unit costs are for Administrative Costs only. A1tl.2 Page 2 of 22 Packet Page 278 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 1 DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Shellabarger Creek Sediment Pond Access 1 LS $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Access Restoration 1 LS $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Temporary Stream Bypass 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Clearing and Grubbing 0.2 AC $ 4,000 $ 716 Excavation (assume 40 x 100 x 6) 900 CY $ 20 $ 18,000 Haul and Disposal Excavated Mat'I 450 CY $ 10 $ 4,500 Haul and Disposal Excavated Mat'I (50% contaminated) 450 CY $ 95 $ 42,750 Construction Geotextile (for pond bottom strength) 444 SY $ 4 $ 1,778 CSBC (for pond bottom) 150 TN $ 30 $ 4,500 Permanent Maintenance Access Road 1 LS $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Roadside/Landscape Restoration 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Subtotal $ 91,244 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 9,124 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 10% $ 9,124 Subtotal $ 109,493 Mobilization 10% $ 10,949 Subtotal $ 120,000 Contingency 30% $ 36,000 Subtotal $ 156,000 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 14,820 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 171,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 34,200 Permitting 10% $ 17,100 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 25,650 Land Cost ° 0.25 AC $ 300,000 $ 75,000 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) S 323,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. So costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. 4. Land Cost assuming assessed land value divided by entire parcel (no discount for wetland). A1t1.3 Page 3 of 22 Packet Page 279 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 1 DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Divert Salish Crossing to Dayton St System Storm Drain - 18" 30 LF $ 80 $ 2,400 Catch Basins 1 EA $ 1,500 $ 1,500 Manholes 1 EA $ 6,000 $ 6,000 Connection to Existing 1 EA $ 500 $ 500 Pavement Removal 30 SY $ 15 $ 450 Pavement Restoration 30 SY $ 25 $ 750 Utility Relocations 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Dewatering 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Subtotal $ 26,600 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 2,660 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 10% $ 2,660 Subtotal $ 31,920 Mobilization 10% $ 3,192 Subtotal $ 35,000 Contingency 30% $ 10,500 Subtotal $ 45,500 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 4,323 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 50,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 10,000 Permitting 10% $ 5,000 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 7,500 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 73,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. So costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. AMA Page 4 of 22 Packet Page 280 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 1 DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Restore Shellabarger and Willow Creek to Marsh" Clear and Grubbing (remove cattails) 1 AC $ 3,500 $ 4,900 Channel Excavation/Dredging 970 CY $ 50 $ 48,500 Haul and Disposal Excavated Mat'I 485 CY $ 10 $ 4,850 Haul and Disposal Excavated Mat'I (50% contaminated) 485 CY $ 95 $ 46,075 Stream Habitat Restoration (Habitat Features) 1 LS $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Revegetation 1 LS $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Subtotal $ 154,325 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 15,433 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 10% $ 15,433 Subtotal $ 185,190 Mobilization 10% $ 18,519 Subtotal $ 204,000 Contingency 30% $ 61,200 Subtotal $ 265,200 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 25,194 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 290,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 58,000 Permitting 10% $ 29,000 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 43,500 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 421,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. SD costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. 4. Cost Estimate taken from Willow Creek Daylighting Study (capital cost only) (Draft, S&W, 2013). Does not include Tide Gate. A1t1.5 Page 5 of 22 Packet Page 281 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 1 DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Remove Cattails and Excavate South Portion of Marsh Clear and Grubbing (remove cattails) 9 AC $ 3,500 $ 31,500 Channel Excavation/Dredging 11,293 CY $ 15 $ 169,400 Haul and Disposal Excavated Mat'I 5,647 CY $ 10 $ 56,467 Haul and Disposal Excavated Mat'I (50% contaminated) 5,647 CY $ 95 $ 536,433 Stream Habitat Restoration (Habitat Features) 1 LS $ 225,000 $ 225,000 Revegetation 1 LS $ 225,000 $ 225,000 Control of Water/diversion/cofferdams 1 LS $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Subtotal $ 1,293,800 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 129,380 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 10% $ 129,380 Subtotal $ 1,552,560 Mobilization 10% $ 155,256 Subtotal $ 1,708,000 Contingency 30% $ 512,400 Subtotal $ 2,220,400 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 210,938 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 2,431,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 486,200 Permitting 10% $ 243,100 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 364,650 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 3,525,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. So costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. A1t1.6 Page 6 of 22 Packet Page 282 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 1 DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Divert Harbor Square Overflows to Dayton Pump Station Storm Drain - 18" 60 LF $ 80 $ 4,800 Catch Basins 2 EA $ 1,500 $ 3,000 Manholes 2 EA $ 6,000 $ 12,000 Connection to Existing 2 EA $ 500 $ 1,000 Pavement Removal 50 SY $ 15 $ 750 Pavement Restoration 50 SY $ 25 $ 1,250 Utility Relocations 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Dewatering 1 LS $ 8,000 $ 8,000 Subtotal $ 40,800 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 4,080 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 10% $ 4,080 Subtotal $ 48,960 Mobilization 10% $ 4,896 Subtotal $ 54,000 Contingency 30% $ 16,200 Subtotal $ 70,200 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 6,669 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 77,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 15,400 Permitting 10% $ 7,700 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 11,550 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) S 112,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. So costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. A1t1.7 Page 7 of 22 Packet Page 283 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 1 DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Ferry Queing Area Water Quality Treatment Traffic Control 1 LS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Excavation 150 CY $ 35 $ 5,250 Shoring 900 SF $ 25 $ 22,500 Dewatering 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Coellescing Plate Vault 1 LS $ 30,000 $ 30,000 Vault Hatches 2 EA $ 2,500 $ 5,000 Contech StormFilter Vault 1 LS $ 30,000 $ 30,000 Foundaiton Preparation 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Divering upstream drainage around WQ Facility, 12" SD 120 LF $ 45 $ 5,400 Storm Drain - 12" 20 LF $ 45 $ 900 Manholes 2 EA $ 6,000 $ 12,000 Pavement Removal 320 SY $ 15 $ 4,800 Pavement Restoration 320 SY $ 25 $ 8,000 Utility Relocations 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Subtotal $ 168,850 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 16,885 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 5% $ 8,443 Subtotal $ 194,178 Mobilization 10% $ 19,418 Subtotal $ 214,000 Contingency 30% $ 64,200 Subtotal $ 278,200 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 26,429 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 305,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 61,000 Permitting 10% $ 30,500 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 45,750 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 442,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. So costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. 4. Land Acquisition unit costs are for Administrative Costs only. A1t1.8 Page 8 of 22 Packet Page 284 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 1 - Remove 36"/22" Culverts and Embankment DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Remove 36"/22" Culverts and Embankment Clear and Grubbing 1 LS $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Channel Excavation 170 CY $ 20 $ 3,400 Haul and Disposal Excavated Mat'I 85 CY $ 10 $ 850 Haul and Disposal Excavated Mat'I (50% contaminated) 85 CY $ 95 $ 8,075 Remove 36"/22" and Gates 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Stream Habitat Restoration (Habitat Features) 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Revegetation 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Control of Water/diversion/cofferdams 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Subtotal $ 44,325 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 4,433 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 10% $ 4,433 Subtotal $ 53,190 Mobilization 10% $ 5,319 Subtotal $ 59,000 Contingency 30% $ 17,700 Subtotal $ 76,700 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 7,287 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 84,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 16,800 Permitting 10% $ 8,400 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 12,600 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) S 122,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. So costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. A1t1.9 Page 9 of 22 Packet Page 285 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 2 DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Daylight Channel Construction Daylight Channel Section above BNSF Bridge (Cost from S&W, : $ 1,306,600 Beach Outfalll Construction(Downstream BNSF Bridge (Cost from S&W, 2013f $ 910,000 Subtotal $ 2,216,600 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 0% $ - Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 0% $ - Subtotal $ 2,216,600 Mobilization 10% $ 221,660 Subtotal $ 2,438,000 Contingency 30% $ 731,400 Subtotal $ 3,169,400 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 301,093 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 3,470,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 694,000 Permitting 10% $ 347,000 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 520,500 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) S 5,032,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. SD costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. 4. Cost Estimate taken from Willow Creek Daylighting Study (capital cost only) (Draft, S&W, 2013). Does not include Tide Gate. A1t2.1 Page 10 of 22 Packet Page 286 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 2 DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Daylight Channel Construction Self -Regulating Tide Gate (Cost from S&W, 2013f $ 250,000 Subtotal $ 250,000 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 0% $ - Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 0% $ - Subtotal $ 250,000 Mobilization 10% $ 25,000 Subtotal $ 275,000 Contingency 30% $ 82,500 Subtotal $ 357,500 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 33,963 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 391,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 78,200 Permitting 10% $ 39,100 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 58,650 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) S 567,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. SD costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. 4. Cost Estimate taken from Willow Creek Daylighting Study (capital cost only) (Draft, S&W, 2013). Does not include Tide Gate. A1t2.2 Page 11 of 22 Packet Page 287 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 1 DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Existing 48-inch Willow Creek Outlet Pipe Modifcations Traffic Control 1 LS $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Excavation 10 CY $ 35 $ 350 Dewatering/Control of Water 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Concrete Weir (with adjustable plate) 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Subtotal $ 21,350 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 2,135 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 5% $ 1,068 Subtotal $ 24,553 Mobilization 10% $ 2,455 Subtotal $ 27,000 Contingency 30% $ 8,100 Subtotal $ 35,100 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 3,335 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 38,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 7,600 Permitting 10% $ 3,800 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 5,700 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 55,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. SD costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. 4. Land Acquisition unit costs are for Administrative Costs only. A11:2.3 Page 12 of 22 Packet Page 288 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 2 - Isolating Marsh System from Dayton DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Isolating Marsh System from Dayton Modification to East Side of SR104 South of Daylong Plug Existing Pipe 1 LS $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Berm Across East Side of Roadway Shoulder 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Roadside/Landscape Restoration 1 LS $ 500 $ 500 Temporary Cofferdam (byass) 1 LS $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Short Concrete Curb with footing for floodwall (approx. 0.5 ft) 50 LF $ 60 $ 3,000 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 1 LS $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Berm on West Side of Harbor Square 150 LF $ 80 $ 12,000 Clearing and Grubbing 0.1 AC $ 4,000 $ 358 Fill Material 170 CY $ 25 $ 4,250 Short Concrete Curb with footing for floodwall (approx. 1 ft) 150 LF $ 80 $ 12,000 Roadside/Landscape Restoration 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Mitigation 0 AC $ 15,000 $ 3,000 Subtotal $ 49,108 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 4,911 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 10% $ 4,911 Traffic Control 0 LS $ - Subtotal $ 58,930 Mobilization 10% $ 5,893 Subtotal $ 65,000 Contingency 30% $ 19,500 Subtotal $ 84,500 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 8,028 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 93,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 18,600 Permitting 10% $ 9,300 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 13,950 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 135,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. SD costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. A1t2.4 Page 13 of 22 Packet Page 289 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 3 DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Edmonds Marsh Pump Station Traffic Control 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Excavation 1900 CY $ 35 $ 66,500 Shoring 5000 SF $ 25 $ 125,000 Dewatering 1 LS $ 100,000 $ 100,000 Pump Vault 1 LS $ 72,000 $ 72,000 Pump Vault Hatches 3 EA $ 4,000 $ 12,000 Foundation Preparation 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 25 cfs submersible pumps 2 EA $ 70,000 $ 140,000 Pump Contols & MCC 1 LS $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Pump Controls - Panel and PLC 1 LS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Pump Controls - Cable Conduit, Instrumentation 1 LS $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Pump Controls - Commissioning 1 LS $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Check Valve Vault 1 LS $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Swing Check Valve - 24" 2 EA $ 30,000 $ 60,000 Eccentric Plug Valve - 24" 2 EA $ 20,000 $ 40,000 Power Service 1 LS $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Emergency Generator 1 LS $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Storm Drain - 48" 20 LF $ 200 $ 4,000 Manholes 2 EA $ 15,000 $ 30,000 Fish Screen Intake Structure (conc) 1 LS $ 230,000 $ 230,000 Fisc Screen (140' x 4') 1 LS $ 140,000 $ 140,000 Pavement Removal 500 SY $ 15 $ 7,500 Pavement Restoration 500 SY $ 25 $ 12,500 Utility Relocations 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Fencing 250 LF $ 30 $ 7,500 Subtotal $ 1,302,000 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 20% $ 260,400 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 5% $ 65,100 Subtotal $ 1,627,500 Mobilization 10% $ 162,750 Subtotal $ 1,790,000 Contingency 30% $ 537,000 Subtotal $ 2,327,000 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 221,065 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 2,548,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 509,600 Permitting 10% $ 254,800 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 382,200 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 3,695,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. SD costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. 4. Land Acquisition unit costs are for Administrative Costs only. A1t3.1 Page 14 of 22 Packet Page 290 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 3 - Pipe Improvements Between Dayton and DATE: 4/15/2013 Marsh BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Pipe Improvements Between Dayton and Marsh Traffic Control 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Dewatering 1 LS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Storm Drain - 30" 730 LF $ 140 $ 102,200 Manholes 5 EA $ 6,000 $ 30,000 Flap Gate at Outlet 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Pavement Removal 650 SY $ 15 $ 9,750 Pavement Restoration 650 SY $ 25 $ 16,250 Utility Relocations 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Subtotal $ 203,200 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 20% $ 40,640 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 5% $ 10,160 Subtotal $ 254,000 Mobilization 10% $ 25,400 Subtotal $ 279,000 Contingency 30% $ 83,700 Subtotal $ 362,700 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 34,457 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 397,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 79,400 Permitting 10% S 39,700 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 59,550 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) S 576,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. SD costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. 4. Land Acquisition unit costs are for Administrative Costs only. A1t3.2 Page 15 of 22 Packet Page 291 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 3 - Isolating Marsh System from Dayton DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Isolating Marsh System from Dayton Modification to East Side of SR104 South of Dayton Plug Existing Pipe 1 LS $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Berm Across East Side of Roadway Shoulder 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Roadside/Landscape Restoration 1 LS $ 500 $ 500 Temporary Cofferdam (byass) 1 LS $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Short Concrete Curb with footing for floodwall (approx. 1 ft) 150 LF $ 80 $ 12,000 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 1 LS $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Berm on West Side of Harbor Square 0 LF $ 80 $ - Clearing and Grubbing 0.1 AC $ 4,000 $ 358 Fill Material 170 CY $ 25 $ 4,250 Short Concrete Curb with footing for floodwall (approx. 2 ft) 0 LF $ 100 $ - Roadside/Landscape Restoration 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Mitigation 0 AC $ 15,000 $ 3,000 Subtotal $ 34,108 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 3,411 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 10% $ 3,411 Traffic Control 0 LS $ - Subtotal $ 40,930 Mobilization 10% $ 4,093 Subtotal $ 45,000 Contingency 30% $ 13,500 Subtotal $ 58,500 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 5,558 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 64,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 12,800 Permitting 10% $ 6,400 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 9,600 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 93,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. So costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. A1t3.3 Page 16 of 22 Packet Page 292 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 3 DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Dayton St/SR104 Pump Station Traffic Control 1 LS $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Excavation 400 CY $ 35 $ 14,000 Shoring 1400 SF $ 25 $ 35,000 Dewatering 1 LS $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Pump Vault 1 LS $ 35,000 $ 35,000 Pump Vault Hatches 2 EA $ 4,000 $ 8,000 Foundation Preparation 1 LS $ 8,000 $ 8,000 10 cfs submersible pumps 3 EA $ 50,000 $ 150,000 Pump Contols & MCC 1 LS $ 40,000 $ 40,000 Pump Controls - Panel and PLC 1 LS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Pump Controls - Cable Conduit, Instrumentation 1 LS $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Pump Controls - Commissioning 1 LS $ 30,000 $ 30,000 Check Valve Vault 1 LS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Swing Check Valve - 16" 3 EA $ 20,000 $ 60,000 Eccentric Plug Valve -16" 3 EA $ 12,000 $ 36,000 Power Service 1 LS $ 25,000 $ 25,000 Emergency Generator (portable) 1 LS $ 50,000 $ 50,000 Storm Drain - 30" 20 LF $ 140 $ 2,800 Manholes 2 EA $ 8,000 $ 16,000 Force Main - 30" 1,100 LF $ 200 $ 220,000 Borring and Jacking Carrier Pipe under RR 100 LF $ 400 $ 40,000 Boring and Jacking Pits 2 EA $ 10,000 $ 20,000 Air Release Valve 2 ea $ 3,000 $ 6,000 New 30-inch Outfalll through Seawall 1 LS $ 15,000 $ 15,000 Pavement Removal 2,400 SY $ 15 $ 36,000 Pavement Restoration (assume 1/2 street) 140 TN $ 160 $ 22,400 Special Sidewalk Restoration (near outfall) 200 SY $ 40 $ 8,000 Utility Relocations 1 LS $ 30,000 $ 30,000 Subtotal $ 1,037,200 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 20% $ 207,440 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 5% $ 51,860 Subtotal $ 1,296,500 Mobilization 10% $ 129,650 Subtotal $ 1,426,000 Contingency 30% $ 427,800 Subtotal $ 1,853,800 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 176,111 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 2,030,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 406,000 Permitting 10% $ 203,000 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 304,500 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 2,944,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. SD costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. 4. Land Acquisition unit costs are for Administrative Costs only. A1t4.1 Page 17 of 22 Packet Page 293 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 4 - Berming Marsh at Harbor Square and SR104 DATE: 4/15/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Berming Marsh at Harbor Square and SR104 Modification to East Side of SR104 South of Daylong Berm Across East Side of Roadway Shoulder 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Roadside/Landscape Restoration 1 LS $ 500 $ 500 Short Concrete Curb with footing for floodwall (approx. 1 ft) 150 LF $ 80 $ 12,000 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 1 LS $ 2,000 $ 2,000 Berm on West Side of Harbor Square 150 LF $ 80 $ 12,000 Clearing and Grubbing 0.1 AC $ 4,000 $ 358 Fill Material 170 CY $ 25 $ 4,250 Short Concrete Curb with footing for floodwall (approx. 2 ft) 150 LF $ 100 $ 15,000 Roadside/Landscape Restoration 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Mitigation 0 AC $ 15,000 $ 3,000 Subtotal $ 59,108 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 5,911 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 10% $ 5,911 Traffic Control 0 LS $ - Subtotal $ 70,930 Mobilization 10% $ 7,093 Subtotal $ 78,000 Contingency 30% $ 23,400 Subtotal $ 101,400 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 9,633 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 111,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 22,200 Permitting 10% $ 11,100 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 16,650 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 161,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. SD costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. A1t4.2 Page 18 of 22 Packet Page 294 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/jf Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 3 - Pipe Improvements at Dayton St/SR 104 DATE: 4/15/2013 Intersection BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Pipe Improvements At Intersection of Dayton St and SR104 Traffic Control 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Dewatering 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Storm Drain - 30" 730 LF $ 30 $ 21,900 Manholes 2 EA $ 6,000 $ 12,000 Pavement Removal 30 SY $ 15 $ 450 Pavement Restoration 30 SY $ 25 $ 750 Utility Relocations 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 Subtotal $ 65,100 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 20% $ 13,020 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 5% $ 3,255 Subtotal $ 81,375 Mobilization 10% $ 8,138 Subtotal $ 90,000 Contingency 30% $ 27,000 Subtotal $ 117,000 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 11,115 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 128,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 25,600 Permitting 10% $ 12,800 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 19,200 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 186,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. SD costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. 4. Land Acquisition unit costs are for Administrative Costs only. A1t4.3 Page 19 of 22 Packet Page 295 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/ma Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 2 (modified) DATE: 7/18/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Clean SR 104 Culvert and Shellabarger Creek Maintenance" Clear and Grubbing (remove cattails) 0.1 AC $ 10,000 $ 1,000 Channel Excavation/Dredging, assumes (2'x10'x200'P 148 CY $ 200 $ 29,600 Haul and Disposal Excavated Mat'I 74 CY $ 10 $ 740 Haul and Disposal Excavated Mat'I (50% contaminated) 74 CY $ 95 $ 7,030 Stream Diversion 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Revegetation 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Subtotal $ 48,370 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 4,837 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 10% $ 4,837 Subtotal $ 58,044 Mobilization 10% $ 5,804 Subtotal $ 64,000 Contingency 30% $ 19,200 Subtotal $ 83,200 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 7,904 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 91,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 18,200 Permitting 10% $ 9,100 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 13,650 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 132,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. SD costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. 4. Cost Estimate based on culvert maintenance and downstream channel maintenance. 5. Assume hand work. A1t2M.1 Page 20 of 22 Packet Page 296 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/ma Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 2 (modified) DATE: 7/18/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Willow Creek 48-inch Pipe Rehabilitation(5) Traffic Control 1 LS $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Excavation 10 CY $ 35 $ 350 Dewatering/Control of Water 1 LS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 Pipe Rehabilitation 600 LF $ 295 $ 177,000 Subtotal $ 198,350 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 19,835 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 5% $ 9,918 Subtotal $ 228,103 Mobilization 10% $ 22,810 Subtotal $ 251,000 Contingency 30% $ 75,300 Subtotal $ 326,300 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 30,999 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 357,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 71,400 Permitting 10% $ 35,700 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 53,550 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) S 518,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. SD costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. 