Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
2016-02-09 City Council - Full Agenda-1604
'4- o 90� AGENDA EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL Council Chambers — Public Safety Complex 250 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WORK MEETING FEBRUARY 9, 2016 7:00 P.M. 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-8321 Approval of draft City Council Meeting minutes of February 2, 2016. B. AM-8325 Approval of claim checks #218372 through #218509 dated February 4, 2016 for $251,567.08. Approval of payroll direct deposit #62055 through #62063 for $518,345.07, benefit checks #62064 through #62071 and wire payments of $482,483.86 for the pay period January 16, 2016 through January 31, 2016. C. AM-8315 Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Jeanette Nyman ($150.00) and from Gary D. Atkinson ($3,604.98). D. AM-8294 Confirmation of Athene Tarrant to the Architectural Design Board in position #3 - layman. E. AM-8296 Confirmation of Lesly Kaplan to the Arts Commission in position #7 - literary. F. AM-8324 Fishing Pier Rehabilitation Project Contract Award Packet Page 1 of 391 4. Audience Comments (3 minute limit per person)* *Regarding matters not listed on the Agenda as Closed Record Review or as Public Hearings 5. PRESENTATIONS/REPORTS A. (15 Minutes) Edmonds Sister City Commission presentation on the 2015 student exchange to AM-8322 Hekinan, Japan. 6. STUDY ITEMS A. (30 Minutes) Update on Planning for Highway 99 Area AM-8327 B. (10 Minutes) Proposed Amendment No 1 Snohomish Public Defense Association AM-8326 C. (30 Minutes) Update on the Edmonds Waterfront Access Study AM-8323 D. (30 Minutes) Presentation of the Sunset Avenue Walkway Project Survey Results AM-8316 E. (10 Minutes) Presentation of Bid Results for the SW Edmonds - 105th/106th Ave W Storm AM-8318 Improvements F. (10 Minutes) Presentation of a Professional Services Agreement with the Blueline Group for Capital AM-8320 Projects Construction Management, Engineering & Inspection Services G. (5 Minutes) Introduction to proposed amendment to ECDC 20.03.002 regarding number of days for AM-8319 public notice 7. (5 Minutes) Mayor's Comments 8. (15 Minutes) Council Comments 9. Convene in executive session regarding pending or potential litigation per RCW 42.3 0.11 0(l)(i). 10. Reconvene in open session. Potential action as a result of meeting in executive session. ADJOURN Packet Page 2 of 391 AM-8321 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 02/09/2016 Time: Consent Submitted By: Scott Passey Department: City Clerk's Office Type: Action Information Subiect Title Approval of draft City Council Meeting minutes of February 2, 2016. Recommendation Review and approve meeting minutes. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Attachment 1 - Draft Council Meeting Minutes Attachments Attachment 1 - 02-02-16 Draft Council Meeting Minutes Form Review Form Started By: Scott Passey Started On: 02/02/2016 11:43 AM Final Approval Date: 02/02/2016 3. A. Packet Page 3 of 391 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL DRAFT MINUTES February 2, 2016 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 7:01 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5t1i Avenue North, Edmonds. The meeting was opened with the flag salute. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Kristiana Johnson, Council President Michael Nelson, Councilmember Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Councilmember Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Dave Teitzel, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Neil Tibbott, Councilmember 1. ROLL CALL STAFF PRESENT Phil Williams, Public Works Director Carrie Hite, Parks, Rec. & Cult. Serv. Dir. Patrick Doherty, Econ. Dev & Comm. Serv. Dir. Shane Hope, Development Services Director Scott James, Finance Director Rob English, City Engineer Kernen Lien, Senior Planner S. Gagner, Police Officer J. Burrell, Police Officer D. Compton, Police Officer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO PULL THE FOLLOWING FROM THE AGENDA: ITEM 3I, FISHING PIER REHABILITATION PROJECT CONTRACT AWARD, AND ITEM 5F, CONSIDERATION OF THE CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE. Councilmember Nelson expressed support for removing Item F from the agenda. Although he is interested in getting the CAO done as soon as possible, in reality the document is not there yet and more time is needed to get there. For example, he submitted two new amendments that may bridge some of the disagreement; staff provided feedback and he is in the process of revising the amendments. Other Councilmembers are also reviewing the ordinance. The CAO is a very technical, 109 page document. He understood there are projects awaiting the adoption of the CAO that will be impacted by the ordinance and many people are anxiously awaiting Council action. At the same time, the CAO will last for ten years so it is important to get it right. If the Council needs an additional 3-4 weeks, that should be provided. With regard to the deadline for submitting the CAO that the City has missed, he has now heard from the City Attorney that although the City is not technically in compliance, it is not considered out of compliance in terms of grants or loans and the City actually has 12 months via an exception that the Department of Commerce expects unless informed otherwise. He summarized the reality is the sky isn't falling; the Council still has time and will not be penalized for spending more time to get the ordinance Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 1 Packet Page 4 of 391 right. He asked Councilmembers to hang in there a bit longer as he believed the Council was making progress and will have an ordinance everyone can be proud of that will protect and enhance critical areas, provide development flexibility and provide accountability. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL VOTING NO. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS TO APPROVE THE AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 3. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: A. APPROVAL OF DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF JANUARY 26, 2016 B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #218274 THROUGH #218371 DATED JANUARY 28, 2016 FOR $778,870.69 C. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN THE COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION AGREEMENT D. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN A SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH DAVID EVANS AND ASSOCIATES FOR THE 76TH AVE AT 212TH ST. INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT E. SECONDARY CLARIFIER NO. 3 STRUCTURAL REPAIR PROJECT FOR THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT F. DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ON AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE 2016 BUDGET FOR CARRYFORWARD ITEMS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED AND APPROVED BY COUNCIL DURING THE 2015 BUDGET YEAR G. HOURLY EQUIPMENT RENTAL RATES FOR EXTERNAL AGENCIES AND THE TRANSPORTATION BENEFIT DISTRICT H. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN PARK CONCESSION AGREEMENT WITH DOG DAY AFTERNOON FOR AN ATM AT RICHARD F. ANWAY PARK J. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH BHC CONSULTANTS FOR THE LAKE BALLINGER SEWER MAIN STUDY 4. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Duane Farman, Edmonds, resident of Seaview, thanked the Council for delaying review of the CAO amendments to allow for further scrutiny of staff s recommendations and provide an opportunity for public comment regarding the changes requested by Mayor Earling. It is very important to him and many others in the community to get the CAO amendments as accurate as possible as decisions can have long lasting effects on the environment. He requested RS-8 be included along with RS-10 and RS-12 zones in in review of vegetation and tree canopy requirements. The Seaview area has an abundance of forested areas as well as streams and wetlands; one of those areas is zoned RS-8 which deserves the same Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 2 Packet Page 5 of 391 consideration as RS-10 and RS-12. The City needs to protect natural vegetated areas in all residential zoned areas, especially where wildlife habitat exists. Phil Lovell, Edmonds, in response to the January 26, 2016 letter submitted by ACE, provided the following comments specifically related to the new community center under design at the current Edmonds Senior Center site. ACE's letter presents conclusions and recommendations that are inconsistent at least and disingenuous at most. The letter states, "build a 30 foot tall new community center measured from the current ground elevation, but raise the occupied first floor level above pending recommended guidelines because we want to assure adequate protection from sea level rise." What the letter means is that while ACE may respect the principles of Best Available Science, it considers current building height criteria alleging "view protection" to outweigh the importance of the City's response to this science. The City's Comprehensive Plan supports maintenance of existing public view corridors and the Shoreline Management Program calls for preservation of a 30% minimum lot width view corridor at shoreline sites. Neither the current Senior Center nor the proposed new building is even visible from any point within the Dayton, Main or other street level view corridors. Furthermore, both the current and future buildings are significantly blocked from any public view points in the downtown -waterfront area due to the taller office building immediately to the north, the Ebbtide condo building to the south and the Salish Crossing building complex across the railroad tracks to the east. The SMP 30% view corridor associated with the existing building site is provided for within the new design. He summarized it would seem that the citizens comprising ACE are standing on principles that impede both public and private property owners who seek development in a responsible and sustainable manner consistent with the greater desires and direction of Edmonds. He urged the Council to consider these factors during upcoming deliberations on the City's CAO. Dave Hunnake, Edmonds, assumed from the Council's action to remove Item F, the Council planned to uphold the Mayor's veto of the CAO. He expressed support for the veto for the following reasons, 1) there is accountability without having Development Services Director Hope sign off on everything, 2) the buffers should not be so restrictive that Willow Creek cannot be daylighted, 3) he was concerned with increasing the size of new trees from 1 inch to 1.5 - 2 inches when 1 inch trees grow better and faster than larger trees, 4) citizens should be allowed to remove trees up to 4 inches, 5) and the height for measuring in floodplains should be raised to 2 feet above. He urged the Council to complete the CAO. He lives in an area where there is a critical slope and they have delayed maintenance for nearly a year awaiting Council action on the CAO. Joe Scordino, Edmonds, retired fish biologist, recognized Ms. Hite and her staff for the commendable job they did with establishing a very open public participation approach in developing the Marina Beach Master Plan. It was an exemplary effort and staff was interested in reaching all user groups to ensure their concerns were addressed in the master plan. He recommended the Council approve the Marina Beach Master Plan as proposed so the City can proceed with the grant application process for the Willow Creek Daylighting project. He also commended the Council for its decision to delay action on the CAO and hopefully have public hearings and public comment as the document needs a lot of work. He email Councilmembers regarding issues he found that need to be amended in addition to the amendments the Council made in December. The CAO is of critical importance to critical areas as well as the public and should not be done hastily but rather in a manner that is easily interpreted and usable for the public. Michael Reagan, Edmonds, a Marine Vietnam Veteran, said he visits the plaque on the rock at the Public Safety Building daily on his walk from Meadowdale High School and doubted anyone visits it more than he does. Fifty years ago he joined the Marine Corps; 48 years ago on April 10, 1968 he came home from Vietnam. Two weeks before he left Vietnam, his unit was hit while in Cam Lo to rest; many people were killed including his friend Vincent Santaniello. The last thing Vincent said before he died was, "Mike, I just want to go home." He visits that rock every day to talk to Vincent. He referred to the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 3 Packet Page 6 of 391 Fallen Hero Portrait Project, displaying portrait of a mother holding her five year old daughter who is holding their 13-week old son. When the young man went to Iraq, she was pregnant; he never came home and children never got to meet their dad. The Veterans Plaza will provide a place for this mother to bring her children and to tell them that the City of Edmonds appreciates your sacrifice and your father's sacrifice so much that they created a place for us to come and talk about him, to talk to his brothers and sisters, a place that tells us they were proud of your father. He summarized