4. Land Acquisition unit costs are for Administrative Costs only. 5. Cost generally taken from 2010 City of Edmonds Comprehensive Drainage Plan A1t2M.2 Page 21 of 22 Packet Page 297 of 456 PLANNING LEVEL COST OPINION SA1` PROJECT: Dayton Street/SR 104 Storm Drain Alternatives Study BY: msg/ma Client: City of Edmonds Description Alternative 2 (modified) DATE: 7/26/2013 BID ITEM QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE I AMOUNT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Element: Harbor Square Pipe Outfall Modifications Traffic Control 1 LS $ 1,000 $ 1,000 Excavation 6 CY $ 50 $ 300 Dewatering/Control of Water 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 Haul and Disposal Excavated Mat'I 3 CY $ 10 $ 30 Haul and Disposal Excavated Mat'I (50% contaminated) 3 CY $ 95 $ 285 Flap Gate 2 EA $ 5,000 $ 10,000 Subtotal $ 16,615 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 1,661.50 Tempoary Erosion & Sediment Control 5% $ 830.75 Subtotal $ 19,107 Mobilization 10% $ 1,910.73 Subtotal $ 21,000 Contingency 30% $ 6,300 Subtotal $ 27,300 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 2,594 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 30,000 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 20% $ 6,000 Permitting 10% $ 3,000 Construction Engineering and Administration 15% $ 4,500 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) `i 44,000 Notes: 1. The above cost opinion is in 2013 dollars and does not include future escalation, financing, or O&M costs. 2. The construction items and quantities are based upon conceptual solution types and should be considered conceptual. See Report text. 3. SD costs include trenching, bedding, pipe and backfill. 4. Land Acquisition unit costs are for Administrative Costs only. A1t2M.3 Page 22 of 22 Packet Page 298 of 456 Appendix E CITY COUNCIL AND PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE MEETINGS File: 001712 1 26512110002 SAIE. Packet Page 299 of 456 Erlrlra • 0. 0 N rfe,e oes the intersection flood? ! inability of Shellabarger Creek to irely flow under SR104 into-oEdmonds the inability of getting the flow Marsh into Puget Sound in anner. The elevation of the Dayton St. E !�77� stormwater line at the intersection of SR104 is lower than the water level in Puget Sound during much of the tidal cycle. `=ZVI Dayton St. Storm line ^'.� " g' outfall into Puget Sound s• * 41 i i -- � LU till ."I •�' 4 v r - 4 Y - ��. _ - spy - 17. it • TM � 4 Op LU 5hellabarger Creek culverts _ ijnr1,;-r RR 1 n4 Rk,1% IF J ecornmended Alter Reduce the Flo te to k.-. e the two main drainage systems ayton St System fillow Creek/Shellabarger Creek/Edmonds Inrch cvctom i Improve Conveyance to both systems Puget Sound for Feet 0 162.5 325 Legend Recommended Forested Upland (2) Freshwater Emergent Parcels Existing Stone drain Proposed Storm drainffierm Alternative Forested Wetland Mudflat and Salt Marsh Existing Channel Notes: JI)As proposed under separate Willow Greek Daylightirrg Study, Shannon and Wilson, 2013. {2j Marsh wetland designations are approximate and taken iron Shannon and Wism, 2a13. — Proposed Channel ■ Proposed water Quality or Conveyance Facility From sdurn �}biniwsc Packet Page 304 of Estimated Planning L Item Isolate the two main drainage Improve Convevance Pump Station s (incl. sediment Connect Salish Crossing flow and Harbor Sauare Overflow Estimated Cost WQ Treatment for Ferry Holding Lanes , Edmonds Marsh System f Willow Creek Da li htin incl. channel restoration , Harbor Square flap gates and berm , Rehab existing pipe/outlet improvements go Self-regulating tide ate (TBD), Estimated Total the next steps? uwOpen House in late spring/early er 2013present the _ ecommended alternatives and get input. Work with stakeholders to develop plan =� = to implement preferred alternatives. Move projects into CIP for design and �` � implementation. Duestic Packet Page 307 of 456 AM-5789 g City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 05/28/2013 Time: 20 Minutes Submitted For: Jerry Shuster Submitted By: Megan Luttrell Department: Engineering Review Committee: Committee Action: Type: Information Information Subject Title Briefing on the Recommended Alternative — Dayton Street & SR104 Drainage Study Recommendation For information only. Previous Council Action On January 15, 2013, the Council was updated on this project. The briefing included the reason the intersection floods and a discussion of the next steps. Narrative The intersection of Dayton St. and SR104 frequently floods. Flooding was particularly evident on November 19, 2012 when 2.26 inches of precipitation fell in a 24-hr period. The intersection and immediate vicinity is an economic and transportation focal point for the City, Port of Edmonds, Washing Department of Transportation, Washington State Ferries, Sound Transit and private commercial property Briefly, the primary causes of the flooding at the intersection during moderate to large storm events are: • The inability of Shellabarger Creek to entirely flow under SR104 into Edmonds Marsh. The flow, instead, travels north along the eastern ditch line of SR104 overwhelming the storm system at the Dayton St. intersection. The culverts under SR104 that are supposed to carry the Shellabarger Creek flow into the marsh are partially silted restricting their capacity. More importantly, the Marsh has silted in over the years such that the flow has "no place to go." • The elevation of the Dayton St. stormwater line at the intersection of SR104 is lower than the water level in Puget Sound during much of the tidal cycle; this means the water cannot flow on its own into Puget Sound when the tide is up. Even if the Shellabarger Creek flow was removed from the Dayton St. storm system, the intersection would still flood in larger storms. The recommended alternative: 1. Isolate the two main drainage systems: • Prevent Shellabarger Creek from flowing north the intersection by: o Cleaning/lowering/replacing the culverts under SR 104 Packet Page 308 of 456 o Plugging the existing 24-inch pipe that extends along the east side of SR 104 along with some berming near the inlet of this pipe. o Incorporate an in -line sediment trap on Shellabarger Creek upstream of the SR 104 culvert crossing. 2. Improve conveyance to Puget Sound. • Dayton Street System o Install large pump station east in City/Port owned Beach Place parking lot to move peak flows out of the Dayton stormwater main line into Puget Sound. o Connect south part of Salish Crossing site (that currently drains though Harbor Square and into the Marsh) and overflow from the Harbor Square system into this pump station. o Add water quality treatment from runoff from ferry holding lanes. *Edmonds Marsh System o Re-establish Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek channels in the Marsh and daylight Willow Creek. o Add low berm between Marsh and southwest part of Harbor Square o Add flap gates to Harbor Square discharge pipes to Marsh to prevent backflow (storm system owned by the City). o Rehab existing 48-inch Willow Creek outfall pipe and other improvements to serve as an emergency overflow for the Marsh. A public meeting will be held in late spring or early summer to present the detailed analysis of alternatives and get input. Staff will continue to work with the Stakeholders and the consultant to develop a plan to implement the most effective alternative solutions. The study is expected to be completed in the 3nd quarter of 2013. Fiscal Impact: The following are planning level cost opinion for this recommended alternative (includes entire Willow Creek Daylighting Project): Item Estimated Cost Isolate the two main drainage systems (incl. sediment pond) $458,000 Improve Conveyance Dayton St System Pump Station $1,173,000 Connect Salish Crossing flow and Harbor Square Overflow $185,000 WQ Treatment for Ferry Holding Lanes $442,000 Edmonds Marsh System Willow Creek Daylighting (incl. channel restoration) $5,545,000 Harbor Square flap gates and berm $200,000 Rehab existing pipe/outlet improvements $400,000 Self-regulating tidegate (TBD) $567,000 Estimated Total $8,970,000 Packet Page 309 of 456 Attachments Recommended Alternative Inbox Reviewed By Engineering Robert English Public Works Phil Williams City Clerk Sandy Chase Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Sandy Chase Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Final Approval Date: 05/23/2013 Form Review Date 05/23/2013 11:49 AM 05/23/2013 01:58 PM 05/23/2013 02:00 PM 05/23/2013 02:46 PM 05/23/2013 02:50 PM Started On: 05/23/2013 09:58 AM Packet Page 310 of 456 a< IL Public Open House rainage June 20, 2013 Jerry Shuster, P.E. Stormwater Engineering Program Manage es Stu OUTLINE 49. Why does the 'inte'rsection flood? What are the components Recommended Alternative to reduce the frequency of - flooding? How much will it cost? oes the intersection flood? ! inability of Shellabarger Creek to irely flow under SR104 into-oEdmonds the inability of getting the flow Marsh into Puget Sound in anner. The elevation of the Dayton St. E !�77� stormwater line at the intersection of SR104 is lower than the water level in Puget Sound during much of the tidal cycle. `=ZVI Dayton St. Storm line ^'.� " g' outfall into Puget Sound s• * 41 i i -- � LU till ."I •�' 4 v r - 4 Y - ��. _ - spy - 17. it • TM � 4 Op LU 5hellabarger Creek culverts _ ijnr1,;-r RR 1 n4 Rk,1% IF J ecornmended Alter Reduce the Flo te to te the two rdrainage systems ayton St. System Willow Creek/Shellabarger Creek/Edmonds Marsh system ,-Improve Conveyance to Puget Sound for both systems Feet 0 162.5 325 Legend Recommended Forested Upland (2) Freshwater Emergent Parcels Existing Stone drain Proposed Storm drainffierm Alternative Forested Wetland Mudflat and Salt Marsh Existing Channel Notes: JI)As proposed under separate Willow Greek Daylightirrg Study, Shannon and Wilson, 2013. {2j Marsh wetland designations are approximate and taken iron Shannon and Wism, 2a13. — Proposed Channel ■ Proposed water Quality or Conveyance Facility t1 From CA,—rO,QM , Packet Page 316 of f . /: r.-1 , k ,r f• . - �.,. }.�k /. . � a. 4'fY'�;:�:�.r'� •w. M1 �, �'� �"�sy� . - �T * \.. i ,I . .Y, '�� •, y lS� + •� it •A. 41 IL 40 � ![ + , • •..� ••}ii Cat Tails Overgrown Shellabarger Creek Channel in Marsh .. � s - Willow Creek — Open Channel Portion Packet Page 318 .. M.T .1k 0— OPP -4� 3ket Page 319 of 456 mated WQ Treatment for Ferry Holding Lanes , Edmonds Marsh System Willow Creek Da li htin incl. channel restoration , Harbor Square flap gates and berm of Rehab existing pipe/outlet improvements is Self-regulating tide gate (TBD) of Estimated Tota � off t the next steps? uwOpen House in late spring/early er 2013present the _ ecommended alternatives and get input. Work with stakeholders to develop plan =� = to implement preferred alternatives. Move projects into CIP for design and �` � implementation. Duestic Packet Page 322 of 456 CCETY OF EDMONDS Dnytan St. & SR �04 Drainage Alternatives Public Open House June 20, 2013, 6:30pm SIGN IN SHEET NAME PHONE, E-MAIL ADDRESS 1 - =�� s 12- j C o ,�CtESfi• n/t'� 3 , 775 -.512-S� u 4 I 5 �t1� ULUUL 10�� tiIl(. , C' Cif 6 6 7 T Sc� 2 0C 41 e CZS� f7 eT -/ �J -C 33 - 53 i/ ZLn-6 . — 76 G 7 10 11 12 \\EDMSVR-DEPTFS\Engineering\ENGR\Storm-Engineer\2012 Capital Projects\JS_E1FB_c374 Dayton SR104_Alts\405 Meetings\Public_620 2013\6202013Public Meeting SignInSheet Boiler.doc Packet Page 323 of 456 Shuster, Jerry From:. Shirley Oczkewicz <socz@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2013 3:40 PM To: Shuster, Jerry; Cawrse, Michael Subject: our marsh/coal trains Mr. Shuster and Mr. Cawrse, I watched on the internet your presentation to the City Council about daylighting Willow Creek, and wish to call this video to your attention. I'm wondering just how 'clean' is the marsh, and how can it be more protected from coal hazards as your plans proceed. Also, positioning the day lighted creek in the area of the dog and public parks would hopefully dispel any remaining thoughts of moving the ferry to that area. Please reply and thank you, Shirley Oczkewiez Worried about coal trains? Or maybe you are not yet sure what is up ... either way, watch this short video of how existing coal trains are polluting the Columbia River. Also, a documentary is airing on KCTS at 7:30 PM on 6/19. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHIcaGLvl Q&feature=youtu.be Packet Page 324 of 456 Dayton Street & SR 104 Drainage Alternative Study Summary of Questions Asked and Answered During June 20, 2013 Public Open House • Will you be discharging untreated stormwater in the Marsh, and Puget Sound? • Utilizing the Marsh as a filter to clean up stormwater, and proposing the use of the Marsh for salmon rearing, seem to be counterproductive — can you explain how both can be accomplished? • Would it be better to not plug the pipe that conveys Shellabarger Creek overflows to Dayton, as an overflow option during storm flows? • Will completing this project indicate that the ferry terminal will be permanently located in its' present location? • Who owns the Marsh? • What other agencies are involved in this project? • Will increased train traffic, including trains to the proposed coal processing facility, affect the project? • What are the alternative proposals to the recommended alternative? • For the pump station near Boat Street, what will it be housed in? Packet Page 325 of 456 CITY OF EDMONDS DAYTCGN STREET & SR104 DRAINAGE ALTERNATIVES Public Open House — June 20; 2013 In the space provided below or in an e-mail, please provide your comments on the presentation and your thoughts on the Recommended Alternative to address the flooding problem at the intersection of Dayton Street & SR 104. YOUR NAME: ADDRESS: DAYTIME PHONE/E-MAIL PLEASE MAIL FORM TO: S``z S (" ? 3 57�:-�F -�;2_ Jerry Shuster, P.E. City of Edmonds -Engineering Division 121 5fh Ave N. Edmonds WA, 98020 (use space on the back, if necessary) OR E-MAIL THE INFORMATION TO: Jerry. Shuster(cDedmondswa.gov or Michael. Cawrseaedrnondswa.gov Packet Page 326 of 456 Louis Berger Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station Predesign Final Report City of Edmonds May 2015 Packet Page 327 of 456 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station Predesign Final Report City of Edmonds May 2015 0 Louis Berger Packet Page 328 of 456 This report has been prepared for the use of the client for the specific purposes identified in the report. The conclusions, observations and recommendations contained herein attributed to Louis Berger Group (LBG) constitute the opinions of LBG. To the extent that statements, information and opinions provided by the client or others have been used in the preparation of this report, LBG has relied upon the same to be accurate, and for which no assurances are intended and no representations or warranties are made. LBG makes no certification and gives no assurances except as explicitly set forth in this report. © 2015 Louis Berger Group All rights reserved. Packet Page 329 of 456 Dayton Street Stormwater Pump Station Predesign Report City of Edmonds TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents List of Tables List of Figures Section 1 INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE..............................1-1 Section 2 EXISTING DRAINAGE SYSTEM.............................................................2-1 Section 3 PUMP STATION ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION...........................................................................................................3-1 Preliminary Identification of Alternatives..........................................................3-1 Pump Station and Outfall Location.........................................................3-1 Hydrologyand Hydraulics................................................................................3-6 Pump Station Type and Configuration.............................................................3-8 Power Availability and Electrical Design Requirements.................................3-14 Controls.......................................................................................................... 3-14 Preliminary Permit Assessment.....................................................................3-16 Geotechnical Considerations.........................................................................3-17 Operation and Maintenance...........................................................................3-19 CostsEstimates............................................................................................. 3-19 Alternatives Evaluation Summary and Recommendations............................3-22 List of Appendices A Preliminary Geotechical Review, Shannon & Wilson, Inc. B Survey/Base Mapping, DHA C Pump Manufacturing Data DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Louis Berger Packet Page 330 of 456 Table of Contents List of Tables Table 3-1 Model Summary Results........................................................................... 3-8 Table 3-2 Preliminary Project Permit Requirements ............................................... 3-16 Table 3-3 Cost Estimate - Duplex Centrifugal (Submersible) Pump ....................... 3-20 Table 3-4 Cost Estimate — Axial Flow Pump........................................................... 3-21 Table 3-5 Summary Comparison of Pump Station Configuration Options .............. 3-22 List of Figures Figure 1-1. Project Vicinity........................................................................................ 1-3 Figure 1-2. Photograph: Dayton St/SR 104 Intersection looking south, Dec 03, 2007.......................................................................................................... 1-4 Figure 1-3. Photograph: Salish Crossing Parking Lot adjacent to Dayton Street/SR 104................................................................................................. 1-5 Figure 1-4. Photograph: Salish Crossing Parking Lot and Dayton Street/SR 104 Intersection looking NW, November 19, 2012......................................... 1-5 Figure 2-1. Existing Drainage System...................................................................... 2-3 Figure 2-2. Drainage Subbasins............................................................................... 2-4 Figure 3-1. Pump Station Location Options.............................................................. 3-3 Figure 3-2. Preliminary Site Plan.............................................................................. 3-4 Figure 3-3. Pump Station Configuration Option 1-Duplex Centrifugal (Submersible) Pump..................................................................................... 3-11 Figure 3-4. Pump Station Configuration Option 2-Axial Flow Pump ....................... 3-13 # Louis Berger 6/1/15 Packet Page 331 of 456 Section 1 INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The intersection of Dayton Street and State Route (SR) 104 in downtown Edmonds has flooded on numerous occasions in recent years resulting in disruptions to traffic and ferry operations. Figure 1-1 shows the location of the intersection and the general vicinity. The intersection is in a low-lying area and is drained by a pipe system extending west along Dayton Street to outfall to Puget Sound. The outfall is equipped with a valve to prevent tidal flow from backing up into the drainage system. The intersection is located just north of the Edmonds Marsh, a contiguous low-lying area. Shellabarger Creek crosses SR 104 and enters into the marsh about 1,000-feet south of the intersection. The flow from Shellabarger Creek through the culvert crossing is affected by a number of factors that can inhibit flow entering the marsh such as tidal conditions, sediment and debris accumulation, and an abundance of vegetation that clogs the creek channel. As such, during storm events, flow through the culvert backs up causing water levels on the east side of SR 104 to rise. The high water levels cause Shellabarger Creek to inundate a low-lying wetland on the east side of SR 104 and then overflow north to the Dayton Street and SR 104 intersection. This flow, in combination with the runoff from other tributary areas to the intersection, can overwhelm the existing Dayton Street stormwater conveyance system and result in periodic flooding, particularly when high tides coincide with heavy rainfall. Figures 1-2, 1-3, and 1-4 show the intersection and adjacent area flooding during three recent large storm events. High water levels in the marsh have also contributed to flooding of portions of the parking area and two buildings at the nearby Port of Edmonds' Harbor Square development. The Dayton Street drainage system and the Shellabarger Creek system were studied previously as a part of the Dayton Street and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Study (Louis Berger, formerly SAIC, 2013). The study included hydrologic and hydraulic modeling of the systems as well as an evaluation of several alternative solutions to reduce flooding. The study recommended a comprehensive set of drainage system improvement projects to help reduce flooding of the intersection. One of the key recommendations focusing on the Dayton Street drainage system included the construction of a pump station to pump stormwater, particularly when the tide is high and restricts gravity flow from the drainage system to Puget Sound. The study identified a preliminary location for the pump station near the intersection of W Dayton Street and Admiral Way. The study also recommended isolating the drainage from the Shellabarger Creek system from the Dayton Street system so that the creek system does not contribute to the intersection flooding. DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT / 6/1/15 Louis Berger Packet Page 332 of 456 Section 1 This page left intentionally blank. 1-2 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Packet Page 333 of 456 1 "=325' 325 0 325 650 Creek/Ditch Scale Feet Pipe/Culvert Figure 1-1 Project Vicinity Louis Berger Packet Page 334 of 456 Section 1 The purpose of this current study is to perform preliminary design investigations for the proposed stormwater pump station. More specifically, this study is intended to confirm the pump(s) size and type, pump station location and configuration, outlet piping size and configuration, provide predesign level cost estimate, and assess implementation and permit requirements. To provide the predesign level information, the following major tasks were undertaken: ■ Field survey in the vicinity of the proposed pump station that can be used for siting analysis and also serve as "base mapping" for future design. ■ Conduct additional hydrologic and hydraulic modeling to confirm pump station capacity requirements. ■ Perform geotechnical investigations using available data to assess soils conditions that could impact construction. ■ Perform alternative analysis as needed to select the best option for pump station siting, and configuration. The predesign study includes a description of the existing drainage system followed by a section that evaluates pump stations options and considerations. Figure 1-2. Photograph: Dayton St/SR 104 Intersection looking south, Dec 03, 2007 1-4 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Packet Page 335 of 456 INTRODUCTION, BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE Figure 1-3. Photograph: Salish Crossing Parking Lot adjacent to Dayton Street/SR 104 Intersection looking NW, Dec 12, 2010 Figure 1-4. Photograph: Salish Crossing Parking Lot and Dayton Street/SR 104 Intersection looking NW, November 19, 2012 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 1-5 Packet Page 336 of 456 Section 2 EXISTING DRAINAGE SYSTEM The Dayton Street system drains an approximate 33.5-acre area that extends east as far as 3rd Avenue S and as far north as Main Street. From the intersection with SR 104, the system extends west along Dayton to Admiral Way, where it continues west through an easement on Port of Edmonds property. At the outlet to Puget Sound, the system includes a tide gate (tide flex valve) that prevents flows backing up in the system during high tides. Figure 2-1 presents a graphic of the existing drainage systems in the project area. This figure also shows the drainage system associated with the Edmonds Marsh/Shellabarger Creek, located to the south of Dayton Street. Figure 2-2 depicts drainage basin boundaries tributary to both the Dayton Street drainage system and the Edmonds Marsh system. Approximately 80-feet west of Admiral Way the drainage system was modified in 2004 to include a water quality facility. This construction changed the system profile and added a swirl concentrator stormwater quality treatment facility. While water quality has been improved with this facility, a disadvantage is that it backs up water (about five -feet high) upstream of its location so much of the system is constantly under water. The intersection for Dayton Street and SR 104 is low-lying and the low point of the road is at about elevation 10. High tides are often in the range of 9 to 11-feet (NAVD88) and sometimes higher during extreme tides. The intersection receives flow from both the north and the south. Drainage from the north includes both SR 104 to about Main Street as well as drainage from the Washington State Ferry's north queuing area. The drainage from the south includes overflows from the Edmonds Marsh/Shellabarger creek system. These overflows enter a pipe system located on the east side of SR 104 that extends north to the Dayton Street system. There are two small areas that lie adjacent to Dayton Street but to do not drain to the Dayton Street drainage system. These include a portion of the Salish Crossing property which is located north of Dayton Street and west of SR 104 (See Subbasin 420 on Figure 2-2), and Harbor Square which is located south of Dayton Street and west of SR 104 (See Subbasin 410 on Figure 2-2). The drainage from the southwestern portion of Salish Crossing is directed south across Dayton Street and connects to a pipe system within Harbor Square. The Harbor Square drainage system includes storm drains that extend south and west to the Edmonds Marsh. DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Louis Berger Packet Page 337 of 456 Section 2 Additional information on the Edmonds Marsh/Shellabarger Creek drainage system can be found in Dayton Street and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Study (Louis Berger, formerly SAIL, 2013). 2-2 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Packet Page 338 of 456 300 0 300 600 Figure 2-1 1 "=300'-0" Louis Berger Scale Feet Existing Drainage System L Packet Page 339 of 456 V R -is Oil IA NO ;row 00 item '� is ! T. _��r :f. E r ji vim lit as 14 OR 16 t �,1�, =fi t`-!� -� .�.... _� ••�,_ .fit s ~ 1 . 4 k Packet Page 341 of 456 Section 3 PUMP STATION ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION Preliminary Identification of Alternatives The original concept identified as part of the Dayton Street and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Studywas a 13 +/- cfs electric submersible pump station near the downstream end of the Dayton Street system that would include a force main discharge to Puget Sound. Following a notice to proceed on this current project, the consulting team met with City staff regarding advancing the pump station project and to identify any preferences for pump station configurations or what alternatives should be considered when advancing the pump station design. The following paragraphs provide discussions of certain aspects of the pump station configuration. Pump Station and Outfall Location The ideal location for the proposed pump station is near the downstream outlet of the system to reduce overall pumping length to Puget Sound. The location should also be close to the existing system to reduce the construction length of gravity main from the existing system to the pump station. It is also desirable to have the pump station pump into a force main that ties back into the existing gravity system prior to its outfall to Puget Sound. The advantages of using the existing outfall are both cost and the difficulty in getting environmental permits for a new stormwater outfall. Ideally, the force main would tie back into the existing system at a catch basin upstream of the existing water quality facility, so that even during pump station operation, stormwater is routed through the water treatment facility. The pump station location must also be readily accessible by City maintenance personnel. With regard to connecting the force main back to the system upstream of the water quality facility, there was some concern regarding potential negative consequences of routing pressure flow through the facility. The water quality facility includes an upstream diversion manhole and a swirl concentrator. The upstream manhole routes flows up to the design flow of 8.5 cfs through the swirl concentrator. The diversion structure bypasses excess flow through a 30-inch diameter high flow bypass pipe to a downstream manhole. The manufacturer of the swirl concentrator (AquaShield) was contacted to solicit input on the option of routing pressure flow through the swirl concentrator. The manufacturer's engineers had no concern about routing pumped flows through the system and considered it better than discharging downstream of the treatment facility in order to increase the amount of stormwater receiving water quality treatment (Andy Gersen, personal communication. 2/23/15). Use of the existing gravity concrete pipe system as an occasional pressure flow conduit is not of concern. Typically, concrete pipe is pressure tested during its initial installation to pressures more than that anticipated for the low head pumping from this project. DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Louis Berger Packet Page 342 of 456 Section 3 Two possible pump station locations were identified with the consulting team and City staff. These are shown on Figure 3-1. The first location (Option 1) is Beach Place parking lot, which is jointly owned by the City of Edmonds and the Port of Edmonds. The other location (Option 2) is in a gravel parking lot to the south of Dayton Street, which is a Port of Edmonds property. To use either site, approvals from the Port of Edmonds would be required. Both sites would be easily accessible by City maintenance personnel. One disadvantage of the potential site south of Dayton Street is the number of other utilities within Dayton Street that a new gravity storm drain would need to cross (between the existing 24-inch storm drain system in Dayton Street and the proposed pump station). This includes the 36-inch wastewater force main from the City wastewater treatment plant and an 8-inch diameter gravity sewer. Based on potential vertical conflicts with these systems, it was concluded that the site to the south of Dayton Street (Option 2) is not preferred so it was eliminated from further consideration. Figure 3-2 presents the proposed location of the pump station and force main on the new surveyed base map (by DHA associates, a subconsultant to Louis Berger). This figure shows an alignment for the force main between the pump station and the existing system as well as additional storm drain improvements that would be required. The figure also shows the pump station as a duplex centrifugal pump station configuration option, discussed later in this section. One of the improvements is the installation of a new backflow prevention device upstream of the new force main connection. The preliminary concept of the backflow prevention device is a "Checkmate" valve, which can be inserted directly to the existing 24-inch pipe. The backflow prevention device is needed in order to prevent recirculation of pump station flows back up into the Dayton Street system. 3-2 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Packet Page 343 of 456 VkI -Iww� 5 o� 1, .i '•� i Location Option 2 Parking Area in Port of Edmonds Parking Lot N 1 inch = 40 feet Feet 0 20 40 80 ww�� '.d - i !v . Location Option 1 Planter in Port of Edmonds Parking Lot J• Legend • Existing Stormwater Catch Basins and Manholes Existing Stormwater Pipe Location Options T 1 J01 n M I Figure 3-1 Pump Station Location Options toLouis Berger 4'METAL r 1 IE N 5.9ASPHALT / \E S 5.89 F F ANNELED BOTTOM EXISTING WATER CONC. AD® STFAs RM #34 /� �� N Q QUALITY TREATMENT FACILITY ap. ry BENCH & TABLE v° P \ '` D #4 ❑ KEYSTONE UCr /' \ \ E8" T /£ -1.55 REPLACE EXISTING UNAULT G� vF W 3-STORY CONDO WALL / 1 � aQ' nv �- MONDS BAY BLDG. CESS LIDED CB II(60 DIA) TIDE FLEX VALVE g NEW TYPE 1 CBGRASS CO 51 W.DAYTON RIM 13.21 Q V / 1E NW 1.21IE SE 3.41 �. WITH NEW TIDE GATE 6 ��o °per® TAX N0. 27032300401300 \ / BOT -1.89 Q �� % RESIROO9 PLANT / w C9 DHA 101 �l PLANTER 299433 905 E=13 39 n 8" M 1258481. '81 cpi P• BORDOF,DR �o 3 INSTALL 8 S D MAILBOXES / CB# EL 13.27 14 P HOSE BIB 3-SCVs e� TO DRAIN TO MH5149 �� / 6 o" P c°N�p9 R �2 AX NO. 27032300415300 `� TAX N 2703230 415 00 / Q P' CONC PAVERS \` r _ TJB CON ETE G%�A FDC CB 11(24 DIA) '\ q. VAULT c CONCRETE 0 6' M Q RIM 12.96 \ MH a 45 HORIZONTAL BEND 4 / V� 1E E 11.22 SO B QP� 51�4 STPSU 1E S 10.94 RCP N M I C8515 O GRASS' 13 / BOT 9.06 0_ A 515 1`3 30"RCP �'� 5153 \\ PLANTE /� O ASPHALT 6 M / p _ �- _ a 0"RCP \ �BCONC WALL W l56 - CB51.5 205 LF 18" STORM FORCE MAIN � ^2ND STORY 14 Ca \ / \ \ / � M / \ C 14 (�� \ \ / NEW 54" DIA MANHOLE .. � \ � A // ELECTRICAL CONTROL PANEL / 8" M FFE=14.63 GRA` BUILDING 2ND STORY s 6 X6 PAD FOR / / H5149 ASPHALT BUILDING FFE=14.64 DHA 100 / \�\9� .ELECTRICAL 6 M CB II(60 DIA) PK NAIL P ANDI G" / \ 4O RIM 12.87 N 299421.925 0 ?��\0 8" TRANSFORMER °� POSSIBLE LOCATION 1E E 3.72 E 1258592.332 j p \ R 1E W 3.62 EL 12.80 BOT 3.32 CB 11( �D2.72 FD HS74 O\ \ li �� OF PERMANENT GENERATORRIA4 / I BW 1172 PIV �, 1 \ / � Q OJ IGN � 'IVp R / 11 N514� "N OGS C 8" M / M �2 INSTALL CHECK VALVE 4" C i a, \ALL WED" gC / 8" M 1 TAX N 7032300415800 6"WOOD �O \ "3H RKG." y- CB / TO PREVENT BACKFLOW BARRIO', DEC ti �\ PAVER JB PLANT D » C- � ,VALVE VAULT � DO CBMH #4 NOTES: 4 '/ 3 T 6 / 10' DIA WETWELL / y H5A4 \/�Si ASPH � c 3-HOUR Q �c.� B \ \ '"�c'YF�`% A -_ ` 91 PARKING ❑1 TEMPORARY REMOVAL AND REINSTALLATION OF PARKING LOT QP Q8 i �� \ \ \ \ \ ` "3HR PLANTER REBAR/C POWER AND STREET LIGHT LIKELY REQUIRED TO CONSTRUCT B5 a°�� MH5145 \ sp c\ \ R E 299286.530 99884 216 �� , 11. PUMP STATION. ASPHALT \ �0 / ° Q pWS\ � \\ \ JO "NOLPARKING" DHA 10J 4 22.5 HORIZONTAL BEND\S "FISHING PIER SIGNS' e► �2 VALVE TO BE INSTALLED "IN -LINE" (E.G., CHECKMATE TYPE E 1258 40:549 13 3 �116- PARKING" / �33 LF NEW 24 DIA , SD VALVE EL 13.43 1p. PHALT °M. \ \\ \ PLA ER 3 CONNECT TO EXISTING CB. PLUG OUTLET TO WATER (QUALITY H � \\ \ri/ /�� 4117 � 5243 p� A \ �\ RIM 11.55 FACILITY. REMOVE AND REPLACE APPROXIMATELY 30 LF �°�'P ��P rgF,a\� ° \\ \ q o #TJB STOP" o, E SW 2.15 .p J� IE NE 2.25 8-INCH AND CONSTRUCT 40 LF NEW 8-INCH SD TO 4 45°_ HORIZONTAL BENDS_ �� \ �o H574 0 / aG GJ`� CHANNELED B RE-ROUTE FLOWS UPSTREAM OF NEW BACKFLOW PREVENTOR. ppaGv PLANTER cS\ \ S� S15T ?R« c�O�cG° �Q�� / O ® HORIZONTAL BENDS ARE SHOWN. ADDITIONAL VERTICAL CONC 18 BENDS MAY BE NEEDED TO AVOID VERTICAL CONFLICTS AT"C „ i apr�P OTHER UTILITY CROSSINGS. P`� °aP`J Rio 16" BENCH D \ \ CB5079// %\ MH5137' NEW 48 DIA MANHOLE�5 �5 EQUIP OUTLET TO PUMP STATION WITH DOWN -TURN ELBOW. ° 0 G P o �p \ R A±BS, /:IE O.0± (CH) EX 24" R 18" C GRAVEL HB "C � L H S ASPHALT Ra IE OUT 2.5 NEW 24" © THE EXISTING TIDE GATE IS NOT FUNCTIONING PROPERLY. �°. �s6" Z BIK ROU " 07 OP/IFS N M 136 / \ �C�S0�9 �PHALT \ 18" �qY tL V paG \ R9 �l T 0 J O S• PLANTER 30 15 0 30 60 Existing SD Features Figure 3-2 1 "-30' Scale Feet New SD Features Preliminary Site Plan �: Louis Berger Packet Page 345 of 456 PUMP STATION ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION The other storm drain improvements includes the "re-routing" of some of the local catch basins immediately near the stormwater quality treatment facility. Approximately four small catch basins, each having rim elevations of about 12 currently drain directly to the stormwater quality treatment facility. If these catch basins were not re-routed to drain to a location upstream of the backflow prevention device, there would be some risk that during extreme tides, stormwater could exit out of the catch basin grates when the pump station is operating. Note that the stormwater quality treatment facility manholes and the manholes downstream of the facility are equipped with solid locking lids, so flows exiting these manholes are less of a concern. The force main alignment is preliminary. Horizontal bends are shown, but it is noted that additional vertical bends may be required. Future design work should include potholing at potential vertical conflicts. A new manhole would be constructed along the existing 24-inch system to connect a new gravity storm drain to the new pump station. The entrance of the 24-inch pipe at the manhole should include a "down - turned" elbow to minimize floatables from entering the pump station. At one point during this study, it was assumed that the preferred location of the pump station would be within the planter at the center of the beach place parking lot. However, City staff indicated it would be undesirable to lose the limited amount of landscaping that exists in this parking lot. As such, the proposed location of the pump station and valve vault were moved into the paved travel way southwest of the planter as shown on Figure 3-2. Figure 3-2 also calls for replacing the existing tide flex valve at the outfall of the existing drainage system because the existing valve is not functioning properly. One optional location and configuration that was also considered but then eliminated from further consideration was a full removal and replacement of the stormwater quality treatment facility. That is, full replacement was considered such that the treatment facility would be set deep and prior to the new pump station so as to keep the existing 24-inch storm drain in Dayton Street drained during non -flow periods. As noted previously, the existing 24-inch storm drain is constantly full of water because of the higher control at the downstream water quality facility. Ideally, this system would drain freely during non -flow periods which would be better for the long-term pipe condition. A high level evaluation was undertaken to assess the feasibility of this option, however, due to the anticipated high costs, the required depths of excavation (on the order of 25 feet) and concern about controlling groundwater to this depth, and the need for a much larger wetwell (because of not using the storage in the existing 24-inch pipe system), this option was not considered feasible and eliminated from further consideration. DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 3-5 Packet Page 346 of 456 Section 3 Hydrology and Hydraulics The XPSWMM model developed as part of the Dayton Street and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Studywas modified and used to analyze pump station capacity and operation. The XPSWMM model is an unsteady state model that accounts for tidal conditions and can also simulate pump system operations. While more detailed information about the model can be found in the Dayton Street and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Study, the following paragraphs summarize some of the important aspects of applying the model to this pump station predesign project. ■ The tributary area to the Dayton Street system includes basin adjustments recommended in the Dayton Street and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Study, which proposed re-routing some flow to the Dayton Street system away from the Edmonds Marsh to take advantage of the pump station capacity. These adjustments are described below; o Re-routing the portion of the Salish Crossing property that currently drains south to the Edmonds Marsh so that it drains to the Dayton Street system. (Subbasin 420 on Figure 2-2). o Installing an overflow drainage connection from Harbor Square (Subbasin 410 on Figure 2-2) to the Dayton Street system in the future so that its drainage system can "overflow" into the Dayton Street system when stormwater is incapable of flowing by gravity during very high water levels in the Edmonds Marsh. The model includes an overflow connection from the Harbor Square system to the Dayton Street system set at elevation 9 (NAVD 88). ■ All overflows from high water levels in the Edmonds Marsh to the Dayton Street drainage system are assumed to be cut off by berming along the south side of Harbor Square and along SR104 as well as plugging the existing 24-inch pipe along the east side of SR 104. ■ With the assumption that the 24-inch pipe along the east side of SR 104 is plugged, the WSDOT ferry queuing area drainage system connection to the Dayton Street system is limited to an 8-inch pipe. This is assumed to be corrected in the future by connecting the ferry queuing drainage system directly to the Dayton Street system. ■ The hydrologic analysis is based upon existing land use. ■ Pump station operation was checked using two significant flood events that were defined in the prior study. These include the 25-yr event and 100-year event which were defined as follows: 3-6 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Packet Page 347 of 456 PUMP STATION ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION 0 25- year: Date: 1-1-1997 (no hydrologic adjustment factor) 0 100-year: Date: 12-3-2007 (+1.05 hydrologic adjustment factor) In addition, a full year of simulation was run to test pump operation on smaller scale storm events. The selected year was hydrologic year 1997 (10/1/1996 — 9/30/1997). The precipitation during this year was 53.13 inches which was above the average precipitation in Edmonds in the last 20 years (40.6 inches) using the Alderwood rain gage data. New data was added to the model for specific evaluation of pump station options. Preliminary pump curves were selected from available submersible pumps as test cases to determine the appropriate capacity needed to prevent flooding for the 100-year storm. The following paragraphs describe how the pumps were configured in the model: ■ The pump station discharge force main was sized to have velocities of 2 fps to 8 fps over the full operational range of pumping and the associated pipe friction is accounted for in the dynamic head on the pumps. The force main size was selected as 18-inch diameter. ■ It was assumed the pump station would include two pumps that would alternate from one pump to the other. Having two pumps increases reliability should one pump fail. It also provides a smaller capacity (by one-half) that can operate during lower flow conditions. ■ Preliminary pump on and off elevations were identified with consideration of solving flooding and maintaining non -pumped gravity flow when possible. The control elevations were set as follows: o When the first pump engages: Pump on at 8.0, Pump off at 4.6 (invert elevation to the gravity system) o If the second pump engages (during major events): Pump on at 8.5, Pump off at 1.5 (in order to evacuate the whole system and create sufficient storage capacity). ■ Wetwell sizing needs to consider minimum cycle times. A standard minimum cycle time for pumps of the anticipated size is 10 minutes. For the Dayton Street system, the City can take advantage of the current volume of the 24-inch pipe system that is always inundated. Another advantage of this "dead storage" is that sediments will tend to drop within the pipe (as opposed to being conveyed to the proposed pump station). The elevation of the 24-inch pipe system ranges from about elevation 0.0 near Admiral Way to about 2.6 near Dayton Street. DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 3-7 Packet Page 348 of 456 Section 3 Using the available storage in the pipe system enables the use of a wetwell consisting of a 10- ft diameter manhole. ■ During initial simulations, it became clear that the previously identified 13 cfs capacity, while solving flooding, provided excess capacity such that only one of the pumps would turn on (and the minimum cycle time was below 10 minutes). A trial and error process, using gradually smaller pump curves that met the head requirements was conducted. This resulted in determining that two 4.5 cfs pumps were needed. For the model results summarized below, Xylem Flygt Pump NP 3153 was used for a pump curve, which yielded a pump capacity of 4.5 cfs at 11.5 ft TDH (See Appendix C for pump curves). The following table provides the results of the modeling simulations. This results in the elimination of the flooding during the simulated storms. Table 3-1 Model Summary Results Maximum WSE at Pump Station 8.0 8.5 Maximum WSE at Dayton St. 9.52 9.55 Peak Flow into the Pump Station 7.37 9.5 cfs Maximum Flow in the Force Main 6.42 9.31 cfs Two Pumps Engage Simultaneously? No Yes Simulation Two Pumps Engage Simultaneously ? Hydrologic ••, No No. of Pump Starts 114 Pump Run Time 45 hours Pump Station Type and Configuration The pump station was initially presumed to be configured as a duplex submersible sewage -style station, since the City is familiar with such stations and their associated solids handling centrifugal sewage pumps. Because of the station's high flow rate (initially estimated at 13 cfs as described above), vertical turbine solids handling (VTSH) pumps were also initially considered but rejected early for being cost -prohibitive, at three to five times the cost of comparable capacity centrifugal sewage pumps. In addition, they would require a substantial above -grade housing structure. 3-8 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Packet Page 349 of 456 PUMP STATION ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION Although the station's final required capacity (9 cfs) is still quite large for a typical circular wetwell, the substantial storage available in the upstream stormwater conveyance system can be considered in order to reduce wetwell volume and as a result, the primary factor influencing wetwell sizing is the physical size of the pumps themselves. With each pump required to convey 4.5 cfs, the minimum available pump size is a 12-inch (suction size) pump, resulting in a relatively large wetwell nevertheless. Figure 3-3 shows this configuration, including a 10-foot (inside) diameter circular wetwell. This would be a precast manhole configuration. This configuration also typically includes a separate valve vault to house check valves and pump isolation valves, all of which must be at least 12-inch diameter in order to maintain reasonable (<8.5 fps) velocities at peak flows. Pump availability for the anticipated head conditions is very limited. Static head could vary from a high of over 10 feet (at a historical tide of 11.67, versus a pump station low water level of 1.50) to a low of negative 0.5 foot (assuming a connection upstream of the water quality facility a invert of 8.00, versus a pump station high water level of 8.5), and there will be very little friction loss in the short force main to mitigate this wide variability. Therefore, Louis Berger sought other pump style options and determined that a submersible axial flow pump may also be a suitable alternative. This style of pump has no directly connected piping but rather sits in a column, drawing the pumped fluid through the open bottom of and into the column, past the pump and motor to the top of the column where it is discharged. Because of the pumps' vertical orientation and resulting small footprint, the station's at -grade or above -ground components are minimized, and the wetwell may be able to be somewhat smaller. Figure 3-4 shows this configuration in a rectangular wetwell. Although the pumps' footprint is significantly smaller than that of the centrifugal sewage pumps, an oversized wetwell is shown to improve pump inlet hydraulic conditions. Alternate methods of straightening flow into the axial flow pumps' inlets may be able to further reduce the wetwell size. The wetwell structure would likely be constructed using a combination of precast vault base with cast in place features such as the interior wall. Head conditions complicate either pump selection, particularly on the low -head end of the system operating range. Most pump manufacturers investigated could not provide a pump selection that would reliably operate with very low total dynamic heads of 3 to 4 feet. One centrifugal sewage pump manufacturer (Flygt) was able to provide a pump selection operable within the full anticipated system range. One axial flow manufacturer was able to provide a suitable pump option (Grundfos); however, they recommended limiting the operating range of 5 to 13 feet. The operating limits of the axial flow pump necessitates that the pump always pump against a minimum head of 5 feet. Figure 3-4 shows a pump station configuration of how this can be accomplished (pumping from 9 to 14). In terms of a site plan arrangement, it would be similar to that shown on Figure 3-2 which shows the duplex centrifugal arrangement, except that the location would have to be shifted north so that the portion of the pump station above grade would be in the landscape planter. An advantage DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 3-9 Packet Page 350 of 456 Section 3 of this is that it eliminates the need for check valves and pump isolation valves. The disadvantage is that the structure must extend above grade by approximately 3-4-feet. It is noted that the centrifugal pump could be configured is a similar way (without the valve vault), but it was assumed that the City would prefer traditional configuration (without being above grade). With either pump station configuration, access hatches should be provided and adequately sized for removal of pumps, valves and other equipment. Access hatches should be constructed of aluminum or noncorrosive alloys. Manhole frame and covers or access hatches should also be provided over the wet well area to facilitate access. 3-10 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Packet Page 351 of 456 4 n" ICnl ATInKi 9'X8' VALVE VAULT Figure 3-3 Pump Station Configuration 1: Duplex Centrifugal (Submersible) - Plan & Section Dayton St Stormwater Pump Station Presdesign Study City of Edmonds 22'-4" nn"A ►ii i Louis Berger 4 2 0 4 8 1 /4"=1 ' —0" Scale Feet Packet Page 352 of 456 Section 3 This page left intentionally blank. 3-12 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Packet Page 353 of 456 HATCH, TYP SECTION Figure 3-4 Pump Station Configuration 2: Coaxial Flow Pump - Plan & Section Dayton St Stormwater Pump Station Presdesign Study City of Edmonds ,Louis Berger R ACCESS LIDS 4'_2» 18" SD OUTLET 2„ tit � I N\ --� J � 1 OPEN GRATE PLAN AT ELEV. 15.50 FIF I �I � JJJJJJJ JJJJJJJ �I I JJJJJJJ I� PLAN AT ELEV. 14.00 PLAN AT ELEV. 2.00 1 4 2 0 4 8 Scale Feet Packet Page 354 of 456 Section 3 Power Availability and Electrical Design Requirements Louis Berger contacted the Snohomish County Public Utilities District (SNOPUD) on March 11, 2015 to ascertain the availability of electrical service at the proposed site. Based on discussion with Mary McAllister, both 208/120-Volt 3-Phase and 277/480-Volt 3-Phase power are available in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of Railroad Avenue and Dayton Street. An existing SNOPUD electrical junction box exists approximately 160 feet from the parking lot island which is the recommended pump station location. To service the pump station, the project design would need to include a 4-inch conduit from thejunction box to a vault adjacent to the station, the vault itself, and SNOPUD-approved clearances around the vault. If the conduit is to be installed using trenchless technology, SNOPUD requires that the installation be performed by their contractors, the cost of which is added to the power service connection fee. After these items have been installed and when the pump station is ready for electrical service, SNOPUD runs the cable, places the necessary transformer and meter, and makes final connections. The station would require a 200-amp 277/480-Volt 3-Phase service, and at a minimum would also include a manual transfer switch so that a portable emergency generator (sized for at least 50 kW) could be connected. This electrical equipment, as well as a meter, main disconnect, 480/120-Volt transformer, motor control center, control panel, and 480-Volt and 120-Volt panelboards would all be mounted in a cabinet enclosure approximately 4-feet by 3 feet, and 3 feet high. The City could also opt for a permanently -mounted generator, which would likely require a residential - grade acoustic enclosure given the prominent and public location proposed. A 12- to 24-hour fuel supply would be stored in a fuel tank on which the generator would be mounted. Overall size of this unit would be approximately 8 feet by 3 feet, and 6-7 feet high, depending on fuel tank size. A preliminary cost estimate for a 50KW 208/120 volt, 3-phase generator with a 60 Hz Sound Attenuated enclosure is $50,000 (personal communication, Ray Bishop Generac Energy Systems). Controls The following paragraphs provide description of a preliminary pump station control approach. This would be further refined as the design progresses working closely with the City: ■ A submersible level transducer in the pump station wetwell/vault is proposed as the primary level sensing mechanism. This will send analog signals to the controls system, providing easily variable setpoints for station operation. In addition, backup floats would be provided for High and Low alarm conditions. ■ Normal pump operation will be according to a lead -lag scheme, with the lead pump coming on at a wetwell elevation of 8.0, and the lag pump starting at an elevation of 8.5. To prevent routine complete drawdown of the stored stormwater volume (which would 3-14 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Packet Page 355 of 456 PUMP STATION ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION allow the system to reset to gravity flow when possible through the water quality facility), the lead pump will stop at an elevation of 4.50. The lag pump will stop at a wetwell elevation of 1.50, and pumpdown to this level will only occur during extreme stormwater events. High wetwell levels above 9.0 will trigger a High Water Alarm, and low wetwell levels below 1.0 will trigger a Low Water Alarm if a pump is also continuing to operate. ■ Motor starters would be configured with H-O-A switches. In the "A" (Auto) position, the pumps will operate according to the Normal Operation described above. If a pump is in the "O" position, it will be removed from the Normal Operation logic. ■ Alarms will be enunciated locally via audio-visual indication at the station incorporating a red light and an alarm horn. Each alarm will require manual acknowledgement to resume operation of stopped equipment. Visual indication will remain until the condition is cleared. Alarms should also trigger an autodialer to a City designated telephone number, unless a more sophisticated telemetry system is utilized. ■ The City owns, operates and manages a Supervisory Controls and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system to control their wastewater system with the main operation center at the wastewater treatment plant. An additional option for controls would be to include SCADA improvements in order to monitor pump operation (on / off), wetwell level, and trouble/alarm conditions from the treatment plant. Cost for implementing the SCADA system controls would likely be on the order of $10,000 to $15,000. • All equipment will be mounted inside a NEMA rated enclosure suitable for the environment in which it is installed. • Pedestal -mounted enclosures will be 72 inches tall by 24 inches wide by 24 inches deep, minimum. • Wiring methods and materials for all panels will be in accordance with the NEC requirements. • Consideration should be given to use of explosion proof electrical systems in the pump station during design. Although flammable gases are typically unlikely in storm drain system, the Dayton Street system has been observed to occasionally contain high degree of petroleum/oils. DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 3-15 Packet Page 356 of 456 Section 3 Preliminary Permit Assessment The scope of work included a preliminary permit assessment in order to identify project permits for implementation. This work was