the Veterans Plaza was a place for people like him when he walks late at night to go and talk to his friends and a place for the town to tell veterans they are proud of them. David Quinn, Woodway, a teacher at Edmonds-Woodway High School but speaking as a citizen, reminded the community of Mr. Reagan's tremendous work, beautifully representing each person who has made the ultimate sacrifice for our country. He recognized it was a permanent sacrifice. He referred to Councilmember Nelson's earlier comments about taking time to get something right. When creating a veteran's memorial, the necessary time must be taken to get it right, to get the sacrifice right to properly honor those who made a great sacrifice for the country. It is important to get right because it is beyond a place for reflection but also a place of permanence for the community, not just at night but also during events such as the Saturday market. He was proud to have worked with the community to get the quotes right which will also be permanent. Some of the design elements in the packet are not right, out of scale and proportion; the committee has considered this and will address it during their presentation. He urged the Council to consider the idea of permanence and to remember it is their responsibility to ensure the final design templates, the size, scope and scale of this tribute are exactly right regardless of how much time it takes. Rick Steves, Edmonds, referred to the Veterans Plaza, commenting he was speaking for people who may not agree with always thinking about our military. A large part of society has not had that experience although all benefit from the sacrifice and valor of the military and want to remember veterans' sacrifice. He agreed a veteran's memorial was needed but found it difficult to question the motive of veterans and military groups who speak for everyone in a way that can be misunderstood as pro -military rather than remembering our veterans. If the intent is to use City land and money to create an area that everyone walks by, it is the Council's responsibility to make it inclusive and something everyone can enjoy and celebrate rather than be a lecture. He feared if a careful eye was not kept on the project, people who are understandably passionate about it will make it pro -military rather than to remember our veterans and our fallen heroes. He asked the Council to keep a careful eye on this project because he walks by it daily as well as the 9/11 monument and he and many others have a different perspective. He saw no reason to have five emblems celebrating the difference branches of military; he wanted to remember the men and women who gave their lives for our freedom. To be effective, the Veterans Plaza does not need to convince those who have a vested interest in remembering the troops; it needed to appeal to the other half so they take it seriously and do not roll their eyes when they walk by. He concluded the emblems of the different military branches distracted from the memorial. Farrell Fleming, Edmonds, Executive Director, Edmonds Senior Center, spoke regarding the Council's consideration of the CAO. With regard to timeliness, he urged the Council to complete the CAO update process in a timely fashion. Take as long as needed to get it right; from their perspective it did not need to be done tonight but shouldn't be drug out unnecessarily over many months. They intend to begin the permitting process for the new community center in the coming months and need the COA update complete so the legal context of the permit process is clear. Next, he urged the Council to reject amendment #8 regarding frequently flooded areas. The agenda prepared for tonight which defines the implication of amendment #8 concludes with the following statement, "The Council amendment to delete the height definition change while keeping the requirement to construct buildings two feet above base flood elevation penalizes properties designing projects for the impacts of sea level rise and flooding by essentially eliminating a portion of the allowable zoning height. Under the Council amendment, a Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 4 Packet Page 7 of 391 building would end up being 27 or 28 feet tall rather than the 30 feet currently allowed by code." They want to build a sustainable structure that, a) abides by current BAS regarding sea level rise, and b) serves its community functions superbly. Their wish is to build a 30' facility from elevation 15' as their design team believes this will accomplish both objectives. Ultimately though, they will build with whatever the codes and permitting process allow them. There is a once in a lifetime opportunity to do this right, to give Edmonds a new community center that will be used by all generations well into the future and be a source of civic pride. They are eager to continue to work with the City Council, Mayor, administration and Edmonds residents to make this a reality. He reminded they are doing this because the City asked them to: the City's strategic plan recommended something good be done with the senior center, appointed them the lead in accomplishing this goal and they have taken that charge very seriously. Maria Montalvo, Edmonds, commented nothing in life is permanent as illustrated by all the changes occurring in Edmonds and as the people who have lost family and friends in war know. She urged the Council to be attentive to the people who are here who need to see the Veterans Plaza. She did not come from a military family or have veterans in her family; she came from a perspective where she did not see where it mattered to her. When she began meeting and working with military families, she learned the incredible sacrifice they make every day, not just the service members but also their families. One of the most impermanent things is their day-to-day existence; one of the fathers of one of their scholarship recipients will not be here in 6 months; it matters to him what is done today. The two year process of developing the Veterans Plaza has involved the community and the families, those are the people who need to know the community is thinking about them and understand they are not permanent. She said the best thing to do is create conversations because the only way people learn the sacrifices these families make is by asking questions and being in a situation where those questions arise. She urged the Council to open the community to being better citizens and better people and asking those questions by being in a place that allows those questions to be asked. Don Requa, Edmonds, commented the dog park is one of great things in Edmonds. It is utilized during all seasons and is rated #6 of the dog parks in Washington. He and his dog enjoy the dog park and the people he talks to enjoy it. He did not see that the marsh needed that much buffer. The dog park is a good thing and a lot of good things are being lost in Edmonds such as old houses that are being demolished and replaced with subdivisions. Rob Matina, Edmonds, asked whether the dog park was in jeopardy. Mayor Earling advised information regarding the dog park would be provided later during the meeting. Mr. Matina expressed his profound support for the dog park. Although he does not own a dog, he visits the dog park regularly; it is a spectacular asset for Edmonds. He liked how the dog park was divided into areas with and without dogs; he felt fortunate to have the opportunity to visit the dog park and enjoy dogs playing. If this dog park is #6 in Washington, he would love to see 1-5 as he could not image any better. He implored the Council to leave the dog park as untouched as possible. 