completed by Shannon & Wilson, Inc., a subconsultant to Louis Berger. The site of the proposed pump station is within the Beach Place parking lot owned jointly by the City of Edmonds and the Port of Edmonds, approximately 200 feet from the Puget Sound shoreline. For the permit assessment, the following project elements were assumed to be included in the project. ■ Construction of a new pump station to reduce the flood hazard at the intersection of State Route 104 and Dayton Street, which is located approximately 700 feet to the east. This intersection is subject to periodic flooding due to the restriction of outflows during high tides. The new pump station is anticipated to alleviate flooding by assisting outflow during combined high tides and local precipitation events. ■ The pump station will be constructed in an existing parking lot. A new storm drain force main pipe will also be constructed to convey water from the pump station to an existing storm drain that discharges to the Puget Sound approximately 250 feet west of the proposed pump station location. Thus, no new outfall is included in the project, which would significantly increase permit requirements. Also, all construction will occur in developed areas and no wetlands or other critical areas will be impacted by this project. Based on a review of the Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA's) current Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) and FEMA's proposed draft FIRM, it appears that the project is located outside of mapped flood areas. It is also understood that the project does not include a federal nexus (federal funding, federal land use, and/or federal permits). Based on this information, the table below summarizes the likely permits that will be required for this project. Table 3-2 Preliminary Project Permit Requirements Shoreline Substantial Land Use Application Form, Adjacent City of Edmonds Development Permit Property Owner List, SEPA Checklist State Environmental Policy Act SEPA Checklist, Critical Areas Checklist City of Edmonds (SEPA) Review Building Permit, Grading Permit Development Permit Application, Plan Set City of Edmonds 3-16 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Packet Page 357 of 456 PUMP STATION ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION Shannon & Wilson, Inc. contacted the City of Edmonds (City) Development Services Department on January 12 and 13, 2015 to verify the above summary of permits likely to be required for the project. Based on discussions with Linda Thornquist in the Building Department and Jen Machuga in the Planning Department, no other local permits are likely required. Ms. Machuga indicated that if the pump station reduces the amount of parking stalls, the City would need to verify that the site would still contain adequate parking in accordance with the City's Municipal Code prior to approving the project. In addition to the project -specific permits above, the City's current Clean Water Act Section 402 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit may need to be modified to include discharging this additional stormwater through the City's existing outfall to the Puget Sound. The need for any permit modifications will be assessed during final design. Geotechnical Considerations The scope of work included a preliminary geotechnical review to evaluate existing subsurface data and provide preliminary design information for the construction of the pump station. The review also considered geotechnical issues that warrant further study during the design phase. This work was completed by Shannon & Wilson (S&W), Inc., a subcontractor to Louis Berger, and is summarized in the following paragraphs. A full copy of the report is included in Appendix A. Eleven soil borings had been completed in the vicinity as a part of other projects. These ranged from a distance of 100 to 500 feet from the proposed pump station location. These borings were reviewed to determine likely existing subsurface information at the proposed station location. Locations and description of the borings can be found in Appendix A. In general most borings encountered loose to dense, poorly graded, fine to coarse sand from just below ground surface (bgs) to a depth of 20 to 30 feet bgs. The density of these soils was found to increase significantly at 15 to 25 feet bgs. In some borings, silt, silty sand, silty sand with gravel, or sand with silt was encountered in discrete layers. Gravel and organic material and asphalt, was also found in some borings. Typically, groundwater was encountered at depths of 5 to 10 feet bgs. Based on this review, the soil profile at the proposed pump station location most likely consists of 5 to 6 feet of medium dense fill material overlying soft wetland and marsh deposits (silt and peat) to a depth of about 10 feet. This is likely further underlain by dense glacial outwash sandy gravel and silty sand belonging to the Whidbey Formation. The elevations at the proposed pump station site are approximately 12-13. The bottom of the proposed wetwell/vault is anticipated to be between elevation -3 and -4. DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 3-17 Packet Page 358 of 456 Section 3 Based on a review of the data and proposed improvements, the soils present at the proposed base of the wetwell/vault appear to be competent for bearing. Certain geotechnical issues however, will require further analysis during the design phase of the pump station, including: ■ Foundation Design. Design of a suitable foundation for the pump station will depend upon the load that the structure will exert on underlying soil and the soil reaction. Included in a foundation design analysis will be recommendations for bearing capacity, estimated settlements, buoyancy resistance, and lateral earth pressures. ■ Seismically Induced Geologic Hazard Analysis (i.e., ground rupture, liquefaction, and increased lateral earth pressures). ■ Earthwork. Construction —specific recommendations such as methods and requirements for excavation and shoring, foundation preparation, and backfill and compaction. S&W recommends further exploration, such as a soil boring(s) specifically at the location of the pump station in order to provide a better understanding of the subsurface conditions. S&W also noted the potential for soils contamination during excavation. Although none of the eleven borings indicated the presence of contaminated soils, both the Washington State Department of Ecology and a recent report by Landau Associates in 2012, for the Beach Place Sanitary Sewer Replacement project, indicate contaminates, including petroleum hydrocarbons and/or metals may be present in the soils within the vicinity of the project. The construction documents should include provisions should contaminants be found during project work. In addition, because space may be limited during construction without space for temporary stockpiling, the plans should allow for transporting materials directly to a permitted landfill. One such facility is Republic Services Landfill (3rd and Lander) in Seattle. With regard to groundwater and dewatering, hydraulic conductivity analysis in the vicinity was conducted under a previous study. S&W reviewed the data and estimated that water may seep into the wet well excavation at a rate of 15 to 20 gallons per minute. Based on this information, S&W recommends a system of well points before and during excavation to lower the groundwater table. Well points are typically installed around or near the perimeter of an excavation and control seepage rates until the structure is installed and backfilled. Design of the dewater system should be performed by a hydrogeologist licensed in the State of Washington. 3-18 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Packet Page 359 of 456 PUMP STATION ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION Operation and Maintenance The two pump configuration options are substantially similar with respect to operation and maintenance concerns. Both are submersible pumps and by their nature are not designed to require significant maintenance. To maintain factory warranties against water intrusion into the submersible motor, electrical components are intended to be serviced only by the manufacturer, if needed. Wet end components including the impeller and mechanical seal can be serviced or replaced by City maintenance personnel in the field, and the seals are expected to need replacement at five- to ten-year intervals, depending on severity of operating conditions. Each pump option is expected to have a service life of up to twenty years, when operated and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's recommendations. Operating efficiency and therefore power use is slightly better with the axial flow pumps, but energy consumption is not expected to be a significant factor since the pumps are expected to operate less than 50 hours per year. The use of a weir discharge box (necessary for the axial flow pumps, but also possible with the submersible pumps) eliminates the need for check valves and pump isolation valves, which also periodically require maintenance. Some debris accumulation could also require periodic maintenance of the wetwell, although it is not anticipated to be much because most sediment would accumulate in the existing 24-inch pipe system in Dayton Street. Costs Estimates Cost estimates were developed for the two main alternative pump station configurations. The cost estimates are provided in Table 3-3 and 3-4. Costs include a 30 percent construction contingency, and a 35 percent allowance for soft costs including design, permitting, and construction administration. The cost estimates do include cost for SCADA, assuming the City would prefer to have it integrated into the control system. The cost estimates include a permanent emergency generator (as requested by the City), which is estimated at $50,000. Based on the amount of pump run time per year and the relative similar performance in pump operation, the difference in energy costs between the two pump configuration options is negligible (probably no more than $5/year difference in energy consumption). Therefore, a lifecycle cost analysis was not performed. DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 3-19 Packet Page 360 of 456 Section 3 Table 3-3 Cost Estimate - Duplex Centrifugal Submersible Pump 1 Traffic Control 1 LS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 2 Pump Station and Valve Vault Excavation 280 CY $ 40 $ 11,200 3 Removal of Obstructions 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 4 Shoring for Wetwell 1000 SF $ 28 $ 28,000 5 Shoring for Valve Vault 250 SF $ 28 $ 7,000 6 Dewatering 1 LS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 7 Pump Vault Hatches 2 EA $ 2,500 $ 5,000 8 Foundation Preparation 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 9 4.5 cfs submersible pumps 2 EA $ 25,000 $ 50,000 10 120" Dia Catch Basin Type 2 Wetwell 1 EA $ 26,000 $ 26,000 11 Wetwell & Valve Vault Pipe & Fittings 1 LS $ 12,000 $ 12,000 12 Pump Controls & MCC 1 LS $ 40,000 $ 40,000 13 SCADA 1 LS $ 15,000 $ 15,000 14 Electrical Cabinet and Starters 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 15 Manual Transfer Switch 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 16 Dry Transformer 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 17 Site Electrical 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 18 Electrical Controls 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 19 Miscellaneous Electrical Site Labor 1 LS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 20 On -site Back-up Generator 1 LS $ 50,000 $ 50,000 21 Electrical Service Fee 1 LS $ 25,000 $ 25,000 22 Swing Check Valve -12" 2 EA $ 14,000 $ 28,000 23 Eccentric Plug Valve -12" 2 EA $ 6,000 $ 12,000 24 Check Valve - 30" (Checkmate Type) 2 EA $ 17,500 $ 35,000 25 Storm Drain - 24" 48 LF $ 200 $ 9,600 26 Storm Drain - 8" 70 LF $ 90 $ 6,300 27 48" Dia Type 3 Saddle Type Manhole 1 EA $ 10,000 $ 10,000 28 54" Dia Type 3 Saddle Type Manhole 1 EA $ 6,000 $ 6,000 29 Catch Basin Type 1 1 EA $ 1,500 $ 1,500 30 Ductile Iron Force Main -18" 205 LF $ 250 $ 51,250 31 Connect to Existing Drainage structure 5 EA $ 1,000 $ 5,000 32 Plug Existing Pipe 1 EA $ 1,000 $ 1,000 33 Pavement Removal 250 SY $ 15 $ 3,750 34 Pavement Restoration 250 SY $ 35 $ 8,750 35 New concrete curb and gutter 40 LF $ 40 $ 1,600 36 Utility Relocations 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 37 Planter Restoration 1 LS $ 2,000 $ 2,000 38 Relocation of Parking Lot Street Light 1 LS $ 4,000 $ 4,000 39 Remove and Reinstall Parking Sign 1 LS $ 500 $ 500 Subtotal $ 575,450 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 57,545 Temporary Erosion & Sediment Control 5% $ 28,773 Subtotal $ 661,768 Mobilization 10% $ 66,177 Subtotal $ 727,944 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 69,155 Subtotal $ 797,000 CONTINGENCIES Multi -Year Inflation 3% (2 Years) $ 47,820 Design Contingency 30% $ 239,100 Management Reserve 10% $ 79,700 Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 1,163,620 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 12% $ 139,634 Permitting 5% $ 58,181 City Project Management / Administration 3% $ 34,909 Construction Management 15% $ 174,543 i Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 1,571,000 3-20 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Packet Page 361 of 456 PUMP STATION ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION Table 3-4 Cost Estimate - Axial Flow Pump r w . . 1 Traffic Control 1 LS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 2 Pump Station and Valve Vault Excavation 125 CY $ 40 $ 5,000 3 Removal of Obstructions 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 4 Shoring 950 SF $ 28 $ 26,600 5 Dewatering 1 LS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 6 Pump Vault Hatches 1 EA $ 2,000 $ 2,000 7 Foundation Preparation 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 8 4.5 cfs Axial Flow pumps 2 EA $ 40,000 $ 80,000 9 8'-0" X 9'-0" X 12'-4" Pump Vault 1 LS $ 50,000 $ 50,000 10 Pump Controls & MCC 1 LS $ 40,000 $ 40,000 11 SCADA 1 LS $ 15,000 $ 15,000 12 Electrical Cabinet and Starters 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 13 Manual Transfer Switch 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 14 Dry Transformer 1 LS $ 5,000 $ 5,000 15 Site Electrical 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 16 Electrical Controls 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 17 Miscellaneous Electrical Site Labor 1 LS $ 20,000 $ 20,000 18 Electrical Service Fee 1 LS $ 25,000 $ 25,000 19 On -site Back-up Generator 1 LS $ 50,000 $ 50,000 20 Check Valve - 30" (Checkmate Type) 2 EA $ 17,500 $ 35,000 21 Storm Drain - 24" 48 LF $ 200 $ 9,600 22 Storm Drain - 8" 70 LF $ 90 $ 6,300 23 48" Dia Type 3 Saddle Type Manhole 1 EA $ 10,000 $ 10,000 24 54" Dia Type 3 Saddle Type Manhole 1 EA $ 6,000 $ 6,000 25 Catch Basin Type 1 1 EA $ 1,500 $ 1,500 26 Ductile Iron Force Main -18" 205 LF $ 250 $ 51,250 27 Connect to Existing Drainage structure 5 EA $ 1,000 $ 5,000 28 Plug Existing Pipe 1 EA $ 1,000 $ 1,000 29 Pavement Removal 250 SY $ 15 $ 3,750 30 Pavement Restoration 250 SY $ 35 $ 8,750 31 New concrete curb and gutter 40 LF $ 40 $ 1,600 32 Utility Relocations 1 LS $ 10,000 $ 10,000 33 Planter Restoration 1 LS $ 2,000 $ 2,000 34 Relocation of Parking Lot Street Light 1 LS $ 4,000 $ 4,000 35 Remove and Reinstall Parkinq Siqn 1 LS $ 500 $ 500 Subtotal $ 559,850 Miscellaneous Construction Items (small incidentals) 10% $ 55,985 Temporary Erosion & Sediment Control 5% $ 27,993 Subtotal $ 643,828 Mobilization 10% $ 64,383 Subtotal $ 708,000 State Sales Tax 9.50% $ 67,260 Subtotal $ 775,000 CONTINGENCIES Multi -Year Inflation 3% (2 Years) $ 46,500 Design Contingency 30% $ 232,500 Management Reserve 10% $ 77,500 _ Total Estimated Construction Cost (Rounded) $ 1,131,500 INDIRECT COSTS Surveying and Design 12% $ 135,780 Permitting 5% $ 56,575 City Project Management / Administration 3% $ 33,945 Construction Management 15% $ 169,725 Total Estimated Project Cost (Rounded) $ 1,528,000 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 3-21 Packet Page 362 of 456 Section 3 Alternatives Evaluation Summary and Recommendations This section includes a comparative evaluation between the two main types of pump station configurations and a recommendation. It also includes a set of recommendations for advancing the design work. A comparison between the two primary pump station configurations is presented in Table 3- 5 for a variety of design, operation, maintenance, and appearance considerations. Table 3-5 Summary Comparison of Pump Station Configuration Options Footprint (at grade area) 22' x 12' + Electrical Excavation to Max Depth 10'0 Wetwell to a depth of -3 ft NAVD88 Electrical Transformer and Panel Above -Grade area (and permanent backup generator, if included) Pump Efficiency (at anticipated 55 - 65 percent operation range) Horsepower 15 each pump RPM 1200 nominal Discharge Size 12" Valve Sizes 12" check valve & 12" isolation valve Pump Removal Jib Crane / Hoist Field Serviceability Electrical - none Wet end - impeller, seal seal leakage, Reliability Concerns power cable damage, motor water intrusion Solids Passing 3-inch Expected Maintenance seal @ 5-10 year intervals Field -Installable Spare Parts Lower seal, Impeller, wear ring Expected Pump Life -15-20 years Pump / Motor Cost $25,000 ea Project Total Cost $1,571,000 12' x 8' + Electrical 8' x 9' Vault to a depth of -2.33 NAVD88 Electrical, Discharge RiserNault to elevation of 15.5 +/- (and permanent backup generator, if included) 60-73 percent 15 each pump 1200 nominal n/a n/a Jib Crane / Hoist Electrical - none Wet end -impeller, seal seal leakage, power cable damage, motor water intrusion 1.9-inch seal @ 5-10 year intervals Lower seal, Impeller -20 years $40,000 ea $1,528,000 3-22 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Packet Page 363 of 456 PUMP STATION ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION In general, the major advantageous to the duplex centrifugal (submersible) station are: • The station would be very similar to other pump stations operated by the City and therefore maintenance procedures would be more familiar to City staff. • It would not need the above grade vault, and could be entirely located in a drive lane, so it would have less impact on existing landscaping; however the at -grade concrete structure would be larger (12' manhole and 9' x 58 valve vault). • It passes larger solids (3.0 inch versus 1.9 inch) than the duplex axial flow pumps. The major advantageous to the duplex axial flow pumps are: • Elimination of the valve vault and valves, and associated maintenance. • Smaller overall facility and at -grade footprint (although an approximate 7' x 8' structure would be above grade). • Simpler pump construction, resulting in less pump maintenance (albeit, different maintenance procedures than City maintenance staff is used to). • Overall cost is $1528,000 which is estimated to be $43,000 lower than the duplex centrifugal cost estimate. Based on this comparison, the duplex centrifugal pump (submersible) is the preferred option. Although the duplex axial pump cost estimate is slightly lower, there is probably greater benefit of having a common type pump station configuration (i.e., submersible) that City maintenance crews are very familiar with. Although probably less important, but also should be considered, are the reduced solids passing dimension and the need to have an above grade structure are also disadvantages with the duplex axial option. As mentioned previously, the duplex axial pump would take up more of the existing site landscaping, which is less desirable. In terms of advancing the implementation of the pump station, the following paragraphs describe some of the key considerations in the future design, permitting and construction: Future Desian and Permittina: • Coordinate with the Port of Edmonds for use of the Beach Place parking lot, including temporary impacts to parking lot and access, relocation of parking lot lights and landscaping. • Coordinate with City Parks Department for temporary impacts to Park access. • Pothole the potential utilities where the proposed gravity or force main lines need to cross. • Conduct additional geotechnical investigations, including boring(s) at the proposed site. • Future upstream improvements including isolating the Shellabarger Creek overflows to the Dayton Street system, and subcatchment diversions of Subbasins 410 and 420 to the Dayton Street system (See Figure 2-2). DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 3-23 Packet Page 364 of 456 Section 3 Construction Considerations: • It is likely the access driveway from Dayton Street W into the parking lot will need to be temporally closed. Access is available off of Railroad Avenue. Temporary closure of the driveway will also necessitate re -orienting the traffic flow directions within the parking area. • Because of limited space in the area, the City may also want to request to use the vacant gravel parking area on the south side of Dayton Street for staging from the Port of Edmonds. • Consideration of "saddle" type manholes over the existing 24-inch diameter pipe would allow the existing system to maintain conveyance during construction of the pump station and related pipe work and limit the need for temporary bypasses. 3-24 DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Packet Page 365 of 456 PUMP STATION ALTERNATIVE IDENTIFICATION AND EVALUATION References Louis Berger (formerly SAIC), 2013.Dayton Street and SR 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Study Personal Communication, Andy Gersen. Manufacturer's Representative, Isomedia (for AquaShield). 2/23/15. Personal Communication, Ray Bishop, Generac Energy Systems. 3/13/15. Personal Communication, Mary McAllister, Snohomish County PUD. 3/10/15. DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 3-25 Packet Page 366 of 456 Appendix A Preliminary Geotechnical Review, Shannon & Wilson, Inc. DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Louis Berger Packet Page 367 of 456 Preliminary Geotechnical Review Dayton Street Pump Station Edmonds, Washington OEDTf GHNIGAI AND ENVInp HMEHTAI CONSULTANTS Excellence, Innovation, Service, Value, Since 1954. February 20, 2015 Submitted To: Mr. Mike Giseburt, P.P. The Louis Berger Group (Domestic), Inc. 520 Pike Street, Suite 1005 Seattle, Washington 98101 By: Shannon & Wilson, Inc. 400 N 341h Street, Suite 100 Seattle, Washington 98103 21- j-22042-001 Packet Page 368 of 456 ACAI LASKAR. rI1 ON OyIpLSON, AC LGLORADOSN FLORIDA GEOTECHNIGAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL (ANTS MISSOURI OREGON '„ASHINUON February 20, 2015 Mr. Mike Giseburt, P.E. The Louis Berger Group (Domestic), Inc. 520 Pike Street, Suite 1005 Seattle, WA 98101 RE: PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL REVIEW, DAYTON STREET PUMP STATION, EDMONDS, WASHINGTON Dear Mr. Giseburt: This report represents a summary of our preliminary geotechnical review for the proposed construction of a new Pump Station in Edmonds, Washington, located as shown in the Vicinity Map, Figure 1. The purpose of this geotechnical review is to evaluate existing subsurface data and provide preliminary design information for the construction of the Pump Station. This report also discusses geotechnical issues that may warrant further study during the design phase. Shannon & Wilson, Inc. reviewed existing data to evaluate seismic site class, possible soil contamination, groundwater seepage rates, and other considerations that will affect the construction of the Pump Station as outlined in Task 1.0 — Preliminary Geotechnical Review Services, 2014. Results of the review are presented herein. BACKGROUND We understand that the Dayton Street and State Route (SR) 104 Storm Drainage Alternatives Sturdy presents the construction of a new Pump Station as an option to reduce flood hazard at the intersection of SR 104 and Dayton Street. This intersection is subject to periodic flooding due to the restriction of outflows during high tides. A new Pump Station will alleviate flooding by assisting outflow during combined high tides and local precipitation events. 400 NORTH 34TH STREET • SUITE 100 21-1-22042-OOt P.O. BOX 300303 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98103 206.632•8020 FAX 206.695-6777 T DD: 1-800.833.6388 www.shannonwilson.com Packet Page 369 of 456 SHANNON bWIL.'1)'0 1, INC. Mr. Mike Giseburt, P.E. The Louis Berger Group (Domestic), Inc. February 20, 2015 Page 2 of 7 The site of the proposed Pump Station is within the Port of Edmonds, near the intersection of Admiral Way and Dayton Street. Depending on the finalized plan, pump station construction may occur on the north or south sides of Dayton Street, as shown in the Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2. The existing ground surface at the site varies between approximate elevations 12 and 14 feet. The bottom of the proposed wet well would be at elevation -4.5 feet. REVIEW OF EXISTING SUBSURFACE DATA Several soil boring logs were reviewed for existing subsurface information (Site and Exploration Plan, Figure 2). Descriptions of the boring logs are presented in Appendix A. Boring logs were chosen based on proximity to the proposed Pump Station, and were in many cases made available through the Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Subsurface Geology Information System. The following explorations were reviewed: ■ Four borings performed by Landau Associates, Inc., and presented in a report for the design of the Dayton Street Outfall (2003). The report references boring B-1 (LB-1 in Figure 2) and older (Landau Associates, Inc.) borings BH-1, BH-2, and BH-3. Three borings performed by the Washington State Highway Commission Department of Highways. Subsurface explorations were performed for the construction of a 66- inch stone drain along SR 104 (1970). Hole 3, Hole 4, and Hole 5 were included in this report. ■ Three borings performed by Landau Associates, Inc., for the design of the Port of Edmonds Marine Support Buildings (1995). Included are borings B-1, B-2, and B-3. ■ One boring completed by Zipper 'Zeman Associates, Inc., for the Edmonds Conunuter Rail Station (2008). Included is Boring No. 4. In general, most borings encountered loose to dense, poorly graded, fine to coarse sand from just below ground surface (bgs) to a depth of 20 to 30 feet bgs. The density of these soils was found to increase significantly at 15 to 25 feet bgs. In some borings, silt, silty sand, silty sand with gravel, or sand with silt was encountered in discrete layers. Gravel and organic material and asphalt, was also found in some borings. Typically, groundwater was encountered at depths of 5 to 10 feet bgs. 21-1-22042-001-1J.doexApr3 n 21-1-22042-001 Packet Page 370 of 456 SHANNON 6WILSON, INC. Mr. Mike Giseburt, P.E. The Louis Berger Group (Domestic), Inc. February 20, 2015 Page 3 of 7 Based on our review of the boring logs, the soil profile at the proposed pump station locations most likely consists of 5 to 6 feet of medium dense fill material overlying soft wetland and marsh deposits (silt and peat) to a depth of about 10 feet. This is fiurther underlain by dense glacial ourivash sandy gravel and silty sand belonging to the Whidbey Formation. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Seismic Site Class and Seismic Design Coefficients It is Iikely that the design of the proposed Pump Station will utilize base shear methods outlined in the 2012 International Building Code (IBC) (International Code Council, Inc. 2012). This design code is based on levels of ground motion anticipated for an event with a 2,500-year recurrence interval. The proposed Pump Station is most likely underlain by fill and alluvium to depths of at least 20 to 30 feet. Below that the soils are likely glacially overridden and dense to very dense. Given the nature of these soils, we have identified the site classification as Site Class D. Based on the mapped spectral accelerations provided by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and using the site classification procedures outlined in IBC 2012, Section1615, this area is likely to be subjected to a peak ground acceleration of 0.53g, which is associated with a seismic event with a 2,500-year recurrence interval. The maximum considered spectral accelerations for short periods and the 1-second period are 1.27g and 0.50g, respectively. The mapped Ss and Si values in the vicinity of the site are shown in Table 1, and are from the probabilistic ground motion studies completed in 2008 by the USGS. The soil response coefficients FA and Fv corresponding to Site Class D are also provided in Table 1. 21-1-22U2-001-LI doc,-Inp11kn 21-1-22042-001 Packet Page 371 of 456 P�lANNON ��Wll.. �C_ N, II\1(,. Mr. Mike Giseburt, P.E. The Louis Berger Group (Domestic), Inc. February 20, 2015 Page 4 of 7 TABLE 1 INTERNATIONAL BUILDING CODE 2012 GROUND MOTION PARAMETERS SS Ws) S1 WS) Site S�1s S�1t WS) Sos (g's) Sol Ws) 1.27 0.50 i 1) 1.0 1.5 1.3 0.75 0.85 IL 0,50 Assessment of Geotechnical Design Issues In general, the soils present at the proposed base of the wet well appear to be competent for bearing. Certain geotechnical issues, however, will require further analysis during the design phase of the Pump Station. Based oil our review of pertinent site information, we reconunend that three general areas receive additional consideration as follows: Foundation Design. Design of a suitable foundation for the Pump Station will depend on the load that the structure will exert on underlying soil and the soil reaction. Included in a foundation design analysis will be recommendations for bearing capacity, estimated settlements, buoyancy resistance, and lateral earth pressures. 2. Seismically Induced Geologic Hazard Analysis (i.e., ground rupture, liquefaction, and increased lateral earth pressures). 3. Earthtivork. Construction -specific recommendations, such as fill placement and compaction and excavation shoring considerations, will address the techniques that should be used during construction of the Pump Station. Prior to addressing these items, further exploration, such as a soil boring(s) at the location of the Pump Station, is recommended in order to provide a better understanding of subsurface Conditions. Possible Soils Contamination Typically, contaminated material is found within the upper layers of a soil boring, and is detected due to a strong odor or with the use of a device such as a photoionization detector. Because the detection of contaminated material may be a subjective experience, dependent on sense of smell, contamination may go unnoticed in some cases. Also, soils contamination is often local, only 21-1-22042-001-LLdoc.Vu%T U 21-1-22042-001 Packet Page 372 of 456 HANNON 6WILSCIN, INC. Mr. Mike Giseburt, P.E. The Louis Berger Group (Domestic), Inc. February 20, 2015 Page 5 of 7 present within a relatively small section of soils or within a specific soil layer that may have been bypassed during sampling. According to the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE), so3ne locations near the area of proposed construction have the potential to release waste material into the surrounding environment. These are known to the DOE as Hazardous Waste Generators, i.e., facilities that generate any quantity of dangerous waste, and are often industrial or commercial production facilities. The DOE has also noted past instances of site cleanup within the vicinity of the proposed Pump Station. A recent geotechiiical report by Landau Associates, Inc, (2012) indicates that petroleum hydrocarbons and/or metals may be present in soils within the vicinity of the proposed project area.. Although borings reviewed for this study did not indicate the presence of contaminated soils near the location of proposed construction, the potential for contaminated soils exists due to nearby industrial or commercial (Port of Edmonds) facilities. Stockpiling space may be limited on site. Therefore, we recommend that plans be put into place Such that, if contamination is found during excavation, the material can easily be exported to all appropriately permitted landfill. One such nearby facility is Republic Services landfill (3`d and Lander facility) in Seattle, Washington. Shannon & Wilson, Inc. can provide further services for the identification and disposal of contaminated soil if necessary. Grotindwatci• Seepage Rates and Construction Dewaterrug It is our understanding that a 12-foot-diameter wet well will be constructed as part of the Pump Station. The excavation for the wet well is expected to extend to an elevation of about -4.5 feet (a depth of about 17 to 18 feet). Previous subsurface explorations near the proposed wet well indicate that the groundwater table is at a depth of about 5 feet. Given the granular nature of soils present at the proposed excavation depth, we estimate that water seepage rates will be relatively high and will require dewatering during excavation and construction of the wet well. HWA Geosciences, Inc. performed a hydraulic conductivity analysis near the location of proposed construction (2006). Using the results of this analysis, we determined that water may seep into the wet well excavation at a rate of 15 to 20 gallons per minute. We recommend using a system of well points before and during excavation to lower the groundwater table. Well 21-1-220 r2-00l-LI.dnexh p� lku 21-1-22042-001 Packet Page 373 of 456 Mr. Mike Gisebitrt, P.E. HANNON &WIL SON, INC. The Louis Berger Group (Domestic), Inc. February 20, 2015 Page 6 of 7 points are typically installed around or near the perimeter of an excavation and control seepage rates until the structure is installed and backfilled. Design of the dewatering system should be performed by a hydrogeologist licensed in the State of Washington. LIMITATIONS The analyses, conclusions, and recommendations contained in this report are preliminary. We have reviewed site conditions as they presently exist, and further assume that the existing subsurface explorations are representative of the subsurface conditions throughout the project alignment; that is, the subsurface conditions everywhere are not significantly different from those disclosed by the explorations. If subsurface conditions different from those encountered in the explorations are encountered or appear to be present during 60% design, 90% design, or during construction, we should be advised at once so that we can review these conditions and reconsider our recommendations, where necessary. If there is a substantial lapse of time between the submission of this report and the start of construction at the site, or if conditions have changed because of natural forces or construction operations at or adjacent to the site, we recommend that we review our report to determine the applicability of the conclusions and recommendations. Within the limitations of scope, schedule, and budget, the analyses, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report were prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional geotechnnical engineering principles and practice in this area at the time this report was prepared, We make no other warranty, either express or implied. These conclusions and recommendations were based on our understanding of the project as described in this report and the site conditions as observed at the time of our explorations. Unanticipated soil conditions are commonly encountered and cannot be fully determined by merely taking soil samples from test borings. Such unexpected conditions frequently require that additional expenditures be made to attain a properly constructed project. Therefore, some contingency fund is recommended to accommodate such potential extra costs. This report was prepared for the exclusive use of the City of Edmonds, The Louis Berger Group, and their design team in the design of the Dayton Street Pump Station project. The data and report should be provided to the contractors for their information, but our report, conclusions, 2t-1-22042-001-L1.docxY% p/1kn 21-1-22042-001 Packet Page 374 of 456 8111AiVNON �MILSiaR INN Mr. Mike Giseburt, P.E. The Louis Berger Group (Domestic), Inc. February 20, 2015 Page 7 of 7 and interpretations should not be construed as a warranty of subsurface conditions discussed In this report. The scope of our present work did not include environmental assessments or evaluations regarding the presence or absence of wetlands, or hazardous or toxic substances in the soil, surface water, groundwater, or air on or below or around this site, or for the evaluation or - disposal of contaminated soils or groundwater should any be encountered. Shannon R Wilson, hie. has prepared and included Appendix B, "Important Information About Your Geotechnical/Environunental Report," to assist you and others in understanding the use acid limitations of our reports. Sincerely, SHANNON & WILSON, INC. Justin Y.B. Cook Geotechnical Staff JPCljpc r�1N W. . 30308 SIDNAI. Martin Page, P.E., L.E.G. Vice President Geotechnical Engineer, LEED AP, DBIATs" Enc: Figure I Vicinity Map Figure 2 — Site and Exploration Plan Appendix A — Subsurface Explorations Appendix B — Important Information About Your Geotechnical/Environuiental Report 21- l-22042-00 t -L l .dacx/%%p4kn 21 - 1 -22042-001 Packet Page 375 of 456 Sit, 11\NNON &WI !L-M, INC. REFERENCES HWA Geosciences, Inc., 2006, Geotechnical Report, Lift Stations? and 8 integration and rehabilitation, Edmonds, Washington: Prepared for HDR Engineering, Inc. International Code Council, Inc., 2012, International Building Code: Country Club Hills, Ill., International Code Council, Inc., 690 p. Landau Associates, Inc., 1995, Report, Geotechnical Design Services, Proposed Marine Support Buildings, Port of Edmonds, Edmonds, Washington: Prepared for Makers Architecture and Urban Design, Seattle, Washington. Landau Associates, Inc., 2003, Report, Geotechnical Engineering Services, Dayton Street Outfall Replacement, Ednionds, Washington: Prepared for Berger/ABAM Engineers, Inc., Federal Way, Washington. Landau Associates, Inc., 2012, Draft Report, Geotechnical Services, Beach Place Sanitar� Sewer Replacement Project, Edmonds, Washington: Prepared for City of Edmonds, 121 5" Ave. N., Edmonds, Washington. Washington State Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Subsurface Geology Information System. Available: hups:Hfortress.wa.gov/dnr/geology/ Washington State Highway Commission Department of Highways, 1970, CS 3130-1 U, SR-104, Ferry Landing to 5"' Ave., Edmonds, L-3242. Zipper Zeman Associates, Inc., 2008, Report of Geotechnical Services, Edmonds Commuter Rail Station, Edmonds, Washington: Prepared for KPFF Consulting Engineers. 21-1-22042-001-LI-Refdocx/ 1VJk1t 21-1-22042-001 Packet Page 376 of 456 In N N 0 0 2 4 Approximate Scale in Miles DOTE Map adapted from aerial imagery provided by Google Earth Pro, reproduced by permission granted by Google Earth TM' Mapping Service. Dayton Street Pump Station Edmonds, Washington VICINITY MAP February 2015 21-1-22042-001 SHANNON &WILSON, INC, FIG.1 4 OTEONNICAL AND ENYINONNLNUL CCNLVLIAN.B Packet Page 377 of 456 iu 0 T CO C 0 N O N N O N 0 3 a 0 0 N O N N 0 Q CD 0 N N E LL Rp !Otrxi 0; des Ary- MIR-' - — i •At �~� !• LEGEND BH-'I Boring Designation and Approximate Location (Landau B-1 (3 Boring Designation and Approximate Location (Landau Associates, 2002) Associates, 1995) Boring No. 4 O Boring Designation and Approximate Location (Zipper LB-1 (D Boring Designation and Approximate Location (Landau Zeman Associates, 2008) Associates, 2003) Boring Designation and Hole 5 Approximate Location (Washington Possible Pump Station Location State Highway Commission Department of Highways, 1970) alk AV + tw�ww \NAV- rL 1 ' •`� `;" •'fix _'�� -* '.� �_ ' �- 4 0 100 200 Approximate Scale in Feet NOTE Map adapted from aerial imagery provided by Google Earth Pro, reproduced by permission granted by Google Earth TM Mapping Service. Packet Page 378 of 456 APPENDIX A SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS HANNON 6 IISON, INC.. 21-1-22042-001 Packet Page 379 of 456 APPENDIX A SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS FIGURES A-1 Log of B-1 (LB-1 in figure 2) A-2 Log of Boring BH-1 A-3 Log of Boring BH-2 A-4 Log of Boring BH-3 A-5 Log of Boring Hole 3 (2 sheets) A-6 Log of Boring Hole 4 (2 sheets) A-7 Log of Boring Hole 5 (2 sheets) A-S Boring B-1 A-9 Boring B-2 A-10 Boring B-3 A-11 Log of Boring No. 4 21-I-22042-001-L I -AA doc,,AN F 1]kn 21- I-22045-00 ] A-i Packet Page 380 of 456 SANNON 6WII SON, INC. APPENDIX A SUBSURFACE EXPLORATIONS Subsurface conditions at the proposed Dayton Pump Station site were interpreted based on 11 historic soil borings. These borings were conducted by various entities from 1970 to 2008, and are believed to provide adequate reference for this geoteelrnical review. Soil properties and expected groundwater conditions used in this review were estimated based on these borings. The approximate locations of the previous field explorations are shown in Figure 2. Selected boring logs are included as Figures A-1 through A-11. 21-1-22042-001-L 1-AA -docx4pllkn 21-1-22042-001 A-1 Packet Page 381 of 456 SAMPI.I i)ATA SOIL PRONLE GROUNDWATER n 0) $ o Drilling Method. Hollow -stem Augur f?r:tNl o 4� Ground Elevallon (It)' 15.5 J — id in — m m E % gilled 13y: Holocene D[liling ❑ —o ul rA otf uri ao ►- C7 - fs SP Olive,gray, gravely, poorly graded, s ^ Waterproof Ana to medlum SAND (medium dense, . Wag WaitSeal In molsl) (fill) _ [=hlsh•mounled Monument Wy3 Nallva Send Backfill S 111I b2 III 5 0 CGvo•ulay, very gravelly, poorly — — — — E3enlonite chips ` 10 W = s • gradeJ, Ano 10 rnedlum SAND 5 2 b7 I I GS (rnediurn dense, nlotsl) AT[) SP OlivO.Oray, graverly, poorlygradod, .Q Ano 10 nlodluna SAND (medium dense, 8.3 b2 in a1! 19' xrol) —10 - S 'f h2 11 VVG1GS 1 •Ineh Diameler PVC 5P QGva•0ray, Oravally, poorly graded, line to medium SAND (medium dense, Blank wet) (nallvo sands) 0 h2 10 W 23 - 10120 Uwe do sand - p,%k 20 - f d 5 S 0 l] b2 25 W = 10 _ 3 L GS 1-Inch Diameter PVC Screen _ 25 la 35 W 1$ Gocomos donso 8•7 ff b2 o°c _ 30 MM Nollvo Sand 3 Boring Completed 013/00103 Total Daplh of Boring A 30,0 fl, ,n 35 r Notes: 1. Strallgraphle conlaels are based on Act] Interprelatlons and ara approximate. ui 2. Reference to the text of this report is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 8 3. Refer to'Sol I Ciassillcallon System and Key' Aguro for explanation of graphlas and symbols. N Dayton Street Outfall LANDAU Replacement Log of B-1 Associms Edmonds, Washington Fig, A-1 SAMPLE DATA Q n BH-1 SOIL PROFILE Drilling Method: Hollow -stem Auger Ground Elevation (ft): _ 15 (MLLW) U � 12V) z c S 1 -i I J 1)2 11 W` 3 S-7. 10 W " 7 5.3b2 f 7 •10 b2 0 — 15 45� b2 15 W::23 . —20 1r2 22 W S 21 as z 172 a m J a — 25 c� n S•! L+J b2 19 = u Y SP_ - a Sint 30 S•Q 1_;LJ 1)2 24 horing Complatod 07lIGl02 1 oial Doplh of Borinv, 31,5 n. a Inclhas of sod over dark brown, silly SAND (medium denso, molsl) (lopsol Grayish brovrn In dark gray, poorfy Uri nno to modium SAND, Irace one subraunded gravel (medium donsoto loose, molsl to wel) (fill) Wood oncountowd at about g ll • 4 f nchos o! savdusl encountered al abau! f 1 f! oorry graaeo, nno to medium Ifaco sill, Iraco flno subrounded medlum dons a, viol) (beach Credos to a light gray, poorly graded, fine 10 coarse SAND, traco sill Qark gray, pacrly graded, pne Ski h'!D vrilh silt (medium densu, wet) `7 ATO —3-5 Nolan; 1. Slrallgruphlo eontocls are based on flald Interpretations and are a 0 2. Roferonco to the Ief of IhIs report Is neoass ry fora proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 3. Roror to "Sall Classlficallon Syslom and Kar figure for explanation of graphics and symbols. MId-waterfront Seawall LANDAU Replacement Assoaxas Edmonds, Washington GROUNDWATER Fig. AW2 Log of Boring 1314•1 Packet Page 383 of 456 B H-2 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATI R a -9 Drilling Melhod: Hollow•stem Auger sr-11 v 8 Ground Elmllon (II): 14.9 (IILLW) � Q J yr rii > 0 SM 3 inches of sod over dark brown. slily SAND finedlum dense moEsl to soil SP Grayish brown, poorly graded, One to medium SAND, Iraca One to coarse subrounded gravel (fooso to ntadiure S• I �J ■ I bz G W ° : dense, moist) (OIl) —5 S•2 b'l. I I W ' 7 SP- {]ark gray, pow—d ggraded, fin© to medlum ATn S•3 �' b2 7 SM SAND villh sill, sawdusl, and wood dabris, trace One subrounded gravel (loose to mad€um dense, viol) i0 SA b2 16 SM wilti sfll and fine subroundod gravel 15 (medium dense to dense, vvel) (beach W 18 deposhs) S•S } i b2 15 GS —2a W. 18 S•Fi b2 33 n_ z 0 m_ —25 I 33 Grades to n IlghI gray, poorly giadod, Ono _ 5.7 1 b2 25 to modlum SAND with sill w af _ Grades to a dark gray, poorly graded, One SAND with sill 30 S•0 b2 26 zz - o doting Complalod OW1G1g2 s TOW Depth of doting a 31.5 O, Gi n 0 —35 Notes: 1. SfraIlgrnphla oonlacls are bused on gold Intotprotallons and ore approximate. v 2. Reforanco to the loxt of this report Is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface conditions. 5 3. Rofer to Tell Classlncallon System and Key' figure for explanallon of graphles and symbols. Mid -waterfront Seawall LANDAU Replacement Log of Boring BH-2 AssociAns Edmonds, Washington Fig. A-3 Packet Page 384 of 456 SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE GROUNDWATER �� Drilling Method; iollow•stem Au o r $ u Groultd 6fovalfon (itj: f`1�t-�7 r 4 _ N c o- O,i -C VJ U _i `v Cl —0 A 3S fCL [ten 51 �I 5.1 I �I b2 7 W=5 S•2 b2 22 W a SP f 2 10 S•`i �� 42 5 SP- Sh4 15 b2 26 W n 26 ' 3 Inches of sod over dark brain, silly SAND (medium donso, moist) (topsoil) Grayrsh brown, poorly graded, line to medium SAND (looso to medlum donso, moist) (rill) `7 Aft) Dark gray, poorly glided, lino to medlum SAND rnh�ed wilh sawdust (very lease to loose, wet) Gray, poorly graded, "no to medium %011 sill, Irace fine subrounded grov+ medium dense to donso, wel) (beat deposits) -20 _ S•6� b2 23 W = 20 m 6� A O h a —25 b2 31 W. 18 �1 as 11 - ti . a Grades to a dark gray, poorly gladod, flno SAND %sith sill so t7 S•8 b2 25 G" Bering completed 07/16102 Total Depth of Boring - 31.6 R. —35 Notes: 1. Slrallgraphlo contacts are based on field Interpretations and Oro approxlnlato. 2. Reference to the text of this ropolt is necessary for a proper understanding of subsurface condilions, J. Rotor to 'Sall Classification System and Key' figure for oxplahallon of graphics and symbols. 1 Mld-watorffont Seawall LANDAU Replacement �- 1 ASSOCIATES Edmonds, Washington Fig. A-4 Lag of Boring BH-3 Packet Page 385 of 456 26.66 [Ray. 5,691 WASHINGTON .Original to Mateelals Engineer Copy to Bridge Engineer STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION Cory to Mstrivi Englrim ,c'' �-h� '`� �2Q AEPARTMGIVT Or HIGHWAYS Copy to LOGOF TEST BORING Section_._. Fej�i,� _=' ti►�S--b--t5----�� 11----- Job No, _ 1- Sub Sect ion._t.¢..-ram -_ .it1 �i __ __.__- •-- ------•--- Cont. Sec. _-- — ;tion._�.) offset ._..__---3._-3..r-d:.,-__--_-- Ground EL -.. JL-1r-1t pe of T3oring-_--.- l`!4� �.�-_�...-...-.....—__ Casing- t�!�?. -- - -- W.T. FI, .pector�.�� .' _ .-. , �*Lt� �- --- —� - —_ Date---- - �2�_� 7 -. --- _ Sliect ,..1- —. of _ 11 BLOVIS PER FT. PROME SAMPLE TWIF. NOS. DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL r r -i 1] t i . VA, 1 r Packet Page 386 of 456 6,66•A (hy. 5.67) rt � ole No,Sub Section...-J,° ___�� Er - -Ln /^ _---•-_--- Sheet_.?, _ of _..� BMWs PER FT. PROFILE SA1.IPLE WBE MOS. DESCRIPTION OF MAIERIA4 W 33 114% Packet Page 387 of 456 26.66 (Rev, S-01 WASHINGTON Original to Alalc11315 )7ngineer STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION copy to Bridge Engineer' Copy to Mstriet Engineer —7 Copy to DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS Nam✓ h 1► ` - [ 4 Z S " Section hEF�[�C�r� ��1� J6 NO..) ,. Sub Sefl _-- 16 6 cont,Secr Offset_ d.?____ _� . ^_. Ground El. 3,A r le of Boring----:.� - . -- -Casing_...._. �_�_� �� -- W.'I'. El.._.. !! a r _ fcctor. _` _4.�-'.F. Iz.-- --- --- - Tarr MAIA . n. I67A' c,. I _� l DESCRIPTION OF MAURIAI Fig. A-6 ` Packet Page 388 of 456 26.66-A (Roy.' 5,01 role No - - ------ L� ...... - - — -------- Sub Section-4( micet-2— of :PM slows PER FT. PROFILE -SAPAE WDE. NO$, DESCRIPTION OF MATCRIM 2JV2. Packet Page 389 of 456 2h.66 IRav, 5.671 WASHINGTON Orlttinil to Materlais ungincer STATE; HIGHWAY COMMISSION Copy to Dildsc EnSIneer DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS copy to District Iinglncet copy to 6 LOG TEST 'BORING S-R._--.`Section—F WL� 32-42-70� No .- Sub SecEio_ N _ Cont, Sec. AOffset _ � ` _ ,_` r - . .. - GroundEl, _ t7�b. )e of baring.__....___' _------__� Casin W.T. El. —8.0: Shcct—�of -- { BLT]WS PROFILE SAMPLE PER Fi. TUBE NOS, DESCRIPTION OF MATERIAL •2 . .- r L-I 3 S. A= C Sri ILI •' Ili •. , . • • - - • • ,-� . •Fig. A-7 * Packet Page 390 of 456 �� Hole B�.--_��---_-_---' Sub Section ------'-_-----_'- Skcn.--_&�_---uf'--��— PER FT. PROFILE IUBE NOS. MCRIPTION OF MATERIM Packet Page 391 of 456 SAMPLE! DATA 8011. VIROFILP u C r X ? ° E 0 Qriming Moll)ad: 4.1/4' IISA/SPT Z a )— o to r > r CL p N u) N Ground Elovalfon (fit: (6.2 W E S O 0 N d (n m (5 7 ,d GW 1.1/4' crushed SURFACING z� 1 "�"�I' 7,l) 31 2.G SP SM Brown, gravelly, lino to coarse SAND with sill fl (dense, mgiSII (fill) 2 21) 13 3.5 Gracins medium dense Q SP Gray line to medium SAND, scaltered wood ATE fragments (medium — s0 i 21) 17 dense, wall Iboach deposits) SW Gray, flravally, line to coarse SAND n 21) A ILT Idenso, wall (glacial oulwash doposilsl 20 G' Grades less GRAVEL, very dense G _�❑ 21) 55 6- Traca gravel Gray, fine to medium SAND with gravel and trace SP 7 Tj] 2b 70 20.4 sill (very denso, wall (glacial oulwash deposits) 21) 69 Grades to fine sand, denso 9 j 26 .10 al2 so 60 YI Bottom of boring at depth 41.6 N; Back(illed with bontonlla Chips with soil cap Borino Complated O0/30/95 Total Depth i 4t5 (I. Holes; 1. Strallgraphio contact$ are based on field lnlarpratatlons and a(o approxiaalu. Rato( to the lox) ror an Oxpranalion at subau(face caniillon$. 2. Rare( to 'Sol Ctassilloalion System and Kay' figure for axplanalion of graphks and syrtt)ols. Boring B-1 LANDAU ASSOCIATES. INC. Packet Page 392 of 456 Hat SAMPLE DATA SOIL PROFILE f TH E o Driving klothed: 4.114' HSA/5PT a T u1 T rn Ground Elevation Ills: 15.7 r o C_ 43 C 3r w1 C U �- U U) a N r i3 :2 t7 0 GW 1•1/4' crushed SURFACING - 1 2h 20 4.0 SP —� Brawn, gravelly lino to coarse SAND (maWvrn � densa, mold) Ifill) ' SP Dark gray, fine to medium SAND. I -Inch 9•6..9 — 10 {{ II 211 td bad of lino sandy sill (medium dense, Beet) (beach deposilsl SP Gra Cna to led' m SAND Ilh Irac ffn WELL DETAIL I ' Conco3te .. / till i / Benionilo Chips / 9.195 / 10.3.95 y, r n ru w rs a $and Pack gravel (very dense, wall (glacial oulwash 4 2b 53 deposits) 2-Inch Diameter Schadulo 00 PVC Screen SW I0.02•[nch slob 20 5 gj 2b 61 Gray, gravelly, lino to coarse SAND (vary denso, Viet) (glacial oulwash deposits) Wall Completed 00/30/95 130ring Completed 00/30/95 Total Depth z 21.5 fl. — 30 — 40 - GO NOWS1 I. Slrallaraphio conlacls are basad on flail intarprolations and are approxlrnalo. Palo to tho d la Kt for an oxpWalion of subsurfaco com lions. 0 2. Hoior to "Soil Classificalion Syslam and Kay' liowo for axP#anallon of grapt,lcs and syrnbofs. Boring q.2 - Fig. A-9 LANDal' MCIATES, INC. Packet Page 393 of 456 6.,3 SAMPLE DATA 8011. PROFILE E epD o U. Dritling Method: 4•1/4' HSA/SPT O z } ti. U U) to a u ,• Ground Glovallon Ifil; 15.5 U c W J a 3 8 ci v to 0 - s7r Sw- crushed SURFACING �1.114' _ ! 2b 11 4.G Grown, gravofly lino to eoarsn SAND (madiurn dense, rnolsll (frill 2 2b 16 t5.4 SKI Gray, silty, Ilno to modium SAND with gravel, scallerad bits of wood (modium _ Sp ATO denso, viol) (boach deposllsl IU 3 �� 21) 34 Dark gray, lino to madlum SAND Idonso. wall Iboach deposltsl SW 4 _L`=17 2b 40 Gray, gravelly, fine to coarse SAND vrilh trano sot Idonso, wall Iglaclal outwash deposits] -� 20 5 2b 79 7.5 G 1� 2b 50 �- — - 5.5" Sp Gray, flno to medium SAND Ive(y denso, wall {olacial oufwash deposits) — 30 7 2b 50 _ - 8 � 2b 50 5' Bottom of boring at depth 35.9 fl; Backlilled vrHh bentonite chips with soil cap 40 Boring Complatod 03/30/95 - Total Doplh ; 35.9 fl. h-50 a 60 Nolos: 1. Slratloraphlo contacls era based on field intorprolalions and are approxtmalo. nefei to the A lox) for an oxplanalion of subsurface cor6lions. 2. RON to 'SoA Classification System and Key" fioufa for oxotanalton of praphles and symbots. Owing B-3 Fig. A-10 LANDAU ASSOC IAT6S, INC, Packet Page 394 of 456 LOG OF BORING NO, 4 c>! iE�fi KPFF Cons-ilting Ent 8I TF Edmonds, WA DESCRIPTION UAppro:x.8Ur(acer_-Iev,: 11.30 ft 5%" ASPHALT s Nl1 W d EL gray, rnedlwtt den8e, moiatto wet (F111) ELT WIT H_tl I; gray. soft, wot to saturated grades to medlum silff GRAVELLY SAND, TRACE SILT gray, dense, saturated NDYG EL.`fF�A(:Eu- f. dense, saturated L.Tgray, BOTTOM OF BOi NG a9ofl PROJECT Edmonds Commuter Rail Station .SAMPLES TESTS o� 0 z � � Z III 1n 5 0.Qto a7 F Qp U di.� z� O n � SM F{S SM Ss 12 19 �1 SM HS The Stet AcQU0:ri 11nea represent the a proAninte Ooundary.11nea bye .9.o i soil aiid rocKtypas; 111•altu, thn Ifanstllon maybe gradual 0WHOMMEN 1•IS 1 1 _[_1 — __ 3 SS I la 6 G7 -. 1e _18PI 1118 SP I 4 1 SS I 11 18— SF' Ct' I-lS — ..._ WATER LEVEL OBSERVATIONS, fl BORING STARTED WL 4.5 WQ T Qbdr A w BORING COMPLETED 3-9-07 WL . T =Mw-1 � �«nil+rr,u RIG CME 85 CO. E.D.I. WE - LOGGED BAG Fig. A-11 i Packet Pagg 395 of 456 SHANNON &WILSON, INC. APPENDIX B IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR GEOTECHNICAVENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 21-1-22042-001 Packet Page 396 of 456 J SHANNON & WIL.SON, INC. Attachment to and part of Report 21-1-22042-001 Geotechnical and Environmental Consultants Date: Pebnrary 20, 20I5 To: Mr. Mike Giseburt, P.G. The Louis Berger Group (Domestic), Inc. IMPORTANT INFORMATION .ABOUT YOUR GEOTECHNICAL.IL-:NVIRONMENTAL REPORT CONSULTING SERVICES ARE PERFORMED FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES AND FOR SPECIFIC CLIENTS. Consultants prepare reports to meet the specific needs of specific individuals. A report prepared for a civil engineer may not be adequate for a constriction contractor or even another civil engineer. Unless indicated otherwise, your consultant prepared your report expressly for you and expressly for the purposes you indicated. No one other than you should apply this report for its intended purpose without first conferring with the consultant. No party should apply this report for any purpose other than that originally contemplated without first conferring with the consultant. THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT IS BASED ON PROJECT -SPECIFIC FACTORS. A geoteclinical/errvironmental report is based on a subsurface exploration plan designed to consider a unique set of project -specific factors. Depending on the project, these may include: the general nature of the stricture and property involved; its size and configuration; its historical use and practice; the location of the structure or the site and its orientation; other improvements such as access roads, parking lots, and underground utilities; and the additional risk created by scope -of service limitations imposed by the client. To help avoid costly problems, ask the consultant to evaluate how any factors that change subsequent to the date of the report may affect the recommendations. Unless your consultant indicates other%vise, your report should riot be used: (1) when the nature of the proposed project is changed (for example, if an office building will be erected instead of a parking garage, or if a refrigerated warehouse will be built instead of an rnnrefrigerated one, or chemicals are discovered on or near the site); (2) when the size, elevation, or configuration of the proposed project is altered; (3) when the location or orientation of the proposed project is modified; (4) when there is a change of ownership; or (5) for application to an adjacent site. Consultants cannot accept responsibility for problems that may occur if they are not consulted after factors which were considered in the development of the report have changed. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS CAN CHANGE. Subsurface conditions may be affected as a result of natural processes or human activity. Because a geoteclnnicaI/environmentaI report is based on conditions that existed at the time of subsurface exploration, construction decisions should not be based oil a report whose adequacy may have been affected by time. Ask the consultant to advise if additional tests are desirable before construction starts; for example, groundwater conditions commonly vary seasonally. Construction operations at or adjacent to the site and natural events such as floods, earthquakes, or groundwater fluctuations may also affect subsurface conditions and, thus, the continuing adequacy of a geotecliinicallenvironnnental report. The consultant should be kept apprised of airy such events, and should be consulted to determine if additional tests are necessary. MOST RECOMMENDATIONS ARE PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENTS. Site exploration and testing identifies actual surface and subsurface conditions only at those points where samples are taken. The data were extrapolated by your consultant, who then applied judgment to render an opinion about overall subsurface conditions. The actual interface between materials may be far more gradual or abrupt than your report indicates. Actual conditions in areas not sampled may differ fi-onn those predicted in your report. While nothing tarn be done to prevent such situations, you and your consultant can work together to help reduce their impacts. Retaining your consultant to observe subsurface Construction operations can be particularly beneficial in this respect. Page 1 of 2 1120 l 5 Packet Page 397 of 456 A REPORT'S CONCLUSIONS ARE PRELIMINARY. The conclusions contained in your consultant's report are preliminary because they must be based on tine assumption that conditions revealed through selective exploratory sampling are indicative of actual conditions throughout a site. Actual subsurface conditions can be discerned only during earthwork; therefore, you should retain your consultant to observe actual conditions and to provide conclusions. Only the consultant who prepared the report is fully familiar with the background uiformation needed to determine whether or not the report's reconnnendations based on thaw conclusions are valid and whether or not tine contractor is abiding by applicable recommendations. The consultant who developed your report cannot assume responsibility or liability for the adequacy of the report's recommendations if another party is retained to observe construction. THE CONSULTANT'S REPORT IS SUBJECT TO MISINTERPRETATION. Costly problems can occur when other design professionals develop their plans based on misinterpretation of a geotech nical/enviromnental report. To help avoid these problems, the consultant should be retained to work with other project design professionals to explain relevant geotechnical, geological, hydrogeological, and environmental findings, and to review the adequacy of their plans and specifications relative to these issues. BORING LOGS AND/OR MONITORING WELL DATA SHOULD NOT BE SEPARATED FROM THE REPORT. Final boring logs developed by tine consultant are based upon inte►pretation of field logs (assembled by site personnel), field test results, and laboratory and/or office evaluation of field samples and data. Only final boring logs and data are customarily included in geotechnical/environmental reports. These final logs should not, under any circumstances, be redrawn for inclusion in architectural or other design drawings, because drafters may commit errors or omissions in the transfer process. To reduce the likelihood of boring log or nnonitoring well misinterpretation, contractors should be given ready access to the complete geotechnical engineering/enviromnerital report prepared or authorized for their use. If access is provided only to the report prepared for you, you should advise contractors of the report's limitations, assuming that a contractor was not one of the specific persons for whom tine report was prepared, and that developing construction cost estimates was not one of the specific purposes for which it Nvas prepared. While a contractor may gain important knowledge from a report prepared for another party, the contractor should discuss the report ►with your consultant and perform the additional or alternative work believed necessary to obtain the data specifically appropriate for construction cost estimating purposes. Some clients hold the mistaken impression that simply disclaiming responsibility for the accuracy of subsurface information always insulates them from attendant liability. Providing the best available information to contractors helps prevent costly construction problems and the adversarial attitudes that aggravate them to a disproportionate scale. READ RESPONSIBILITY CLAUSES CLOSELY. Because geotechnical/enviromnenntal engineering is based extensively on judgment and opinion, it is far less exact than other design disciplines. This situation has resulted in wholly unwarranted claims being lodged against consultants. To help prevent this problem, consultants have developed a number of clauses for use in their contracts, reports and other documents. These responsibility clauses are not exculpatory clauses designed to transfer the consultant's liabilities to other parties; rather, they are definitive clauses that identify where the consultant's responsibilities begin and end. Their use helps all parties involved recognize their individual responsibilities and take appropriate action. Some of these definitive clauses are likely to appear in your report, and you are encouraged to read them closely. Your consultant will be pleased to give frill and fi•ank answers to your questions. The preceding paragraphs are based on information provided by the ASFE/Association of Engineering Firms Practicing in the Gcosciences, Silver Spring, Maryland Page 2 of 2 1/2015 Packet Page 398 of 456 Appendix B Survey/Base Mapping, DHA DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Louis Berger Packet Page 399 of 456 6• PVT; WLKR1, �- � 6• PVC CIILVFRT B TAX N0. 27032300400700 e[ WIM TRAP, IE . 8.6 CB REEF APARTMENTS BUILDING �, t t /INEI>G O LOT f3 I SEE NOTE 14\\ SSMH RIM.11.84 FENCING 1 SLOT /4 19 CB f4 U M. NE, SE, M sw LMERCRCUND STORM LINE CUR. CHANNEL COUPTIARt IFrBS l� 1 UNDERGROUND SEWER FORCE MAIN LINE GRASS / 'IVN NOT 9UM£Y N 1• UNDERGROUND SEWER UNE SAID 1p NOTE 12 CON. UNDERG M WA7ER UNE CBf1 AT1 SCALE f N �� UNDERGROND TELEPHONE LINE SAND NOTE 10 ryJ r � � PAD ASPHALT SEE NOT: 15 t / SCUBA SHOP \ UNDERGROUND POKER LINE BRICK PAVERS � t (R'�f) S{g FRAME MUSE f268 \ / ■ IRR/GATON CONTROL VALVEDECIWWS ON OF t HOU A FIRE HYDRANT COIVIFER 8l m o LVENT GM55 SL\'�e W N FRAM SEJ290 EPLANTER CB % t WMA TRAP, N wA ER vA vE SW BEE Ng6 WATT METE ■ MNLBOX !! O IE . 8.8 BI11C1( wAl1 COo % CONC. P POWER POE W/ UOR CO SANITARY SEINER CLEANWT J SEND SLOT f7 R SFE NONE 7 / Q� CON. SEE NOTE 1 ..rtsA ® SfA COND• Y019 FOWER POE 0 STORM DRAIN CATCH SASIN(T1PE 1) �``rr�- A1--��1N A Pam'••_ S 1 BPoCK / POWEN PO£ ANCHOR e STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN(TYPE 11) Qvv 1•' WN. PAD ®/`� ® % 2-EJ ASPHALT \ �� / C SANITARY SEINER MANHOE 81 J-12TVAMETER COLUMN L POST (iT GRAM 11 � gSPHALT ` DHA SURIkY CONIiRd. SNA f8 GRASS.i 1� \� ISTAIRS WIORNL 94 FISHING WKING PLOT . O MONUMENT N CASE J�O BENCH PAD . 1 cBf1 TAX(4NO. 03230041 0 GB fe / ■ POKER METER O DB nSTARSwL H SEE ND E R Ms dB�EMAL0.Yi C��(; O 4'METPL IE N 5.89ASPHALT GOVERNMENT LOT 2 dF WAIN LINK FENCE C C `G" � HEELED P V GOVERNMENT LOT LORE / VHF VERTICAL BOARD FENCE CON CONIFER BENC2014 WHOK ON 1 PIMITER // NMENAT AL C/GONG CONCRETE P PINE BIND/ S T •/4 KKK ONE J.1 1 B• �,N/ P.A. PLANTED AREA DEC DECIDUOUS E Be UA4N VAULT y. 3-STORY CONDO PVC PO )WA CHLORIDE %PE M M C�5.S LA 3P EDIAON0.5 MY BIDC. Y O DUCTILE IRON W II(60uv CRASS 51 W. DAMN (A) APPRO.WMATE IEE�NNSEwfS1� ® e� �E�'�Q 9 0 TAX NO. 27032300401300 �° 11 ASPHALT CAP CORRUGATED METAL PIPE BOT -I.W v 1 CONIC.DNA / M PLANI MB MAIL See(N 29943L905-1138YYOOD 9 O 1 ER� MAILBOXES 6' M PPRkING / O RV RV HOOK-UP E /21� •1..127 HB HOSE BIB FRD PER RECORD DRAPING w , 0 14 12 DG TAX NO. 27032300415300 TAX N . 2703230 415 00 B BOLLARD eY fXAYC PAVERS \C' TJB CONCRETE / / `` 6• M / !./ FFE FINISH FLOW ELEVATW ON N fYM9B -• MH UIIUO VAULT CONCRETEOWN p KE It. JB JUNCTION BOX H S /G94 08A 515 GRASS BOJ A06 ` RCR t 515 417 HORIZONTAL DATUM, -�� / 30 'a MH W-f LI5AAAH��Ifia RiCPO 5153\ \q•' 4 ASPHALT \ / f OP WAWNGLON STATE COORDINATE SYSTEM. NORM ZONE NAOBJ(91). US FEET UTILIZING RM k � Y Y � CB515 �1V•' ,Q O� / 41 CPS FIELD PROCEWRES V„� YYYY YVVV �y\ CONTOUR NTONE FVAL (1) FOOT CONTOURS ^ 14 - 14 f 4 / \ M / / / \�� O _�+•\O� `?J" VERTICAL DATUM: NA19BB, us FEET. SIALP G 2ND STORY B• M 1� \ +Q' " / ,j,/ / U77L177ES MAPPING: ��FFE=fABJ WAG MK5119 Q GAS M \ AgpHALT ALL EXISTING UNUTES SWAN F/ERE/N ARE TO SE VERIFIED HW/ZONTALLY AND VERTICALLY MOR FFE•1,A6,} nn m ANY CWSIRUCTON. ALL EXISTING FEATURES /NOUONG BURID UTLIIES ARE SYONN AS CB I(f10b/A) DICAP PKA NM Q I• �L. PARKING• ,d / / / / INDICATED BY RECORD LOCATION W fElD lE0 AS A RESULT ON A UTUTY PAINT -WTI DURING N. 1287 N 29911T.815 • �c �O / J`- iF/E COURSE OF THE FIELD SURVEY. WANE HAR,MM . ASSOC/ATM NC (DHA) ASSUMES NO /E E SM £ 1299421. M I/ ��V* LAB/UTY FOR THE ACCURACY O' THE RECORD AFORMATW. FOR TIE FNAL LOCIRON� TW: Ewa SOT SJ2 W W(24;N 4 12LW � . n� 4 O � \ / 8• M / / / 0 EXISTING YEs u 5 N aREas cRlvzER m cdvsmu ). CONTACT 11E U7N/TY ONNFR AGENCY REEL 12M�V PAR aN0 uTwTEs uNDERGRDUNO CENTER 1e90/424-ssssJ. OaM PN P TOPOGRAPHIC MAPPING. �F n MOWED* CB /11 g�M e C M / nIE MAP SHOIW FEREW IS RE RESULT OF a r7PDrwaPHlc slwrNEr BY CHAFE HARTMAN s TAX NO. 27032300415800 `/' PA J 7H G. ?� 1 M 1 ASMAIES /NC (DNA) COMPLETED ON DECEMBER 2014 DNA ASSUMES NO LASUTY BEYOND 7HAT MAY MY WTTAW OR ADTURE G M WS `URA �>� DN "'EB 4 C � � C� / DBMK ►. SLOT PI, RIM -13.1 13 ror (425) 4ftT�iL55 FOR S/lE UPDATES AND LEER/FlCA1/QVS WTTOM 123 1 \ T 3-HOUR ` ' 13.1 DNA SURVEY P 6• PVC SW, ME .120 e r b"POR H5145 O \ 'PRKG VJJIER WW PARKING / O 12 SLOT f9 CB1002 CB1009 MW7 C91837 MH51M MH5155 DEC 2014 SLOT f3, 8' PVC NERIM . 13.12 IE . 1. RIM=12.58 RIM-11.82 PoM=12.61 RIM.12.19 PoM-11.28 RIM=11.90 111 -12.89 , T \ /� \ / ?IO PM.KING• DRIVE / IE.11.88 W-11.24 IE N.9.17 IE.11.49 IE-10.48 IE.5.40 IE E�3.74 PE ASPHALT IE SE-8.16 IE S.3.69 SLOT f4, PoM . 13.11 WA 103 SLOTf10 CB1003 IE NW-8.11 CB1464 M1838 1JH5140 BOTTOM . 12.2 N 29 "led Z JB \ 12 'FISHING %ER 510N RIM .12.58 PoM=11.54 PoM.11.64 RIM 0IM RIM=11.67 MH5IW E 1259840.549 7�/ IE-IIM IE W.10.59 C81010 IE N.10.59 IE.I 1M IE.N A RIM=1263 ../ Q' / IE N-3..OB SLOT f5, RIM 13.13 EL iJ. .MLT / IE NE=G.94 Rim-12.03 IE NE�B.89 BOLT=0.27 IE Ea5.2J GOTIOM - 12S �• �A�/ �B]. \ _ (A, / / np� SLOTf11 IE SW.9.84 IE.11.28 IE SW=10.14 Y01871 PoM.12.56 RIM10.77 MH5141 SLOT 18 RM 11- C81012 C81,155RM-11 IE.10.77 IE CHANN C85150 SLOT M, PoM 1J.12 •l. ?f \ 2u 6SMH(4S•OW) RIM.11.87 PoM.11.66 RIM11.64 YDI800 IE CWFNNETr1.42 RIM 12.80 8' PVC SW, IE 121 ,4 1 / 1' SLOT ty12 IE.9.84 IE NW=8.82 IE NE.10.29 IE SW.8.82 IE=10.30 P. S, PoM 11.55 PoN.13.60 IE NE.9.66 IE SE-1024 PoM=11.15 SLOT f7, PoM - 13.12 O $ \ �1 ��1 """ TJ IE NE 2.25 IE.11.60 081005 IE SE=8.96 IE ~0.34 IE-10.70 CB5143 YD5151 8• PVC NE, E - 121 O� CB51C3 \ B "1/Y. /1 yQl IE SW UED PoM.11.87 IE SW.9.81 RIM.1243 '011w / A, 1 \ CT1 SLOT f11 RM-11. CB1468 YD1B50 RIM- 13 IEMN,A o4 P ao 5` OiV CFMNNElID BOTTOM RIM.12.61 CBI22B RIM.11.15 RIM.11S7 / SLOT /B, PoM . 13.14 (1 �. TAX N0. 27032300406000 IE.11.86 mime RIM.11.55 IE.10.15 IE=10.8] C85144 MISS BOTTOM . 12Z PVNiER \ ST 1 SG" RIM.12.28 IE=10.95 YD1951 EMFr10.Be RIM.11.48 4YZVG \ 1 SIDT 914 IE.9.53 CG1502 IE-N/A CGMH #I. RIM . 13.12 18•D �' O •F PoM=1 61 CB1230 RIM.11M RIM.10.86 IE 5.10.73 IE.11S6 M1007 RIM.11.72 IE.10.43 IE.10.11 CS5199 8' PVT: E. IE • BS ,$ 12- T, L/ pSPRALi MH51M B' PVC W. IE 112 O0 1 b / \ ` BIKE PoM.12.42 IE.10.97 YDW78 RIM.13.21 RIM=i1S9 B' PYC NE. E 11.7 CB �• PoM . 10.76 .f'H R� C 1 7 RIDTf15 IE.9.75 Cel.RM-11 IE-N/A 8' PVC MV, IE . 8.1 V' E-112.59 RI -11 IE . 100 E.1013 IE.1.58 8' Pry; NN, IE 11.6 12' CONC BE. IE . 8.3 18' BEACH CB50]B 13]` IE.11.89 RM-12 RIM.1110. IE SW.10.20 8' PVC W, IE 7.1 CB51 •PIN CONIC. 6"PVC RIM.12.35 IE SE.10.34 IE NE.9.50 MH5148 YD5201 8' PVC SW. E . 8.3 P C81835 IE SW= -Se IE S-10.7 4 CIESZPQRM=l1. RIM E-8. PoM10.97 8' PVC SE, IE BA PoM.10.81 IE NE•9.50 IE N.10.79 CB1504 PoM E-9. IE SE.B.ST IE.10.97 CB fe. PoM . IE = R p /'� GRAVEL F,H / 2•PIN R.'[ IE=9.98 IE N=9.80 PoM=11.09 IE NE.9.19 IE bW=8.43 CGMH /2, RIM 11.12 CI II Li •,S Q, 138 6 IE K-eH RIM 2. IE SW.9.64 IE SW.9.89 IE XX.8.43 CB5243 PIP CONIC NW, IE = 8.2 w p , A T MHS1J8 IE 2 8.25 RIM.12.36 IE NE=10.19 IE NW.8.88 BOT..7.98 RI -11.10 6• PVC NE, E . 11.0 PIPE TO SW Ib CAPPED y 6• R PoM12.09 IE=10.]8 IE NW.9.09 IE SW.9.05 8' PVC SW. IE . 11.1 18 Rr MAY (� COW. o CD IE=N/A MH5137 M129 MH5147 IE SE.9.15 {' PVS SE, IE . 10.8 CB f7 RIM . 10.8] Q PV•'IER ,y 1. V' T CON. SIOEK'MK FULL OF SANG RIM1."e MH1341 MH1682 RIM.10.33 RIM.13.78 8' PVC W. IE . 11.9 8' PVC NW, IE . 9.0 QI ^ 16•C NO-1 PIPE VISIBLE W//SUMP PUMP R! -12.13 IE SW.9.53 IE=7.08 CB5214 8' PVC W. IE . BS 8' PVC NE, IE . 89.9 0\ v G \ H324 mi 0�2� GOT, 0.88 RIM.12.22 IE.4.68 IE N.9.58 BAFFE.9S6 RIM.10M \ 16'C 1 \ n 1�Y IE NW.10.17 BOLT..-0.52 IE.9S5 SUMP PUMP 2• PVC \'� GRAVEL ✓ �NO1N• \ G 4• NH5153 IE SW.10.32 C81832 NH5130 COMM f3, RIM . 1020 SE, IE . 9A \� GRA �° 1 V ry RIM.12.60 IE SSFr10.22 RIM.11.14 PoM=10.71 MH5148 CB5243 24' CONIC W. IE . 6.7 \d0 8'C S MH52 M IE ES IE BE- 0.27 IE SE.B.64 •41.81 RIM.13.85 PoM.10.48 12' CONIC NW, IE . ex CB fe, PoM = 10.69- IE SE.4.40 IE NE=10.32 E NE.9.. IE=N/A BOT..6.55 IE.9.16 12' CONIC N, IE . 6.] 12' CONIC NW, IE = 8.1 IE W� E IE SW.9.79 TAX NO. 27032300415 � S e _ IE N.3.95 CSIM2 MH5131 MH5149 MH5206 12' CONIC SE, IE = 7.8 5130 RI -12.4b C81833 PoM.1I.96 PoM=13.1] PoM.IDAB MAIN f4, RIM . 10.62 CONTROLLERONS AA��,,S MH51 I T IE NE-11.10 RIM=11.28 IE.-O.TT IE NW.4.9] IE=-1.82 24• CONC NE, IE • 5.5 CB f9, PoM . 10.W GRAVEL %LET I ' IE NW.11.15 IE NW.9.W IE S=-0.33 12' CONIC SR, IE • 5.2 to CONC E, IE . 8.4 IE SN=9.43 MM132 GOT.-0.33 CB5248 12• CONIC W, E . 5.7 le CONIC W, IE . 8.7 '4 ` IB• � RIM311.19 IE NE .28 MM.11.59 PoM=10.16 % SSAM1(M-DA) t / IE.11.49 IE SE.8.98 IE.-0.96 CB5152 IE M826 CB fl, RIM . 13.14 CS f10, PoM . 10.42 ,,Ll'P PoM 11.70 \ H o �1J �. CG5129 MH5154 MH1834 MH5133 PoM.1255 IE NE.9.06 8' PVC NE, IE . 11.7 4' M BE, IE . 9S y ' IE N 1.70 \ 6 BM / \•i �`•� 1' NR MM-12.74 MVIIS .26 RIM.11.67 IE S.9.75 4' PVC S. IE . 10.B �y" /�� J J HAUL NO %PES "BIBLE IE NE.8.85 CB5208A +} IE W 0.80 BSMN(,iavo) C E IE SE.8.88 W f11, PoM 11.39 �,,p .�N♦ 11 77 v 12, IE NW.8.71 BOT..0.42 IE NW=9.40 RIM=10.0 CS f2, RIM = 13.20 8' CONIC E, IE = 9.2 f2W C R CINNNELED BOTTOM Po N11.77 IE SN.BS1 IE W.9.40 IE.7.62 \ � SURVEY Vfl 8' PVC NE, IE . 11.5 ; IE S 1.57 4' OWN-UNK 72 a CS f12, RIM . 11.04 BUILDING CHANNELED BOTTOM �t�IK CB f3, RIM . 11.72 B' CONIC S, IE . 9.4 } 6' PVC SE, IE . 10.2 DO I _m 8 yNI5� EL 4• PVC NE, IE . 10.4 `RI fl, RIM . 11.79 RAW 1217 GRAM S TAX N0. 27032300407500 Su W PVC W, E . 10,3 E E 10.,n so• AX N0. 27 32300411300 S ey0 6 - 4' PVC SW, IE . 10.4 YD P3. RIM . 111. LTT 977 / 1��BBRBM/ ��m 3• PVC N. IE . 120 TAX NO. 270323O0406400 12 a CS P4, PoM . 1152 6• P✓c NW, E - 10.5 m f4, RIM = 12.49 50 25 0 50 100 _ 1 E7=501 / \ Louis Berger Scale Feet l ' Macket Page 400 of 456 Appendix C Pump Manufacturing Data DAYTON STREET STORMWATER PUMP STATION PREDESIGN REPORT 6/1/15 Lwl$Berger Packet Page 401 of 456 xylem Let's Solve Water N P 3153 LT 3- 625 Technical specification Water, pure Installation: P - Semi permanent, Wet Curve according to: ISO 9906 grade 2 annex 1 or 6N S ,zve � 338 Zt V4 r�r.uW U8 4" z-F11- 01P *2% N48PoSMtrr 9QToN(-) 858 d i Project Project ID FLYGT Note: Picture might not correspond to the current configuration. 2 General Patented self cleaning semi -open channel impeller, ideal for pumping in waste water applications. Possible to be upgraded with Guide -pin@ for even better clogging resistance. Modular based design with high adaptation grade. Impeller Impeller material m j Discharge Flange Diameter Hard -Iron TM 9 13/16 inch Suction Flange Diameter 250 mm Impeller diameter 186 mm Number of blades 3 Motor Motor # N3153.095 21-18-6AA-W 15hp Stator v ariant 5 Frequency 60 Hz Rated voltage 460 V Number of poles 6 Phases 3— Rated power 15 hp Rated current 22 A Starting current 101 A Rated speed 1155 rpm Power factor 1/1 Load 0.73 3/4 Load 0.67 1/2 Load 0.55 Efficiency 1/1 Load 87.0 % 3/4 Load 88.0 % 112 Load 87.5 % Configuration Created by Created on Last update 2015-02-04 Packet Page 402 of 456 xylem Let's Solve Water N P 3153 LT 3- 625 Performance curve Pump Motor Discharge Flange Diameter 9 13/16 inch Motor# Suction Flange Diameter 250 mm Stator variant Impeller diameter 75/16" Frequency Number of blades 3 Rated voltage Number of poles Phases Rated power Rated current Starting current Rated speed [h Project N3153.O95 21-18-6AA-W 15hp 5 60 Hz 460 V 6 3-- 15 hp 22 A 101 A 1155 rpm FLYGT Power factor 1/1 Load 0.73 3/4 Load 0.67 1/2 Load 0.55 Efficiency 1/1 Load 87.0 % 3/4 Load 88.0 % 1/2 Load 87.5 % t] Head 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 10.4 ft 0 9 8 7 6 5 25 186mm 4 3 2 1 QEfficiency 0 Total efficiency 0 64.6 57.1 0 2L 0 0 0 er 2 Power input 1 0 10.7 hp 9 8 7 — mm 9.47 hp 186mm (P ) tj SH-values 2 0 8 6 4 27.3 ft g.p.m. 2324 US 0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 2800 3200 [US g.p.m.1 Water, pure Curve according to: ISO 9906 grade 2 annex 1 or 2 Project ID Created by Created on Last update 2015-02-04 Packet Page 403 of 456 xylem Let's Solve Water N P 3153 LT 3~ 625 FLYGT Duty Analysis [ft] 23.0 22.5 Head 22.0 21.5 21.0 20.5 20.0 19.5 19.0 18.5 18.0 17.5 17.0 16.5 16.0 15.5 15.0 14.5 14.0 13.5 13.0 12.5 12.0 11. 11. 10.5 10.4 ft 10.0 9.5 9.0 64.6 8.5 8.0 7.5 7.0 6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 N25186mm 2324 US g.p.m. 0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 2800 3200 [US g.p.m.] Water, pure Curve according to., ISO 9906 grade 2 annex f or 2 Individual pump Total Pumps running Specific /System Flow Head Shaft power Flow Head Shaft power Pump eff. energy NPSHre 1 2320USg.p.m 10.4ft 9.47hp 2320USg.p.m. 10.4ft 9.47hp 64.6% 57.3kWWUSMG 27.3ft Project Project ID Created by Created on Last update 2015-02-04 Packet Page 404 of 456 xylem Let's Solve Water N P 3153 LT 3- 625 VFD Curve 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 P E c [h 1 FLYGT Head t] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-- 0- 0 0 0 0 0 64.6°0 0 0 F; 6 4° 0 0 64.6°0 0 64 6°0 0 ° 0 mm 0 55 Hz 0 0 Hz Hz Efficiency 0-Total efficiency 0 0 0 O H H 50 H gggg 55 Hz 25 186mm 0 0 Hz Hz z 0 0 Shaft ower 2 �] Powerinput 0 8 186mm (P ) 6 mm 55 Hz 4 50 Hz bb z 2 z 0 PSH-value t] 8 4 0 Hz 25 186mm 55 Hz 6 50 Hz 2 0 400 Water, pure 800 1200 1600 2000 Project ID Created by 2400 2800 3200 [US g.p.m.] Curve according to: ISO 9906 grade 2 annex 1 or 2 Created on Last update 2015-02-04 Packet Page 405 of 456 xylem Let's Solve Water N P 3153 LT 3- 625 VFD Analysis FLYGT n.] Water, pure Curve according to: ISO 9906 grade 2 annex 1 or 2 Individual pump Total Pumps running Specific /System Frequency Flow Head Shaft power Flow Head Shaft power Hyd eff. energy NPSHre 1 60Hz 2320USg.p.m. 10.4ft 9.47hp 2320USg.p.m. 10.4ft 9.47hp 64.6% 57.3kW4VUSMG27.3ft 1 55Hz 2030USg.p.m. 8.65ft 6.88hp 2030USg.p.m. 8.65ft 6.88hp 64.5% 48.1k1Nh/USMG23.1ft 1 50Hz 1780USg.p.m. 7.35ft 5.16hp 1780USg.p.m. 7.35ft 5.16hp 64.2% 41.9k1Nh/USMG20ft 1 45Hz 1520USg.p.m. 6.16ft 3.74hp 1520USg.p.m. 6.16ft 3.74hp 63.4% 36.9kVMUSMG17ft 1 40Hz 1230USg.p.m. 5.07it 2.57hp 1230USg.p.m. 5.07ft 2.57hp 61.4% 33.3kvWUSMG14.3ft Project Project ID Created by Created on Last update 2015-02-04 Packet Page 406 of 456 xylem Let's Solve Water N P 3153 LT 3- 625 Dimensional drawing Project FLYGT 56 3(4 REFLINE 38' (rowafflesrPM-r) 6 3/4 4T cfl O a 2i 121/2 REFLINE 33/8 221/4 141/8 4916 2' GUDE EARS m° 010' } z 00 --— i N I 21/ 8 O 25A rn1 MEW ❑Z — ❑Z 141/8 REF.UW -4------- k-- - _ BClTO3(4 (4x) Note: 6 Fdes IVttor o 19 5�8 ��t Obs) Purrp Disch U * DItvENSICNTOENDSCFGUDEBAJ;S 710 315 ° Dirr CrEl Ch�g w e W " SB " 081013 are ALTOCAD NP3153LT 5399 DRNMNG 019,6- 6605300 9 Project ID Created by Created on Last update 2015-02-04 Packet Page 407 of 456 :^. 9. Curve charts KPL.20".---.6.T.60.L H H [m] IN 15 4.5 14 4.0 13 12 3.5 11 10 3.0 9 2.5 8 7 2.0 6 1.5 5 4 1.0 3 2 0.5 1 0.0 0 NPSH IN [m] 40 10 30 20 5 10 0 -0 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 Q [US GPM] P2 P2 Ef[ [kW] [hp] - 40 — 5- 25 - 0— 20 - 25 — 15 20 — 5- 10 10 5 0 5— 0 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 Q [US GPM] 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 Q [ml/h] Angle 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 •, ___ E MWI MEMO , , Free passage [in. (mm)] 1.4(35) 1.6(40) 1.8(45) 1.9(48) 2.0(50) 2.2(55) 2.4(60) 2.6(66) Motor Frequency Rated speed Tube size Propeller diameter No. of Model [Hp] [Hz] [rpm] No. of poles [in. (mm)] [in. (mm)] blades KPL.20".15.6.T.60.1- 15 60 1165 6 20 (508) 11 (280) 4 KPL.20".20.6.T.601 20 a a N N O O 22 GRUNDFOS i%0.0 Packet Page 408 of 456 KPL, KWM or 10. Technical data n w Dimensions KPL Fig. 12 Dimensional sketch, KPL 50 G RU N D FOS i% Packet Page 409 of 456 KPL, KWM Pump type Weight H L D1 D2 D3 [lb (kg)] [in. (mm)] [in. (mm)] [in. (mm)] [in. (mm)] [in. (mm)] KPL.20".15.6.T.601 727 (330) 44 (1118) 20.25 (515) 19.29 (490) 15.35 (390) 16.94 (430) KPL.20".20.63.601 815 (370) 44 (1118) KPL.24".20.8.160.L 1124 (510) 56 (1423) 25.82 (655) 23.22 (590) 20.47 (520) 22.07 (560) KPL.24".25.83.601 1146 (520) 56 (1423) KPL.28".50.83.601 1829 (830) 74 (1880) KPL.28".60.83.601 1895 (860) 74 (1880) KPL.28".75.8.1601 2028 (920) 81 (2058) KPL.28".100.83.60.L 2138 (970) 81 (2058) 27.57 (700) 27.16 (690) 24.41 (620) 25.97 (660) KPL.28".30.10.T.60.L 1653 (750) 71 (1804) KPL.28".40.10.T.60.L 1719 (780) 71 (1804) KPL.28".50.10.T.60.L 2028 (920) 81 (2058) KPL.32".100.83.60.L 2403 (1090) 88 (2236) KPL.32".120.83.60.L 2601 (1180) 88 (2236) 36.44 (925) 31.10 (790) 28.35 (720) 29.91 (760) KPL.36".150.87.60.L 4739 (2150) 101 (2566) KPL.36".175.83.61.L 5224 (2370) 102 (2591) KPL.36".215.8.T.62.L 5313 (2410) 108 (2744) KPL.36".60.10.T.60.L 4166 (1890) 101 (2566) 37.38 (950) 35.04 (890) 32.29 (820) 33.85 (860) KPL.36".75.10.T.60.L 4365 (1980) 101 (2566) KPL.36".100.10.T.60.L 4563 (2070) 101 (2566) KPL.36".120.10.T.60.L 4761 (2160) 101 (2566) KPL.40".175.10.T.60.L 5930 (2690) 113 (2871) KPL.40".215.10.T.60.L 6591 (2990) 118 (2998) KPL.40".265.10.T.60.L 7098 (3220) 118 (2998) KPL.40".335.10.T.60.L 7495 (3400) 118 (2998) 44.13 (1121) 38.97 (990) 35.82 (910) 37.79 (960) KPL.40".120.12.T.60.L 5754 (2610) 113 (2871) KPL.40".175.12.T.60.L 5930 (2690) 113 (2871) KPL.40".215.12.T.60.L 7187 (3260) 118 (2998) KPL.48".215.14.T.60.L 9303 (4220) 132 (3353) KPL.48".265.14.T.60.L 9303 (4220) 132 (3353) 52.57 (1336) 46.85 (1190) 43.32 (1100) 45.66 (1160) KPL.48".335.14.T.60.L 10890 (4940) 134 (3404) KPL.56".335.14.T.60.L 12235 (5550) 141 (3582) KPL.56".400.14.T.60.L 12500 (5670) 140 (3556) KPL.56".500.14.T.60.L 13690 (6210) 149 (3785) KPL.56".600.14.T.60.L 14087 (6390) 149 (3785) 59.82 (1520) 54.72 (1390) 50.79 (1290) 53.54 (1360) KPL.56".215.16.T.60.L 12103 (5490) 140 (3556) KPL.56".265.16.T.60.L 12500 (5670) 140 (3556) KPL.56".335.16.T.60.L 13095 (5940) 149 (3785) KPL.56".400.16.T.60.L 14087 (6390) 149 (3785) KPL.60".500.14.T.60.L 14925 (6770) 156 (3963) KPL.60".600.14.T.60.L 15322 (6950) 156 (3963) KPL.60".665.14.T.60.L 17659 (8010) 160 (4064) 66.13 (1680) 58.66 (1490) 55.13 (1400) 57.47 (1460) KPL.60".730.14.T.60.L 18055 (8190) 160 (4064) KPL.60".800.14.T.60.L 18254 (8280) 160 (4064) KPL.64".400.16.T.60.L 15917 (7220) 158 (4014) KPL.64".465.16.T.60.L 18055 (8190) 162 (4115) KPL.64".535.16.T.60.L 18651 (8460) 162 (4115) 69.69 (1771) 62.22 (1580) 59.07 (1500) 61.41 (1560) KPL.64".600.16.T.60.L 19268 (8740) 168 (4268) KPL.64".665.16.T.60.L 20458 (9280) 168 (4268) KPL.72".665.18.T.60.L 21737 (9860) 171 (4348) KPL.72".730.18.T.60.L 23523 (10670) 171 (4348) KPL.72".800.18.T.60.L 24515 (11120) 171 (4348) 76.00 (1931) 70.10 (1780) 66.94 (1700) 69.29 (1760) KPL.72".930.18.T.60.L 26543 (12040) 171 (4348) KPL.72".1060.18.T.60.L 27138 (12310) 171 (4348) GRUNDFOS�i/ 51 Packet Page 410 of 456 KPL, KWM Installation dimensions 0 ' KPL 0 W The requirements for installation are shown in the table a below. See installation examples, fig. 14 through 17. W rt at OD C S M.W.L* [in. (mm)] [in. (mm)] [in. (mm)] [in. (mm)] 20 (508) 10 (254) 30-47 (750-1200) 39-57 (1000-1450) 24 (610) 12 (305) 43-55 (1100-1400) 55-67 (1400-1700) 28 (712) 14 (356) 51-69 (1300-1750) 65-83 (1650-2100) 32 (813) 16 (407) 55-83 (1400-2100) 71-98 (1800-2500) 36 (915) 18 (458) 59-100 (1500-2550) 77-118 (1950-3000) 40 (1016) 20 (508) 65-110 (1650-2800) 85-130 (2150-3300) 48 (1220) 24 (610) 79-134 (2000-3400) 102-157 (2600-4000) 56 (1423) 28 (712) 91-150 (2300-3800) 118-177 (3000-4500) 60(1524) 30(762) 96-159(2450-4050) 126-189(3200-4800) 64 (1626) 31 (788) 118-165 (3000-4200) 150-197 (3800-5000) 72 (1829) 35 (889) 157-181 (4000-4600) 193-217 (4900-5500) Minimum water level M H Fig. 14 Minimum water level, KPL pump M O M N I(� V Q� N O F Fig. 15 Installation dimensions, KPL pump, ACC installed 54 GRUNDFOS i%0.0 Packet Page 411 of 456 KPL, KWM Pit construction D/2 FT GRUNDFOS -- 59 Packet Page 412 of 456 KPL, KWM or CD -D n 0 M a sv 2D V*� p -t- 2D W max. 20 * C V* 7 min. D I I min. 4D C V*---w- e V*--AM— o + m 0 A D V*: 2.3 ft/sec (0.7 m/sec) for stormwater and wastewater containing particles. 1.0 ft/sec (0.3 m/sec) for screened stormwater and wastewater without particles Dimensions N H D (pipe dia. ANSI) [in. (mm)] [in. (mm)] [in. (mm)] [in. (mm)] [in. (mm)] T [in. (mm)] 20 (508) 79 (2000) 39 (1000) 10 (250) 79 (2000) 79 (2000) 24 (610) 94 (2400) 47 (1200) 12 (300) 94 (2400) 94 (2400) 28 (712) 110 (2800) 55 (1400) 14 (325) 110 (2800) 2 110 (2800) 32 (813) 126 (3200) 63 (1600) 16 (400) 126 (3200) 2 126 (3200) 36 (915) 142 (3600) 71 (3800) 18 (450) 142 (3600) c 142 (3600) 40 (1016) 157 (4000) 79 (2000) 20 (500) 157 (4000) C 157 (4000) 44 (1118) 173 (4400) 87 (2200) 22 (550) 173 (4400) 0 173 (4400) 48 (1220) 189 (4800) 94 (2400) 24 (600) 189 (4800) �' 189 (4800) 56 (1423) 220 (5600) 110 (2800) 28 (700) 220 (5600) 220 (5600) 60 (1524) 236 (6000) 118 (3000) 30 (750) 236 (6000) 236 (6000) 64 (1626) 252 (6400) 126 (3200) 31 (800) 252 (6400) 252 (6400) 72 (1829) 283 (7200) 142 (3600) 35 (900) 283 (7200) 283 (7200) 60 GRUNDFOS i%0.0 Packet Page 413 of 456 KPL, KWM Installation type This section gives an overview of installation types. The installation types shown in this section are only examples. For more information on suitable installation types, contact Grundfos. Fig. 28 Discharge above floor and with discharge pipe valve, non -return valve and ACC Fig. 29 Discharge above floor and with discharge pipe and ACC Fig. 30 Discharge above floor for low suction water levels and formed suction intake (FSI) Fig. 31 Discharge above floor and with concrete column and channel GRUNDFOS V� 61 Packet Page 414 of 456 Reroute Salish Crossing Drainage i to Dayton System Puget Sound ,. Dayton Street System ' Pump Station (13 cfs) and New 18" Outfall Pipe /i Add High Flow Bypass Connections (Two) From Harbor Square to Dayton System •yam' t• ,.. New Berm a �� • U Add Flap Gates to Outfalls ' t Add Weir to Existing Willow Creek '.' 10A ♦ Outfall to Function as Overflow Remove Existing Culverts (1) Willow Creek 48-inch CMP Pipe Rehabilitation �,• Eliminate WSDOT I\�l_IrITIF- System Overflows fl I�. Daylight Channel Excavation (1) Pedestrian Bridge with Culvert and (SRT) Tide Gate (1) Existing BNSF/Sound Transit Bridge Crossing I Approxiamte Location of Daylight Channel Excavation (1) L k F. # All• 5P Stormwater Oil Control and F '�V 1►?_� F Treatment System for wwML- Ferry Queuing Area Dayton Plug Pipe to Dayton System and Add Short Berm (0.5' +/-) Clean and/or Lower Culvert Sediment Pond Re -grade and Re-establish Shellabarger Creek and Willow Creek in New Location (1) n s —40 "00, r, ' : r - uree Esri i cubed USDA, USGS, EyX, GeoEye �Getmappin,g, Aerogrid, IGNIGP a d the � I Use ommu ity -a. - ,.