5. ACTION ITEMS A. VETERANS' PLAZA UPDATE Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite recalled the Council approved a design of the Veterans Plaza one year ago today. The community group the Council charged with working on the Veterans Plaza has been working diligently for the past year with site Workshop on design development and defining the space; part of taking a concept to construction is design development phases. Concerns have been expressed during the past 3-4 months by a few citizens including Mr. Quinn and Mr. Steves about the size, style, design and welcoming aspects of the plaza. The committee met with Mr. Quinn and Mr. Steves a few times over the past few months and worked with Site Workshop to redesign the plaza; that redesign will be presented to the Council tonight. The Council packet includes the original design and the redesign. The Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 5 Packet Page 8 of 391 redesign includes some development of the original plaza area. In the original design, the community group was not allowed to include the plaza, only the garden area and the median between the parking and the plaza for a commemorative wall. Mr. Quinn and Mr. Steves were concerned that the design of the plaza area was very militaristic, a flat, hard surface that was not welcoming. The plaza has now been redesigned to break up the hard surface and add vegetation and seating that could be considered more welcoming. Following Site Workshop's presentation, Ms. Hite requested Council give direction to the community group regarding the revised design as well as consider a $30,000 contribution to help with development of the plaza. The community group committed to raising the $400,000 cost of the garden area and the wall but the plaza was not part of their capital campaign. There is fund balance in the Real Estate Excise Tax (REET) fund and this expenditure would fit with the purpose of those funds. Parallel to this process, the Off Leash Area group has also been engaged with the committee and raising funds to commemorate the role that dogs played overseas and during wartime. Brian Bishop, Site Workshop, explained since presenting the competition concept they developed for the Veterans Plaza a year ago, they have been working closely with the committee, Park staff and community members to refine the design and evolve it to fit within the space and the intended purpose. The design elements include the wall, garden and plaza. The current design is stronger as a result of the process that has occurred. He displayed an aerial, identifying the location of the proposed Veterans Plaza. He displayed overhead view of the original design which included minimal impact on the existing plaza, the veteran's walls on the north side, the veteran's garden in the existing planting area on the south and seating cubes in the existing plaza that contains smaller planting beds and columnar trees. He displayed an overhead view of the currently proposed design that includes the veteran's wall, plaza and veteran's garden. He displayed a bird's eye views of the original design and the proposed design looking toward the northeast. The original 120-foot wall consumed the entire length of the north edge of the existing plaza, from the access to the parking lot to the existing sign wall. In the revised plan, the wall is 80 feet long and includes modification to the parking stalls to the north without changing their dimensions to provide space for an evergreen hedge on the back side of the wall and circulation on the front side in the plaza. He displayed elevations of the original and currently proposed design; originally there were five walls depicting the military branches separated by water walls. The emblems on the original design were approximately 30 inches in diameter. The new design includes three primary walls, one with the five emblems which are about 12 inches in diameter, a primary sign wall and a quote wall at the east end, two water walls on either side of the center wall and a runnel and waterfall on the west end and a hedge on the back side. Mr. Bishop displayed the original design that included a large emblem and information on the establishment, motto and other information about the military branches with a runnel in front of the walls. In the current design, the walking area and benches provide a more contemplative feeling on that edge. The wall will be clad with natural stone, a range of lighter granites to address concerns that the original design was too dark and memorial -like. He displayed and reviewed details of the water wall, runnel and waterfall. Mr. Bishop displayed an overhead view of the original garden design, identifying the seating area with the memorial boulder in the center, garden pathways and seating walls. He displayed an overhead view of the proposed design, identifying the seating area, memorial boulder in the garden but closer to the pathway, space for a service dog statute, garden pathway, and northwest garden. He displayed a prospective view looking toward the garden from the plaza in the original design and the proposed design. Due to the grades, the number of seating walls was reduced in the current design to protect the root system of the existing oak tree. He identified elements of the garden space including the semi -circle granite bench in the Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 6 Packet Page 9 of 391 seating area, the memorial boulder, stone paving on the garden paths and a depiction of a memorial to service dogs. Mr. Bishop displayed a drawing of the original design of the plaza, essentially as it currently exists with the additional of seating cubes. The existing sloped plaza contains a series of trees and small planters and free-for-all