� N Legend Recommended Forested Upland (2) Freshwater Emergent Parcels Existing Storm Drain Proposed Storm Drain/Berm Alternative Feet Forested Wetland Mudflat and Salt Marsh ---- Existing Channel - — Proposed Channel - = =- 0 162.5 325 Proposed Water Quality or Notes: (1)As proposed under separate Willow Creek Daylighting Study, Shannon and Wilson, 2013. Conveyance Facility From Science to Solutions (2) Marsh wetland designations are approximate and taken from Shannon and Wilson, 2013. R:\Seattle\001772 Edmonds WA, City of\2651211002 Dayton St SR104 Alternatives Study\Data Analytical\GIS 1 5-20-2013 Packet Page 415 of 456 AM-8226 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2016 Time: 10 Minutes Submitted For: Jerry Shuster Department: Engineering Type: Potential Action Submitted By: Megan Luttrell Information 6. F. Subiect Title Authorization for Mayor to sign the Second Amendment to the Interlocal Agreement with the Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed Forum. Recommendation Authorize Mayor to sign the amendment. Previous Council Action On July 1, 2008, and September 7, 2010, Council approved a similar Interlocal Agreement (ILA) to be implemented by the appointed City representative to the Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed Forum. Both of these ILAs were one year agreements. The ILA approved in 2010 for calendar year 2011 included funding for a Federal lobbyist approved by City Council. On January 23, 2012, Council approved a version of this ILA with an end date of December 31, 2013 that included $1,600 to pay for Edmonds' portion of the Forum administration costs but did not include a $10,000 contribution toward the Forum's Federal Lobbying efforts. On April 3, 2012, Council approved this ILA that included funding for the Forum administration costs and the Forum's Federal Lobbying efforts. On January 21, 2014, Council approved the First Amendment to the ILA that included funding for the Forum administration costs and the Forum's Federal Lobbying efforts. Narrative The current ILA expired on December 31, 2015. This Second Amendment to the ILA will: • Make it effective January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2018 (2 years) • Authorize funding for Forum Administrative Support up to $4,800 per year, which will be split amongst the member jurisdictions • Authorize funding for Forum Lobbying efforts up to $36,000 per year, which will be split amongst the member jurisdictions. Currently, the Forum has three official member jurisdictions, the Cities of Mountlake Terrace, Lake Forest Park, and Edmonds. This second amendment will build on the work done by the Forum members and the Forum's lobbyist. Over the past 2 years progress has been made on the recurrent flooding issue that affects Edmonds' residents located on the south shore of Lake Ballinger: Packet Page 416 of 456 • Mountlake Terrace completed construction of three culverts, one in 2013 and two in 2014, on the Nile Golf Course portion of McAleer Creek, the sole outlet for Lake Ballinger. As a result of these improvements, the lake level falls markedly compared to the pre-2013 condition. • Edmonds continued to operate a web -based early warning system so anyone with an internet connection can check the lake level at any time. • The Water Resources Reform and Development Act (WRRDA) of 2013 was signed into law in May 2014. This reform of the WRDA process will make it easier for Forum projects to get funded through involvement with the local office of the Army Corps of Engineers. • Mountlake Terrace completed the Ballinger Park Master Plan, previous site of the Ballinger Park Golf Course, incorporating stormwater and flood -related improvements. Mountlake Terrace worked with Lake Forest Park to draft a letter to send to the Army Corps of Engineers, requesting a meeting to discuss conducting an overarching study of the watershed. Topics for this study would include water quantity/flooding, the Ballinger Park Master Plan, fish passage/habitat, and water quality. This Second Amendment to the ILA has been approved by the City Attorney. Fiscal Impact The 2016 City budget has $45,000 for Lake Ballinger Associated projects in the Stormwater Utility Fund. The Councils of Lake Forest Park and Mountlake Terrace have indicated approval of this ILA amendment. If the Edmonds City Council approves the amendment to the ILA, our costs will be capped at $1,600 per year for Forum Administration and at $12,000 for the Forum's lobbyist. If additional jurisdictions join the Forum (such as Snohomish County, Shoreline, or Lynnwood), the cost per year will be less. There is sufficient funding in this line item to fund the administrative and lobbying costs in 2016. Since this amendment extends through 2017 and Edmonds does not, yet, have a Council -approved 2017 budget, the ILA has the following language in Section 6.1"...the financial obligations of each Member Jurisdiction to fund this Agreement after December 31, 2011 are contingent upon local legislative appropriation of necessary funds in future fiscal years...". Attachments 2nd Amendment to ILA for the Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering (Originator) Robert English 01/07/2016 11:37 AM Public Works Megan Luttrell 01/08/2016 08:18 AM City Clerk Scott Passey 01/08/2016 08:23 AM Mayor Dave Earling 01/08/2016 09:44 AM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 01/08/2016 10:05 AM Fonn Started By: Megan Luttrell Final Approval Date: 01/08/2016 Started On: 01/06/2016 05:23 PM Packet Page 417 of 456 Second Amendment to Interlocal Agreement for the Governmental Jurisdictions within the Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed Including the Cities of Edmonds, Lake Forest Park, Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, Shoreline and Snohomish County This Second Amendment to the Agreement ("Second Amendment") is entered into by and among Snohomish County, a political subdivision of the state of Washington, and the cities of Edmonds, Lake Forest Park, Lynnwood, Mountlake Terrace, and Shoreline, all municipal corporations of the state of Washington. RECITALS WHEREAS, the Agreement, expires on December 31, 2015; and WHEREAS, The Agreement, by its terms, may be extended for such additional terms as the Member Jurisdictions may agree in writing; and WHEREAS, the Member Jurisdictions desire to extend the Agreement for an additional two-year term commencing January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2017 ("extended term"); and WHEREAS, the Member Jurisdictions desire to provide for a new Exhibit D ("Operating Fund Allocations"), a new Exhibit E ("Service Provider Operating Fund Allocations") for the extended term; and WHEREAS, the Member Jurisdictions desire to amend the Agreement on the terms and conditions set forth in this Second Amendment. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, conditions and covenants contained herein, the Member Jurisdictions agree to amend the Agreement as follows.. Section 1. Defined Terms. All capitalized terms when used herein shall have the same respective meanings as are given such terms in the Agreement, unless expressly provided otherwise in this Second Amendment. Section 2. Extension of Term. The Member Jurisdictions acknowledge and agree that the term of the Agreement shall be extended by an additional two-year term, Second Amendment to Interlocal Agreement Page 1 Packet Page 418 of 456 commencing January 1, 2016 and remain in effect through December 31, 2017 ("New Term"), unless terminated earlier pursuant to the provisions in the Agreement. Section 3. Replacement of Exhibit D and Exhibit E. Member Jurisdictions acknowledge and agree that Exhibit D1 and Exhibit E1 to the Agreement shall be replaced respectively with new Exhibits, Exhibit D2 ("Operating Fund Allocations") and Exhibit E2 ("Service Provider Operating Fund Allocations"), which are attached hereto and incorporated by reference. Section 4. Method and Duty to File Second Amendment. Member Jurisdictions shall, upon execution of this Second Amendment to the Agreement, post this Second Amendment on its official website in accordance with RCW 39.34.040 and RCW 39.34.200. Section 5. Counterparts. This Second Amendment may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, but all of which together shall constitute the same instrument and, collectively, constitute the entire Second Amendment. Section 6. Conflict; No Further Modification. In the event of any conflict between the terms and conditions of the Agreement and the terms and conditions of this Second Amendment, the terms and conditions of this Second Amendment shall prevail. Section 7. Remaining Terms of Agreement. Except as specifically set forth in this Second Amendment, all other terms and conditions of the Agreement and Exhibits shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect. Section 8. Effective Date of Amendment. This Second Amendment shall become effective upon its execution by Member Jurisdictions, as authorized by each jurisdiction's legislative body. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Member Jurisdictions hereto have executed this Second Amendment on the dates indicated below: Approved as to Form: CITY OF EDMONDS By: By: _ Title: Title: Date: Date: Second Amendment to Interlocal Agreement Page 2 Packet Page 419 of 456 Approved as to Form: By: Title: Date: Approved as to Form: By: Title: Date: Approved as to Form: By: Title: Date: Approved as to Form: By: Title- Date - Approved as to Form: By: Title: Date: Second Amendment to Interlocal Agreement CITY OF LAKE FOREST PARK By: Title: Date: CITY OF LYNNWOOD By: Title: Date: CITY OF MOUNTLAKE TERRACE By: Title: Date: CITY OF SHORELINE By: Title: Date: SNOHOMISH COUNTY By: Title: Date: Page 3 Packet Page 420 of 456 EXHIBIT D2 OPERATING FUND ALLOCATIONS Second Amendment to Interlocal Agreement Page 4 Packet Page 421 of 456 Table 1 Service Provider Operating Fund Allocation 2016-2017 Allocation shall be equal percentage for each (current) Member Jurisdiction Jurisdiction Edmonds Snohomish County Lake Forest Park Mountlake Terrace Lynnwood Shoreline % of Total Original members 16.67% 16.67% 16.67% 16.67% 16.67% 16.67% % of Total 5 members 20.00% 20.00% 20.00% 20.00% Second Amendment to Interlocal Agreement 20.00% % of Total 4 members 25.00% 25.00% 25.00% 25.00% % of Total 3 members 33.33% 33.33% 33.33% Page 5 Packet Page 422 of 456 EXHIBIT E2 SERVICE PROVIDER OPERATING FUND ALLOCATIONS Second Amendment to Interlocal Agreement Page 6 Packet Page 423 of 456 Administrative Support Service Provider Needs Listing The Forum wishes to retain the City of Mountlake Terrace as the Administrative Support Service Provider. The Forum has suggested quarterly meetings at a minimum for the current agreement period with other meetings held as needed. The Service Provider needs listing allows for four quarterly meetings and up to four additional meetings per year. Duties Hours/Quarter Year 1. Attend and take notes at monthly Forum Meeting 5 20 2. Arrange for room reservations, provide materials for meetings 5 20 3. Compile and produce minutes from the Forum meetings 10 40 4. Generate draft agenda for the Forum Meeting - 3 12 coordinate with the chair and co-chair on meeting agenda 5. Coordinate e-mail contacts through the Forum distribution list 1 4 6. Assists with cities web site maintenance 6 24 7. Maintains documents record for Forum activities 6 24 8. Prepares News Releases on Forum updates 4 16 Total 40 160 Additional Duties may be added as needs develop Provider Support through the City of Mountlake Terrace Administrative Support for 2016 $4,800 Administrative Support for 2017 $4,800 This listing assumes services are provided at 40 hours a quarter are allocated for a total of 160 hours for each of the 2016 and 2017 calendar years. Each Member Jurisdiction's cost percentage of the Administrator Support Provider is listed in Exhibit D Table 1. Second Amendment to Interlocal Agreement Page 7 Packet Page 424 of 456 Federal Government Relations Service Provider Needs Listing The Member Jurisdictions wish to retain and employ a Federal Government Relations Service Provider, Johnston Group, for the term of the agreement period (January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2017) to provide federal government relation services for the Forum in order to increase its visibility with its congressional delegation and compete for federal funding. The Johnston Group scope of services is attached at the end of this exhibit. The total cost for each year of the agreement shall not exceed the amounts listed for 2016 and 2017 below. Government Relations Support through the Johnston Group: For 2016 $36,000 For 2017 $36,000 The Member Jurisdiction's cost percentage of the Federal Government Service Provider is listed in Exhibit D Table 1. Second Amendment to Interlocal Agreement Page 8 Packet Page 425 of 456 JOHNSTON I GROUP Appendix A Scope of Services The Consultant ("The Johnston Group") shall provide the scope of services listed below for the Client ("Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed Forum"). The scope of services may include, but not be limited to, the following activities: Support Federal Funding for the Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed Forum • Work with the Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed Forum to identify the funding needs and get detailed information about priority projects contained in the Forum's Capital Improvement Plan. • Review Forum planning documents and budget to ascertain the full range of Forum initiatives and determine which Forum projects are eligible for support through the existing federal funding programs. • Advise the Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed Forum about which projects ought to be prioritized for federal grants, directed federal spending via appropriations and authorization bills. • Assist the Forum with its engagement with the Seattle office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and utilize the delegation to bolster this relationship to result in funding for the Forum. Prepare and Support the Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed Forum within Federal Funding Opportunities • Advise the Forum about the creation of collateral materials for federal funding requests. • Work with the Forum to identify potential supporters for project requests and secure letters of endorsement. • Coordinate formal submission of appropriations requests, if applicable, and ensure compliance with all deadlines. • Work with Forum on the Water Resources Development Act implementation and seek federal funds to support the Forum's activities. Second Amendment to Interlocal Agreement Page 9 Packet Page 426 of 456 • Determine legislative tactics Congress may utilize to enact federal appropriations bills and implement a strategy to preserve funds targeted for the Lake Ballinger Watershed Forum. • Contact key congressional staff to obtain support for the Forum's federal funding requests and respond to any questions or concerns as appropriate. • Assist congressional staff in the preparation of letters of request to relevant House and Senate oversight, authorization and appropriations committees and subcommittees. • Monitor the budget and appropriations process throughout the year with regular legislative updates provided to the Forum. D.C. Lobbying Meetings • Schedule meetings in Washington, D.C. as necessary with Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed Forum representatives and Congressman Larsen, Congressman McDermott, Representative DelBene and Senators Murray and Cantwell. We also may schedule meetings with other members of the delegation as relevant. • Include the D.C.-based liaison for Washington State Governor Inslee as a part of our D.C. meetings and outreach strategy if appropriate to do so. • Identify and prepare key congressional staff for federal funding and policy requests and meetings with Forum representatives and elected officials. • Attend and facilitate meetings in Washington, D.C. • Prepare Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed Forum officials for congressional meetings. • Follow up to all meetings as appropriate. • Ensure that district and D.C. based key staff in each delegation office are aligned in support of Forum's goals. • Maintain regular communication with key legislative staff and elected officials throughout the year in support of the Forum's funding and policy agenda. • Ensure the delegation is prepared to engage federal Agencies in support of the Forum as necessary and as appropriate. Second Amendment to Interlocal Agreement Page 10 Packet Page 427 of 456 • Ensure the delegation is prepared to swiftly respond in the event of a flooding event to coordinate disaster relief and support. Involvement of Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed Forum Member Staff and Elected Officials • Issue monthly activity reports to Forum representatives detailing specific actions taken on the Forum's behalf. • Engage the Forum's elected officials and staff as necessary to contact Members of Congress and their staff as appropriate in support of the funding requests. • Counsel the Forum about locally -based lobbying activities to further the Forum's legislative and federal funding priorities, potentially including meeting in North King County / South Snohomish County with members of the federal delegation, participation in congressional sponsored events in Washington State and the continued involvement of district based congressional staff in Forum meetings. • Draft correspondence as appropriate for the Forum to send to Congress on policy issues and other legislative concerns. • Work to include Forum elected leadership in delegation based policy discussions as they develop and as appropriate. Delegation Engagement with the Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed Forum • Solicit support from each Member of Congress that we are seeking support from (i.e. Congressman Rick Larsen, Congresswoman DelBene, Congressman Jim McDermott, Senator Patty Murray and Senator Maria Cantwell) for our federal funding and policy requests. • Maintain year -long direct engagement with targeted Members of Congress and their staff. • Prioritize a visit to the Watershed by district congressional staff to get a firsthand look at the Forum's projects and have an in-depth discussion about the Forum's funding and policy needs. Grant Funding Strategy • Solicit support from the Governor and the congressional delegation for the relevant Forum grant applications. Second Amendment to Interlocal Agreement Page 11 Packet Page 428 of 456 AM-8225 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2016 Time: 10 Minutes Submitted For: Jennifer Lambert Department: Engineering Type: Potential Action Submitted By: Megan Luttrell Information Subiect Title Authorization for Mayor to sign a sewer easement for an existing sewer main. Recommendation Authorize Mayor to sign the sewer easement. Previous Council Action None. 6. G. Narrative The property located at 828 Caspers St. has an existing City sewer main without an easement. The City is obtaining a permanent easement (attachment 1) from the property owners of 828 Caspers St., since an easement was not recorded when the sewer main was constructed in 1959. On September 11, 2015, the owners of 828 Caspers St. recorded an easement benefitting the City prior to completion of the City easement approval process. Therefore, the City is relinquishing the easement recorded in September and replacing it with the subject easement. Attachments Attachment 1 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering (Originator) Robert English 01/07/2016 04:45 PM Public Works Megan Luttrell 01/08/2016 08:18 AM City Clerk Scott Passey 01/08/2016 08:23 AM Mayor Dave Earling 01/08/2016 09:43 AM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 01/08/2016 10:05 AM Fonn Started By: Megan Luttrell Started On: 01/06/2016 05:07 PM Final Approval Date: 01/08/2016 Packet Page 429 of 456 Return Address: City Clerk City of Edmonds 121 5th Avenue N. Edmonds, Washington 98020 SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT RELEASE AND EASEMENT GRANT AGREEMENT Grantor: Edmonds United Methodist Church, a Washington Corporation Grantee: City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation Property Address: 828 Caspers St, Edmonds, Washington 98020 Abbreviated Legal Description: Section 24 Township 27 Range 03 Quarter NW - SEG'D FOR TAX PURP ONLY - CAAP ON N LN OF NWI/4 SE1/4 NWI/4589*39 OOE 564.76FT FR E LN 7TH ST PROD N TH S00*12 OOW 45FT TO POB TH SO4*19 10E ALG EXSTFENCE 290.34FT TH S03*53 50E 335.10FT TH S89*43 08E 305.97FT TH N TAP WH IS S89*39 OOE 328.99FT FR TPB TH N89*39 OOW TO TPB (EXEMPT PER ST OF WA REG #00994-001) LESS 0.44 AC & BLDGS ON TAXABLE ACCT27032400217101 Assessor's Property Tax Parcel No: 27032400217100 THIS EASEMENT RELEASE AND EASEMENT GRANT AGREEMENT ("Agreement') is made and entered into on the date set forth below by and between Edmonds United Methodist Church, a Washington Corporation ("Grantor"), and the City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation ("Grantee") (collectively "the Parties") with regard to the following: RECITALS A. Grantor is the fee owner of the real property described above, which property is burdened by a permanent sewer easement, having Snohomish County Auditor Recording No. 201509110731, in favor of the City of Edmonds ("Easement"). B. Grantee desires to re-record the easement to conform with City protocol and approved easement documentation, and has proposed that the Easement be terminated and released, and that the Grantor grant to the Grantee a new comprehensive easement as legally described below, and as depicted on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein in full by this reference ("New Easement"). NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the benefits to accrue to the Grantor herein, the Parties hereby agree as follows: Release of Easement Grantee hereby terminates and releases all right, title and interest of every nature held by the Grantee, its successors and assigns arising under or accruing as a result of the easement having Snohomish County Auditor Recording No. 201509110731 ("Released Easement"). The termination and release of the Released Easement shall be effective upon recording of this Agreement with the real property records of Snohomish County. Page 1 of 4 Packet Page 430 of 456 2. Grant of New Easement 2.1 Grant of New Easement. Grantor hereby grants and conveys to Grantee a permanent easement for the installation, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, reconstruction or replacement of a sanitary sewer pipeline and necessary appurtenances, over, across, through and below the following described property, and the further right to remove trees, bushes, undergrowth and other obstructions, interfering with the location, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, reconstruction or replacement of said sanitary sewer pipeline and appurtenances, together with the right of access to the easement at any time for the stated purposes ("New Easement"). The New Easement hereby granted is located in the City of Edmonds, County of Snohomish, State of Washington, is depicted in the drawing attached as Exhibit A, and is more particularly described as follows: THE SOUTH 15.00 FEET OF THE EAST 80.00 FEET OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. TOGETHER WITH THE EAST 30.00 FEET OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORHTWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. ALSO TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER; THENCE SOUTH 00011'21" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, 349.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89°09'39" WEST, 30.00 FEET TO THE WESTERLY MARGIN OF 9TH AVENUE NORTH; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 89009'39" WEST, 294.02 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 03051'27" WEST, 312.05 FEET TO A POINT THAT IS 45.00 FEET DISTANCE FROM, AS MEASURED PERPENDICULAR TO, THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, SAID POINT BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF CASPER STREET; THENCE NORTH 89039'00" WEST, ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER, 30.08 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 03051'27" EAST, 312.68 FEET TO A POINT THAT BEARS SOUTH 89°09'39" WEST FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 89009'39" EAST, 30.04 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. Page 2 of 4 Packet Page 431 of 456 LESS THAT EASEMENT MORE PROPERLY DESCRIBED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE #201509110730 AND ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT B. SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. THE CITY agrees to restore to substantially the original condition such improvements as are disturbed during the construction, maintenance, and repair of said utility or utilities, provided the Grantor, its heirs, or assigns shall not construct any permanent structure over, upon, or within the permanent easement. DATED THIS DAY OF 20 Accepted by the City Council dated day of 920 CITY OF EDMONDS By David O. Earling, Mayor Page 3 of 4 ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Scott Passey, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney Packet Page 432 of 456 Edmonds United Methodist Church, a Washington Corporation Philip A. Borgnes Chair Person, Board of Trustees STATE OF WASHINGTON) ) ss COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH) On this day personally appeared before me, Philip A. Borgnes, to me known to be the representative of the corporation described in the within and forgoing instrument, and who executed the within and foregoing instrument as Grantor, and acknowledged that he was authorized to execute this instrument and signed the same as his free and voluntary act and deed on behalf of such corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL THIS DAY OF , 20 NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at Page 4 of 4 Packet Page 433 of 456 N8939'00"W 343.56' N00 21 '00"E 45.00' S8939'00"E 298.98' c�j s`S0'/ N8939'00" W 30.08, I I I I N O Z O O O CA I ` N.E. 1 /4, N.E. 1 /4, r, i J J S.E. 1 /4, N. W. 114 rn I Iw CA to N I N 6� O o I Cn PARCEL "D" 30' A.F. NO. 9904015009 N89 °09'39 "E4 30.04' I I S. W. 1 /4, N.E. IA S.E. 1 /4, N. W. 114 I 130' ----------- LOT "A" S\ApR k2 �1pp15 S b 10 LOT "C" wA S89"09'39"W 294.02' P. 0. B. S89'09'39"W 30.00' S.E. 114, N.E. 1 /4, S.E. 1 /4, N. W. 114 SEWER EASEMENT A.F. NO. 8702100158 SCALE: 1" = 100' 100 0 100 EXHIBIT A EXHIBI T "C" SEWER EASEMENT IN THE SE 114 OF THE NW 114 OF SECTION 24, T.27N., R.3E., W.M. CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON JOB NO. 2014-051 a4 ORCA Land Surveying DATE: 9/9/15DWG BY. KG 3605 COLBY AVENUE, EVERETT, WA 98201 425-259-3400 FAX 425-258-1616 SHEET 1 OF 1 Packet Page 434 of 456 I W W I EA SEMEN T LOCATION EXHI BI T FOR EDMONDS UNITED METHODIST CHURCH IN THE SE 114 OF THE NW 114 OF SECTION 24, T.27N., R. 3E., W.M. CITY OF EDMONDS, SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON S00'11'21 "E 349.50' 7TH AVENUE NORTH - I o 0`o i rn 00 cs rn / cl: 56.00' 00 rn NO3'51'27"W W ih S03'51'27"E ;W p d 0') w o0 56.74' o rn^ o^ 0) 00 00 z C6 I e0 0) Z I cn Co O NO3'51'27"W - 312.05' Uj z z W W I °p cn cn i— o I gN W O W O WZ W� �Q O to I O �03'51'2 312.68' ' W C) Sao 0 �o 0o rn"� 00 0 00 \\ 9 PARCEL "C" zzviz PARCEL 4 15009 A.F. NO. 990 PF • 3 �; PPR g90 0""139 1500 P.F. NO. In. 0 owe I aw - , SCALE: 1 " = 100' 100 0 100 s4 ORCA Land Surveying 3605 COLBY AVENUE, EVERETT, WA 98201 425-259-3400 FAX 425-258-1616 -I� 0 00 ,S L EXHIBIT B JOB NO. 2014-051 DATE: 919115 Packet Page 435 of 456 AM-8224 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2016 Time: 10 Minutes Submitted For: Mike DeLilla Submitted By: Megan Luttrell Department: Engineering Type: Potential Action Information 6. H. Subiect Title Authorization for Mayor to sign a Professional Services Agreement with BHC Consultants for the Lake Ballinger Sewer Trunk Main Study. Recommendation Authorize Mayor to sign a professional services agreement. Previous Council Action None. Narrative The City issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) in December 2015 to hire a consultant to provide study and modeling services for the Lake Ballinger Sewer Trunk Main Study. The City received statements of qualifications from three engineering firms and the selection committee selected BHC Consultants based on their qualifications and experience in accordance with the City's consultant selection policy. This project will be divided into two phases. The first phase will provide an assessment of the existing 24-inch concrete sewer trunk main that is located west of Lake Ballinger and also the 30-inch sewer trunk main located south of Lake Ballinger. These pipes are currently owned and maintained by the City of Edmonds and based on the 2013 Sanitary Sewer Comprehensive Plan, are nearing their flow limit capacities and will need to be upsized in the future. In addition, even though the City owns and maintains both pipes, other jurisdictions also convey sewer flows through these systems as follows: • The west trunk main conveys flows from the City of Edmonds, Olympic View Water Sewer District, the City of Mountlake Terrace, and in some very high flow events, the City of Lynnwood. • The southern