circulation. He displayed the revised plaza design explaining the intent to provide a clear circulation space, a minimum of 20 feet, flanked with generous planting areas and a 7'6"-foot wide more intimate side path adjacent to the veterans wall. One of the benefits of the redesign is the amount of soil available for tree growth, approximately 10 times more soil than the existing trees. He identified a pathway to the sidewalk, seating cubes at each end of the planting area, and a series of benches flanking the garden space. He provided examples of the seating cubes and the benches that will be consistent with other benches downtown. Ron Clyborne, Co -Chair, Veterans Plaza Committee, was honored to be representing the Edmond Veterans Plaza Committee. After the Council's original approval a year ago, the committee went out to the community and regrouped. He noted in every community, people have lost family members in service to our country. This is not intended to be a memorial but a park plaza, a place the community as a whole can come and enjoy. The project began three years ago and the design was approved by Council a year ago. Since that original approval, the following vision for the committee and project was created: The Edmonds Veterans Plaza will be a place where veterans connect with each other, coming together to find ways to heal themselves and each other. They will find strength and comfort from opportunities to remember comrades and share stories about their experiences. It will also serve as a venue where veterans and non -veterans can engage in dialogues. The venue will be appealing and attractive to all members of the community who will come to the plaza to listen, share their own thoughts and will walk away with a greater understanding and appreciation of each other. Mr. Clyborne appreciated Mr. Steves and Mr. Quinn bringing their concerns to the attention of the City. Originally the plaza area was off limits to the design. Thanks to Mr. Steves and Mr. Quinn, they are now able to create three wonderful parklike environments, bringing the modified wall and garden together in a place where the community can gather. He envisioned people sitting in the plaza during the Saturday market. Mr. Clyborne explained presentations have been made to numerous organizations and service clubs over the past year seeking their input including three detailed meetings with the community leaders who spoke to the Council earlier. The Edmonds Veterans Plaza will act in partnership Edmonds Community College Veterans Resource Center; the plaza will be a conduit for help and provide information to veterans and their families, access to information regarding veterans services, family services, suicide prevention will be located in the garden in the eastern most portion of the plaza. One of the biggest dilemmas in serving veterans is making the initial connection; the centrally located Veterans Plaza, a place for quiet reflection, will draw many to it and many will learn about the services and support that are available. Mr. Clyborne explained over the past year, without even going public, the Edmonds Veterans Plaza has raised $282,000. Once the campaign goes public, he anticipated a substantially greater percentage of the public will be behind this project. He concluded unfortunately each day we lose more men and women who are serving our country. It is most important to honor and remember all veterans past, present and future. Ms. Hite thanked Councilmember Mesaros who has been on the fund development team for the Veterans Plaza, Councilmember Tibbott who was involved as a Planning Board Member and former Councilmember Peterson. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 7 Packet Page 10 of 391 Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she would like to see what will be written on the walls as it is not visible from the drawings. She asked whether the design would be ADA accessible and whether there would be ADA seating in the plaza. Mr. Bishop answered yes, explaining due to the sloping nature of the plaza, the pathway is aligned with the street and the plaza. Ms. Hite advised the words on the wall are in development and have not been finalized. That could be brought back if the Council wanted to see it before it moves into construction. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked if there was opportunity for input regarding what will be placed on the walls. Ms. Hite said the committee wants the branches of the military and honoring veterans past present and future on one wall. The intent is to have reflective quotes on the other two walls; a committee is working on a proposal for the wording. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled the Council initially approved this as a Veterans Memorial Park and one of the reasons was the park in front of the museum was not sufficient to honor those veterans. She asked where the names of the people who have given their life for their country will be memorialized on the walls. Mr. Clyborne responded the names of Edmonds veterans that were either MIA or KIA will be properly researched and accurately spelled and placed on a special veterans wall in the memorial garden. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas observed the memorial portion will not be on the walls but in the memorial garden. Mr. Clyborne said any and all memorial elements will be located in the garden area. He clarified the entire project is not a memorial. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked why the name was changed from Veterans Memorial Plaza to Veterans Plaza. Mr. Clyborne said the term Edmonds Veterans Plaza was used when he made the presentation a year ago. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled when the project was first proposed, it was Veterans Memorial Plaza. Mr. Clyborne acknowledged that may have been in the early days before there was an organized committee. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas referred to Mr. Clyborne's comment that this hasn't gone public yet; they have only gone to individual groups. Observing this wall will be owned by the public, she asked whether the public would have opportunity to propose additions or changes. Mr. Clyborne responded his reference to not going public was in regard to fundraising and completely to the media. He has personally made numerous presentations to Rotary Clubs, Chambers of Commerce, Edmonds Community College, Elks, etc. My Edmonds News has offered free advertising space but they have not yet used it because they did not want to go out to the general public related to fundraising yet. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she was interested in whether the general public not just community leaders had been able to provide input. Ms. Hite recalled the Council held a public hearing on the Veterans Plaza last year before the Council adopted the design. Revisions have made during the design development and they are asking for Council direction regarding the revisions. The committee is hopeful a design can be finalized in the near future; it would not be feasible for the committee to launch a public fundraising campaign and continue to modify the design. A design needs to be finalized to proceed to 60% and 90% design and construction. For Councilmember Fraley-Monillas, Ms. Hite explained a public hearing was held on the design on January 15, 2015; the request tonight is to consider the revisions to the design since the Council already approved the original design. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recognized the veterans were raising the funds but she wanted to ensure there was enough input from the general public. She commented the design looks very interesting and will be a nice addition to the downtown core. She relayed both her parents were WWII veterans, her father was in the Air Force and her mother was a Navy officer and 4 years ago she lost her 27-year old nephew because of what he did for his country. Mr. Clyborne expressed his condolences for her loss, noting this plaza will provide an opportunity to honor those relatives. Councilmember Teitzel complimented the committee for incorporating Mr. Steves and Quinn's input and revising the design. He said the revised design looks great and this will be a public space everyone will enjoy. He was supportive of the additional $30,000 for the revised design and asked if there was potential Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 8 Packet Page 11 of 391 for additional funding requests in the fixture for other design revisions. Ms. Hite answered in conversation with the committee, she did not anticipate any future funding requests; the $30,000 request was specifically for the plaza area to carve out the hard surface and add soil, plantings and seating. The committee has been very ambitious in their fixndraising and is very positive about the fundraising. Councilmember Buckshnis commented the new design looks much better. The dog park will provide $6,000 and potentially more once the campaign goes public as there is a huge dog contingency in the area. She asked whether there will be an opportunity to include memorial plaques on the benches. Ms. Hite answered the City has been working with the committee to provide the bench design used downtown that has a memorial plaque. The committee asked to have the opportunity to sell those benches first to those who want to commemorate someone. If they are unable to sell the six memorial benches, the City has a waiting list of people wishing to purchase a memorial bench. Councilmember Buckshnis agreed adding the three trees and the benches softened the plaza. She noted the cubes were nice but not really nice. She referred to the history of the plaza and did not recall it was ever Veterans Memorial Plaza; it has always been Veterans Plaza unless that wording was used at the Planning Board level. She noted many veterans including her family specifically visit the emblem of the branch they served in. Councilmember Nelson appreciated Mr. Clyborne's distinction between this being a plaza and a place rather than a memorial. He wanted to ensure this place included a memorial, a place for people to pay their respects as well as being a place for everyone to visit. He expressed support for including the Council in reviewing the quotes that will be on the wall. He was supportive of the additional $30,000. He questioned the use of the seating cubes and suggested having more benches instead. Mr. Bishop said the cubes are not included in the funding request from the Council; they are funded from the original project budget. Councilmember Mesaros said working with the veterans on this project has been one of his great joys. As the only veteran on City Council, a reluctant Vietnam era Army veteran who was drafted but served in Germany, he agree with Councilmember Buckshnis that the emblem plays a role in the identification for a veteran. He teased his fellow veterans that without the Army, the other branches would not have been as successful, noting veterans often tease, cajole and pay respects to each other. He relayed when visiting West Haven, Connecticut, last summer, he came upon a new veterans plaza that had just been installed. His first inkling was to find and stand by the US Army emblem. He noticed the other emblems in the plaza and acknowledged Mr. Clyborne would likely find and stand by the Marine Corps emblem. He summarized the incorporation of the emblems was an important element of the Veterans Plaza. Council President Johnson thanked the veterans who came tonight and those who spoke to the Council about the plaza. She remarked there were two perspectives to the plaza; visiting the plaza as a veteran and traversing the area. When she traverses the area, she is headed to the doors of the Public Safety building; the current design delineates the walking path. The trees and plantings in the new design are exactly where she wants to walk. The original plan included 9 trees and established shrubbery that have been in place for 20 years. She hated to see the existing trees cut in order to plant new and different trees. She recognized the desire to green up the area and soften the edges but did not support this design. The design needs to work for City employees and people using the Public Safety building. She viewed the seating cubes as tripping hazards. She looked forward to the completion of the project and questioned why the committee was asking the City Council for the additional $30,000 when their fundraising has been so successful. Ms. Hite answered the committee has a very ambitious goal of $400,000 - $430,000; their fund development materials do not include the funds for the plaza. They would like the Council to consider contributing to support the plaza. Mr. Bishop agreed the trees have been in place since the Public Safety building was constructed. Although there are no apparent structural problems, they have reached their potential due to the way they Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 9 Packet Page 12 of 391 are arranged and the available soil. Many people do not like the plantings in the planting pits and find it spotty and have asked whether there would be an opportunity to revisit the plantings. He agreed when coming from City Hall or some parking locations, there may not be an unimpeded paved area to reach the front door. He disagreed it was a convoluted path or