trunk main conveys flows from the City of Mountlake Terrace and from the City of Edmonds. The first phase of the study will help the City verify the amount of effluent that comes from each respective jurisdiction so that discussions between all these entities can begin and an interlocal agreement can be drafted between all entities as to cost sharing for maintenance of the current system, and also cost sharing of any future designs, studies, repairs, upgrades, and realignments. It is estimated the first phase of the project will cost $165,000 and the second phase $135,000 making the total cost approximately $300,000. Packet Page 436 of 456 The first phase will include: • The flow study and basin analysis for the west and south trunk pipes to determine the existing flow conditions, and flow split by jurisdiction • An alternative analysis to determine future needs by all jurisdictions, viability of upgrading the pipe at its current alignment or if other alternative alignments are feasible, • A preliminary Design Report summarizing the findings. The second phase will include: • Finalization of alternatives • Preliminary Geotechnical Services • Preliminary Environmental Permitting Requirements • Cultural Resources Investigation for possible historic site impacts • Final Design Report summarizing the findings. The second phase will be paid for by the various entities based on the interlocal agreement that will be drafted after the completion of the first phase and will not start until the interlocal agreement is in place. Inbox Engineering (Originator) Public Works City Clerk Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Final Approval Date: 01/08/2016 Form Review Reviewed By Date Robert English 01/07/2016 04:58 PM Megan Luttrell 01/08/2016 08:18 AM Scott Passey 01/08/2016 08:23 AM Dave Earling 01/08/2016 09:42 AM Scott Passey 01/08/2016 10:05 AM Started On: 01/06/2016 04:20 PM Packet Page 437 of 456 AM-8233 6. I. City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2O16 Time: 10 Minutes Submitted By: Robert English Department: Engineering Type: Potential Action Information Subiect Title Authorization for Mayor to sign and accept right of way documents from Edmonds School District for the Madronna Walkway Project. Recommendation Authorize Mayor to sign and accept right of way documents. Previous Council Action None. Narrative Construction of the 236th St Walkway is expected to begin in Summer, 2016. A requirement of the Federal funds obtained for this project is that sidewalk be constructed along the Madrona School driveway in order to create a pedestrian accessible link to the school buildings. This driveway is on District property, so a Temporary Construction Easement (Attachment 1) is necessary to complete the improvements. The City's stormwater code requires that this project provide detention of stormwater. Due to site topography, the most ideal spot to install these facilities is under 236th St in front of the school. The District owns half of 236th St at this location and has agreed to grant a Permanent Drainage Easement (Attachment 2) for the new stormwater detention system. The Edmonds School District has agreed to donate both easements for this project and the easements are scheduled to be approved by their Board on January 12th. Attachments Attachment 1 - Temporary Construction Easement Attachment 2 - Permanent Drainage Easement Attachment 3 - Location Map Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering (Originator) Robert English 01/07/2016 02:33 PM Public Works Megan Luttrell 01/08/2016 08:18 AM City Clerk Scott Passey 01/08/2016 08:23 AM Mayor Dave Earling 01/08/2016 09:42 AM Packet Page 438 of 456 Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 01/08/2016 10:05 AM Form Started By: Robert English Started On: 01/07/2016 01:25 PM Final Approval Date: 01/08/2016 Packet Page 439 of 456 -� City of Edmonds TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT Madrona Elementary Walkway Property Address: 9300 236t" St SW. Edmonds, WA 98020 Assessor's Property Tax Parcel No.: 27033600404600 Property Owner: Edmonds School District #15 The undersigned, Edmonds School District #15, for themselves and for their heirs, successors and assigns, hereafter together referred to as "GRANTOR(S)", for and in consideration of the promises set forth below and the improvements to the City's Madrona Elementary Walkway Project, hereby convey and grant to the City of Edmonds, a Municipal Corporation, and its successors and assigns, hereafter together referred to as "the City", a temporary, non-exclusive easement (the "Temporary Construction Easement") over, under, in, along, across and upon the GRANTOR(S)' property as depicted in Exhibit A, attached hereto and by this reference made a part hereof (the "Temporary Easement Area"), for the purpose of sidewalk construction. Work will include installation of sidewalk, curb ramps, and incidental items necessary to restore the property to a condition similar to its previous state. All costs of this work shall be completely borne by the City. The GRANTOR(S) and the City, by accepting and signing this document, mutually convenant and agree as follows: 1. The City shall upon completion of the work, remove all construction debris and restore the surface of the above -described property to substantially its original condition, except as modified by the subject project. 2. Access to the GRANTOR(S)' property shall be maintained at all times during the City's Madrona Elementary Walkway Project. 3. This Temporary Construction Easement shall commence upon the date this Agreement is signed by both parties and shall terminate and expire upon the City's final acceptance of this project by the Edmonds City Council. No major construction works shall occur between the first and last days of school during any school year as defined by the Edmonds School District. 4. Upon the expiration of the term of this Temporary Construction Easement, all of the rights and benefits of the City in, to and under this Agreement with respect to the Temporary Construction Easement shall automatically terminate and be of no further force and effect. The sidewalk, curb ramps and all appurtenances thereof, constructed pursuant to this Agreement shall be owned and maintained by the Edmonds School District #15. Packet Page 440 of 456 DATED this day of 120 Owner(s) Name— PRINTED Owner(s) — SIGNATURE Phone Number (Optional ACCEPTED BY: City of Edmonds Dave Earling, Mayor Date STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH ) On this day of , 201, before me personally appeared , to me known to be the duly authorized representative of the Edmonds School District #15 and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he/she signed the same as a free and voluntary act and deed on behalf of the Edmonds School District #15, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL THIS _ DAY OF , 20 NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at Packet Page 441 of 456 EXHIBIT A PARCEL NO.27033600404600 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT THAT PORTION OF THE HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED PARCEL "A", DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL "A", - THENCE SOUTH 02000' 11 " WEST ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID PARCEL "A", 30.00 FEET TO ALINE THAT IS 30.00 FEET SOUTH OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL "A", - THENCE NORTH 88° 36' 32" WEST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE, 23.42 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 88° 36' 32" WEST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE, 27.62 FEET,• THENCE SOUTH 35° 00' 55" WEST, 144.45 FEET,• THENCE SOUTH 48° 06' 27" WEST, 42.58 FEET, - THENCE SOUTH 07° 43' 32" WEST, 24.03 FEET, THENCE SOUTH 82° 21 ' 19" EAST, 40.92 FEET - THENCE NORTH 160 32' 06" EAST, 46.41 FEET, THENCE NORTH 35° 00' 55" EAST, 159.74 FEET TO SAID PARALLEL LINE AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 5490 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. PARCEL 'A".- (PER STEWART TITLE COMPANY ORDER NO. 01148-40501, DATED FEBRUARY 19, 2015) THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. 27033600404600 TCEdocx Page 1 of 2 KPG IACOM - SEA I l E �pREA �::•oF AS ' Q r �= L•EZ 48754 LAso 1zr2glzv(s Packet Page 442 of 456 SE 1 /4, SEC. 36, T. 27 N., R. 3 E., W.M. z cn _ _PROPERTY LINE N 0 PROPOSED UTILITY EASEMENT o ro PROPOSED RIGHT OF WAY LINE NE1/4 OF SE1/4 SEC 36 T 27N R3E TAX LOT NUMBER 27033600404600 Oct �5 W ,V. y[ TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT AREA = 5490 S.F.f x ml z c>I W Q I � p Z -=i 04 of EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY D 236TH ST SW EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY � 27.62' - TPOB r' EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY _ 23.42' I I� I�o 0 N O N F-- G.) I ~ N 1 �I z W (ri Q ' � Z Q W W � Z Iof _ Of WO co 00 W d F C Of ID CD w 00 U W p d w I I I DATE:12/28/2015 Page 2 of 2 FILE: 27033600404600 TCE.DWG KPG'r EXHIBIT "A" 753901Ave N 2502JeBe.,Ave PARCEL 27033600404600 Seaflle, WA 98109 Tacoma, WA 98402 www.kpg.com0 (253)627-0720 TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT wvm.kpg.com Packet Page 443 of 456 Return Address: City Clerk City of Edmonds 121 - 5th Ave. N. Edmonds, WA 98020 Grantor(s): Edmonds School District #15 Grantee: City of Edmonds Abbreviated Legal: Ptn NEl/a of the SEl/a of Section 36, T27N, R3E, Snohomish County Assessor's Property Tax Parcel No.: Ptn 27033600404600 UTILITY EASEMENT Property Address: 9300 236th St SW, Edmonds, WA 98020 IN CONSIDERATION of benefits to accrue to the grantor(s) herein, the undersigned, Edmonds School District #15, hereby grant(s) to the CITY OF EDMONDS, a Municipal Corporation, a permanent easement for the installation, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, reconstruction and/or replacement of a stormwater detention system, pipes, catch basins, and necessary appurtenances, over, across, through, and below the following described property, and the further right to remove trees, bushes, undergrowth and other obstructions thereon interfering with the location, construction, operation, maintenance, repair, reconstruction and/or replacement of said stormwater detention system, pipes, catch basins, and necessary appurtenances, together with the right of access to the easement at any time for the stated purposes. The easement hereby granted is located in the COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON, and is more particularly described as the following property: See Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof. THE CITY agrees to restore to substantially the original condition such improvements as are disturbed during the construction, maintenance, and repair of said utility or utilities, provided the grantor(s), their heirs, or assigns shall not construct any permanent structure over, upon, or within the permanent easement. DATED THIS DAY OF Edmonds School District #15 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH) 20 On this day of , 201_, personally appeared before me , to me known to be the duly authorized representative of the Edmonds School District #15, and who executed the within and foregoing instrument and acknowledged that they signed the same as their free and voluntary act and deed on behalf of the Edmonds School District #15, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned. UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL THIS DAY OF , 20 NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington, residing at Packet Page 444 of 456 EXHIBIT "A" PARCEL NO. 27033600404600 UTILITY EASEMENT THE NORTH 30.00 FEET OF THE EAST 150.00 FEET OF THE HEREINAFTER DESCRIBED PARCEL A". CONTAINING 4500 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. PARCEL "A" (PER STEWART TITLE COMPANY ORDER NO. 01148-40501, DATED FEBRUARY 19, 2015) THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 27 NORTH, RANGE 3 EAST, RECORDS OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY, WASHINGTON. SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF SNOHOMISH, STATE OF WASHINGTON. 111jr- •� I j I . � v 27033600404600 ESMT.docx Page 1 of2 KPGG I;-1COMA• St Af i[ I. Packet Page 445 of 456 SE 1/4, SEC. 36, T. 27 N., R. 3 E., W.M. NE1/4 OF SE1/4 SEC 36 T 27N R3E TAX LOT NUMBER 27033600404600 UTILITY EASEMENT AREA = 4500 S.F.f cn 0 0 C z cn EASEMENT FOR WATER MAINS #9210080388 \� OLYMPIC VIEW WATER AND SEWER DISTRICT `I PROPERTY LINE EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY — m 92ND AVE W xl Z N i w N o Z CO < I2 O DATE:12/28/2015 Page 2 of 2 FILE: 27033600404600 ESMT.DWG KPCIk EXHIBIT "A" Seaft,09 25023effew ,09840 PARCEL 27033600404600 Seattle, WA 96109 Tacoma, WA 96402 www.og.com (253)627-0720 UTILITY EASEMENT www.kpg.com Packet Page 446 of 456 T. 27 N, R. 3 E, WM LEGEND MIC MONUMENT IN CASE SECTION LINE PROPERTY LINE EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE EXISTING RIGHT-OF-WAY CENTERLINE PROPOSED ACCESS AND UTILITIES EASEMENT CALCULATED LINE — - - — TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT EXISTING STORM LINE t PROPOSED STORM LINE 0 10 20 40 60 SCALE IN FEET SE 1/4 SEC 36 FOUND MON IN CASE Lu ;t 4"X4" CONC POST WITH INV. NAIL > E 1/4 CORNER, 36-27-3 a 0 z N PROPOSED ACCESS AND UTILITIES EASEMENT r' I :r y I •'i <rN �''� Ale v? S 8221'19" E �'- 40.92' PERMANENT � EASEMENT CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT 4,500 5,490 SIDEWALK RAMPS PROPOSED SIDEWALK z Z ¢w¢ cna aw¢ } o U ~ K Q J CZ � � PROPOSED SIDEWALK e AM-8235 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2016 Time: 10 Minutes Submitted For: Bertrand Hauss Department: Engineering Type: Potential Action Submitted By: Megan Luttrell Information 6. J. Subiect Title Authorization for Mayor to sign the TIB Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement for the 238th St. SW Walkway from Highway 99 to SR-104 Recommendation Authorize Mayor to sign the TIB Fuel Tax Grant Distribution Agreement. Previous Council Action None. Narrative This project will construct approximately 1,000 feet of new sidewalk on the north side of 238th Street between Highway 99 and SR-104. All pedestrian curb ramps will be upgraded to meet the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards. A mid -block pedestrian crossing with solar -powered flashing beacons will be added to provide a safer crossing for pedestrians. This segment of 238 th Street is served by Community Transit and the project will provide a continuous sidewalk between Highway 99 and SR-104. The project is in the 2015 Transportation Comprehensive Plan. A State Transportation Improvement Board (TIB) grant in the amount of $372,300 was secured to complete the project (design and construction phases). The City will provide $118,700 in matching funds from the Stormwater Utility Fund to pay for stormwater improvements that will be constructed with the project. The preliminary total project cost is estimated to be $491,000. A budget amendment will be processed to program the grant revenue, stormwater funds and 2016 anticipated expenditures. The design phase will begin in 2016 with construction anticipated to begin in 2017. Attachments TIB Agreement Project May Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering (Originator) Robert English 01/07/2016 03:23 PM Public Works Megan Luttrell 01/08/2016 08:18 AM Packet Page 448 of 456 City Clerk Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Final Approval Date: 01/08/2016 Scott Passey Dave Earling Scott Passey O1/08/2016 08:23 AM O1/08/2016 09:44 AM O1/08/2016 10:05 AM Started On: 01/07/2016 01:28 PM Packet Page 449 of 456 Washington State Transportation Improvement Board P-P-139(P02)-1 Fuel Tax Grant Agreement City of Edmonds P-P-139(P02)-1 238th Street SW SR99toSR104 STATE OF WASHINGTON TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT BOARD AND City of Edmonds AGREEMENT THIS GRANT AGREEMENT (hereinafter "Agreement") for the 238th Street SW, SR 99 to SR 104 (hereinafter "Project") is entered into by the WASHINGTON STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT BOARD (hereinafter "TIB") and City of Edmonds, a political subdivision of the State of Washington (hereinafter "RECIPIENT"). 1.0 PURPOSE TIB hereby grants funds in the amount of $372,300 for the project specified above, pursuant to terms contained in the RECIPIENT'S Grant Application, supporting documentation, chapter 47.26 RCW, title 479 WAC, and the terms and conditions listed below. 2.0 SCOPE AND BUDGET The Project Scope and Budget are initially described in RECIPIENT's Grant Application and incorporated by reference into this Agreement. Scope and Budget will be further developed and refined, but not substantially altered during the Design, Bid Authorization and Construction Phases. Any material alterations to the original Project Scope or Budget as initially described in the Grant Application must be authorized by TIB in advance by written amendment. 3.0 PROJECT DOCUMENTATION TIB requires RECIPIENT to make reasonable progress and submit timely Project documentation as applicable throughout the Project. Upon RECIPIENT's submission of each Project document to TIB, the terms contained in the document will be incorporated by reference into the Agreement. Required documents include, but are not limited to the following: a) Project Funding Status Form b) Bid Authorization Form with plans and engineers estimate c) Award Updated Cost Estimate d) Bid Tabulations e) Contract Completion Updated Cost Estimate with final summary of quantities f) Project Accounting History 4.0 BILLING AND PAYMENT The local agency shall submit progress billings as project costs are incurred to enable TIB to maintain accurate budgeting and fund management. Payment requests may be submitted as often as the RECIPIENT deems necessary, but shall be submitted at least quarterly if billable Fuel Tax Agreement Page 1 of 5 November 2012 Packet Page 450 of 456 Washington State Transportation Improvement Board P-P-139(P02)-1 ' Fuel Tax Grant Agreement amounts are greater than $50,000. If progress billings are not submitted, large payments may be delayed or scheduled in a payment plan. 5.0 TERM OF AGREEMENT This Agreement shall be effective upon execution by TIB and shall continue through closeout of the grant or until terminated as provided herein, but shall not exceed 10 years unless amended by the Parties. 6.0 AMENDMENTS This Agreement may be amended by mutual agreement of the Parties. Such amendments shall not be binding unless they are in writing and signed by persons authorized to bind each of the Parties. 7.0 ASSIGNMENT The RECIPIENT shall not assign or transfer its rights, benefits, or obligations under this Agreement without the prior written consent of TIB. The RECIPIENT is deemed to consent to assignment of this Agreement by TIB to a successor entity. Such consent shall not constitute a waiver of the RECIPIENT's other rights under this Agreement. 8.0 GOVERNANCE & VENUE This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the state of Washington and venue of any action brought hereunder shall be in the Superior Court for Thurston County. 9.0 DEFAULT AND TERMINATION 9.1 NON-COMPLIANCE a) In the event TIB determines, in its sole discretion, the RECIPIENT has failed to comply with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, TIB shall notify the RECIPIENT, in writing, of the non-compliance. b) In response to the notice, RECIPIENT shall provide a written response within 10 business days of receipt of TIB's notice of non-compliance, which should include either a detailed plan to correct the non-compliance, a request to amend the Project, or a denial accompanied by supporting details. c) TIB will provide 30 days for RECIPIENT to make reasonable progress toward compliance pursuant to its plan to correct or implement its amendment to the Project. d) Should RECIPIENT dispute non-compliance, TIB will investigate the dispute and may withhold further payments or prohibit the RECIPIENT from incurring additional reimbursable costs during the investigation. 9.2 DEFAULT RECIPIENT may be considered in default if TIB determines, in its sole discretion, that: Fuel Tax Agreement Page 2 of 5 November 2012 Packet Page 451 of 456 �`- Washington State Transportation Improvement Board P-P-139(P02)-1 Fuel Tax Grant Agreement a) RECIPIENT is not making reasonable progress toward correction and compliance. b) TIB denies the RECIPIENT's request to amend the Project. c) After investigation TIB confirms RECIPIENT'S non-compliance. TIB reserves the right to order RECIPIENT to immediately stop work on the Project and TIB may stop Project payments until the requested corrections have been made or the Agreement has been terminated. 9.3 TERMINATION a) In the event of default by the RECIPIENT as determined pursuant to Section 9.2, TIB shall serve RECIPIENT with a written notice of termination of this Agreement, which shall be served in person, by email or by certified letter. Upon service of notice of termination, the RECIPIENT shall immediately stop work and/or take such action as may be directed by TIB. b) In the event of default and/or termination by either PARTY, the RECIPIENT may be liable for damages as authorized by law including, but not limited to, repayment of grant funds. c) The rights and remedies of TIB provided in the AGREEMENT are not exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law. 9.4 TERMINATION FOR NECESSITY TIB may, with ten (10) days written notice, terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, because funds are no longer available for the purpose of meeting TIB's obligations. If this Agreement is so terminated, TIB shall be liable only for payment required under this Agreement for performance rendered or costs incurred prior to the effective date of termination. 10.0 USE OF TIB GRANT FUNDS TIB grant funds come from Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax revenue. Any use of these funds for anything other than highway or roadway system improvements is prohibited and shall subject the RECIPIENT to the terms, conditions and remedies set forth in Section 9. If Right of Way is purchased using TIB funds, and some or all of the Right of Way is subsequently sold, proceeds from the sale must be deposited into the RECIPIENT's motor vehicle fund and used for a motor vehicle purpose. 11.0 INCREASE OR DECREASE IN TIB GRANT FUNDS At Bid Award and Contract Completion, RECIPIENT may request an increase in the TIB funds for the specific project. Requests must be made in writing and will be considered by TIB and awarded at the sole discretion of TIB. All increase requests must be made pursuant to WAC 479-05-202 and/or WAC 479-01-060. If an increase is denied, the recipient shall be liable for costs incurred in excess of the grant amount. In the event that final costs related to the specific project are less than the initial grant award, TIB funds will be decreased and/or refunded to TIB in a manner that maintains the original ratio between TIB funds and total project costs. Fuel Tax Agreement Page 3 of 5 November 2012 Packet Page 452 of 456 Washington State Transportation Improvement Board P-P-139(P02)-1 Fuel Tax Grant Agreement 12.0 INDEPENDENT CAPACITY The RECIPIENT shall be deemed an independent contractor for all purposes and the employees of the RECIPIENT or any of its contractors, subcontractors, and employees thereof shall not in any manner be deemed employees of TIB. 13.0 INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS The PARTIES agree to the following Each of the PARTIES, shall protect, defend, indemnify, and save harmless the other PARTY, its officers, officials, employees, and agents, while acting within the scope of their employment as such, from any and all costs, claims, judgment, and/or awards of damages, arising out of, or in any way resulting from, that PARTY's own negligent acts or omissions which may arise in connection with its performance under this Agreement. No PARTY will be required to indemnify, defend, or save harmless the other PARTY if the claim, suit, or action for injuries, death, or damages is caused by the sole negligence of the other PARTY. Where such claims, suits, or actions result from the concurrent negligence of the PARTIES, the indemnity provisions provided herein shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of a PARTY's own negligence. Each of the PARTIES agrees that its obligations under this subparagraph extend to any claim, demand and/or cause of action brought by, or on behalf of, any of its employees or agents. For this purpose, each of the PARTIES, by mutual negotiation, hereby waives, with respect to the other PARTY only, any immunity that would otherwise be available to it against such claims under the Industrial Insurance provision of Title 51 RCW. In any action to enforce the provisions of the Section, the prevailing PARTY shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attorney's fees and costs incurred from the other PARTY. The obligations of this Section shall survive termination of this Agreement. 14.0 DISPUTE RESOLUTION a) The PARTIES shall make good faith efforts to quickly and collaboratively resolve any dispute arising under or in connection with this AGREEMENT. The dispute resolution process outlined in this Section applies to disputes arising under or in connection with the terms of this AGREEMENT. b) Informal Resolution. The PARTIES shall use their best efforts to resolve disputes promptly and at the lowest organizational level. c) In the event that the PARTIES are unable to resolve the dispute, the PARTIES shall submit the matter to non -binding mediation facilitated by a mutually agreed upon mediator. The PARTIES shall share equally in the cost of the mediator. d) Each PARTY agrees to compromise to the fullest extent possible in resolving the dispute in order to avoid delays or additional incurred cost to the Project. e) The PARTIES agree that they shall have no right to seek relief in a court of law until and unless the Dispute Resolution process has been exhausted. Fuel Tax Agreement Page 4 of 5 November 2012 Packet Page 453 of 456 Washington State Transportation Improvement Board P-P-139(P02)-1 Fuel Tax Grant Agreement 15.0 ENTIRE AGREEMENT This Agreement, together with the RECIPIENT'S Grant Application, the provisions of chapter 47.26 Revised Code of Washington, the provisions of title 479 Washington Administrative Code, and TIB Policies, constitutes the entire agreement between the PARTIES and supersedes all previous written or oral agreements between the PARTIES. 16.0 RECORDS MAINTENANCE The RECIPIENT shall maintain books, records, documents, data and other evidence relating to this Agreement and performance of the services described herein, including but not limited to accounting procedures and practices which sufficiently and properly reflect all direct and indirect costs of any nature expended in the performance of this Agreement. RECIPIENT shall retain such records for a period of six years following the date of final payment. At no additional cost, these records, including materials generated under the Agreement shall be subject at all reasonable times to inspection, review or audit by TIB personnel duly authorized by TIB, the Office of the State Auditor, and federal and state officials so authorized by law, regulation or agreement. If any litigation, claim or audit is started before the expiration of the six (6) year period, the records shall be retained until all litigation, claims, or audit findings involving the records have been resolved. Approved as to Form Attorney General By: Signature on file Guy Bowman Assistant Attorney General Lead Agency Transportation Improvement Board Chief Executive Officer Date Executive Director Print Name Print Name uate Fuel Tax Agreement Page 5 of 5 November 2012 Packet Page 454 of 456 PROPOSED 238TH ST. SW WALKWAY FROM SR-104 TO HWY. 99 (CITY OF EDMONDS) 245 490 980 Feet Packet Page 455 of 456 AM-8241 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 01/12/2016 Time: 30 Minutes Submitted By: Scott Passey Department: City Clerk's Office Review Committee: Committee Action: Type: Information Information Subject Title City Attorney Annual Report. Recommendation Information only. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Jeff Taraday, City Attorney, will provide an annual report to the City Council. Form Review Form Started By: Scott Passey Started On: 01/08/2016 09:27 AM Final Approval Date: 01/08/2016 6. K. Packet Page 456 of 456