blocked access and felt it was making better use of the existing space so it was not only circulation space but also usable, enjoyable space. With regard to the cubes being a tripping hazard, Mr. Bishop said the cubes are 18 inches high. He had more concern with the cubes when they were scattered in the plaza but did not have concerns now that they were consolidated to the edges. The cubes are an important element of the design to the committee and he felt the proposed location was preferable to the grid overlay. Council President Johnson agreed her concern with the cubes being a tripping hazard was in the grid overlay. Council President Johnson asked whether the soil and root system of the existing trees could be enhanced instead of replacing the trees. Mr. Bishop answered the existing planting pits are 5'x5' and the depth is unknown. The trees have not been evaluated by an arborist and there do not appear to be any long term problems other than their organization and their columnar nature. The intent was a different tree form to provide a more garden -like space. He summarized the replacement of the trees is more an organizational site planning issue rather than a tree health issue. A tree with a larger canopy likely would not grow well in the existing tree pits and would need to be replaced more often. Council President Johnson commented she may be in the minority but she likes the plaza as it is currently. One of the reasons is chairs can be set out to create a gathering space on special events like Veterans Day. She concluded there were advantages to both designs. Councilmember Tibbott thanked Mr. Clyborne for the work he and the team have done. He was amazed at how much has been done in the three years this project has been underway. He found himself caught up in the committee's vision and was excited the City will have an opportunity to enjoy the space and to find comfort and healing. He noted the drawings depict lot of green space and asked if any thought had been given to colorful, all -season landscaping. Mr. Bishop answered the final planting palate has not been finalized. The intent is to have an evergreen framework with seasonal color and variety, more of a northwest palate, not necessarily native but a combination of native and plants that would be found in northwest gardens. There is also opportunity to add additional color with annuals. Councilmember Tibbott asked whether the intent was to utilize the current hardscape and embellish it in some way. Mr. Bishop answered the majority of the hardscape will remain; the intent is to remove pieces selectively. The only patching anticipated is lighting adjacent to the wall on the north edge. Recognizing the plan for the plaza has morphed in the recent past, Councilmember Tibbott asked whether consideration had been given to how the design could incorporate additions in the future. Mr. Bishop answered one of the challenges with designing spaces that take on a memorial aspect is trying to find the right balance of design and space for further additions. The intent is a design framework that would allow additions in the future but there are no areas identified for specific additions in the future. Councilmember Tibbott commented the proposed seating arrangement was not conducive to conversation such as benches that face each other or a table between benches. Mr. Bishop agreed, recalling the intent of the original cubes was they could fit a couple of people. Given the slope in the plaza, there has been discussion whether to locate benches on the pathways that run through the three garden areas. It is not a key element to the design but he agreed it warranted further discussion. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether the $30,000 would be spent on the actual development of the plaza. Ms. Hite answered yes, the green space. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled the Council already contributed to the project. Ms. Hite agreed the Council contributed $10,000 to begin the design. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 10 Packet Page 13 of 391 Councilmember Buckshnis offered to develop a memo to contribute $5,000 from the Council Contingency Fund toward the $30,000 request. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas recalled Ms. Hite said there is fund balance in REET 125 that could be used to provide the $30,000. Mr. Hite offered to prepare a budget amendment to fund it from REET 125. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas preferred to fund the request from REET 125 if the funds are available and especially this early in the year. COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO PUT TOGETHER A $30,000 PACKAGE FOR THE VETERANS PLAZA FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLAZA, FUNDED FROM REET 125 FUND. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER TEITZEL, TO SUPPORT THE VETERANS PLAZA AS DESIGNED AS OF TODAY. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether there will still be opportunity for the Council to weigh in as the process continues. Ms. Hite relayed the Council's requests tonight, 1) the committee bring back the wording on the walls to allow Council to weigh in, 2) the committee possibly look at the seating design as proposed by Councilmember Tibbott, and 3) consider whether to include the cubes. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented other things may come up. Ms. Hite answered at some point the project needs to go to 90% design and construction documents; at that point changes require a change order and are more expensive. Councilmember Mesaros said the committee members have thought about the cubes a lot and they are an important element to the project. Councilmember Nelson said he would drop any questions he had about the cubes and expressed his full support for the design. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON VOTING NO. Mayor Earling declared a brief recess. B. MARINA BEACH MASTER PLAN APPROVAL Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite thanked the Project Advisory Committee (PAC), remarking several were in the audience: • Renee McRae — Interim Assistant Park Director, City of Edmonds • Keeley O'Connell— Senior Project Manager, Earth Corps • Jerry Shuster — Stormwater Engineering Program Manager, City of Edmonds • Rich Lindsay — Park Maintenance Manager, City of Edmonds • Diane Buckshnis — City Council, Floretum Garden Club, OLAE • Val Stewart — Planning Board, City of Edmonds • Rick Schaefer — Tetra Tech • Susan Smiley — Edmonds Floretum Garden Club • Joe Scordino — Community Member (retired NOAA fisheries) • Ron Brightman — City of Edmonds Tree Board • Laura Leeman — Community Member (Edmonds Moms Group) • Kevin Conefrey — Edmonds Arts Commission The intent of tonight's presentation is final approval of the master plan. She acknowledged final approval is pending any changes to the CAO that might impact the plan. The proposed master plan is in compliance with current codes. If changes are made to the COA in the future, staff will need to request Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 11 Packet Page 14 of 391 Council open the master plan to make changes. Official adoption of the Marina Beach Master Plan will be done with the Comprehensive Plan amendment later this year. Chris Jones, Landscape Architect, Walker I Macy, advised this is the fourth time he has presented the project. This has been a very successful project which he attributed to the public outreach effort by Ms. Hite, himself and the PAC, outreach to stakeholders, three public open houses, and an online open house. The final draft master plan in the packet documents all the outreach efforts. He displayed and reviewed the site context that illustrated environmental features that would impacted and the site analysis of manmade and environmental features. He displayed Stream Alignments A, B and C, explaining Options A and B, were presented at the first open house. Option A was eliminated due to the community's concern with its impact on the dog park. Public input at the first open house included: • Beach, views, environment, picnic tables, seating, walking, active/passive recreation opportunities • Retention of dog park • Parking capacity • Restroom facilities • Provide more habitat and educational opportunities • Willow Creek alignment and impacts • Dog and human conflicts. Dog impacts to environment Options B and C were presented at the second open house as Option 1 and 2. Public input included: • 75% of attendees preferred Option 1 • Like parking turnaround • Like restroom location — make it centrally located and/or include an additional restroom for dog park users • Prefer larger lawn areas • Prefer two overlooks • Separate dog and people best He displayed a drawing of Option 1, the preferred Master Plan and reviewed elements of the plan: • Beginning at the north: o Maintains large lawn area o Wide paths that circulate through park o Overlooks o Turnaround that accommodates fire trucks o Plaza space that will accommodate food rucks o Brick and mortar restroom adjacent to parking lot o Park amenities such as picnic tables, barbeques and benches throughout the park o Retains feeling of beach, driftwood, views, lawn trees, essence of place and o Uses natural materials o Allows for non -motorized personal watercraft such as kite sailing • Central section o Play area (reduced by 1/3) o Lawn area (reduced by 1/3) o Willow Creek with two bridges o Soft paths in the buffer zone • South side: o Second restroom (similar to Portland loo) o Natural play area Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 12 Packet Page 15 of 391 o Off leash dog park, consolidated slightly ■ Relocate agility area to the south portion ■ Improve fence and queuing areas Mr. Jones assured the dog park is not in jeopardy based the current master plan. He displayed the approximate Edmonds Crossing alignment, explaining they met with Kojo Fordjour, Washington State Ferries (WSF), who supports this project. WSDOT cannot say exactly where the ferry terminal will exist or how it translates to Marina Beach Park. Councilmember Tibbott inquired about the percentage reduction of the off -leash area. Mr. Jones answered pretty minimal, 3000-5000 square feet. Councilmember Tibbott asked the percentage reduction of the lawn area. Mr. Jones answered it was reduced by about 25-30%. Councilmember Mesaros referred to Ms. Hite's reference to potential conflicts with the CAO and asked about the potential conflict related to buffer size. Ms. Hite explained the buffers reflected in the master plan are 75 feet on the dog park side and 50 feet on the north side using buffer averaging. At her request Mr. Jones prepared drawings depicting 75-foot buffers and 100-foot buffers on both sides. A 75-foot buffer on both sides impacts the northern part of the park a bit and impacts the restroom, entrance to the bridge to the dog park and the pathways. Impacting the pathways means they will have to be soft surface and not ADA accessible. The 100-foot buffer greatly impacts the park including the park entrance, parking areas and the pathway on the north side, eliminates most of the play area, and limits ADA access to the park. If Council decides on a 100-foot buffer, she recommended opening the master plan and re- planning, as it would be difficult to configure an entrance to the park, would eliminate some parking and limit active areas in the park. Councilmember Teitzel relayed concerns he has heard about the dog park creating pollution issues for Willow Creek when it is daylighted by being 75 feet away. He asked if that was a real concern or was 75 feet enough. Mr. Jones responded as part of the master plan and redevelopment of the park, grading would occur so there is no runoff from the dog park into Willow Creek; runoff would either captured in a catch basin and treated or kept within the park. Likewise on the shore edge, grading would be back into the park and not into Puget Sound. Councilmember Teitzel asked whether the water quality of Puget Sound at the dog park is tested now and have there been any concerns. Ms. Hite answered it is tested by Snohomish County on a regular basis and there have not been any concerns. Council President Johnson asked what the water is tested for. Ms. Hite offered to provide a link to the test results on Snohomish County's site that includes testing for many beaches in Washington State. Council President Johnson said the daylighting of Willow Creek is of paramount importance to her. She appreciated the extensive public outreach to stakeholder groups and the formation of the PAC. This is a very ambitious project and questioned whether it was necessary to have two pedestrian bridges and two restrooms. She suggested taking another look at the plan and making it not quite the full Cadillac version. Ms. Hite said the master plan identifies optional items and she agreed some elements could be phased. Those questions do not need to be answered until the project reaches the design development phase. The master plan reflects the public's strong sentiment for two bridges. Similarly in discussions about having only one restroom, there was concern expressed with dog owners having to walk into the park where dogs are not allowed and having portapotties in the new park. Council President Johnson referred to a conversation she had yesterday with Ms. Hope and Mr. Lien about the buffers and the concept of buffer averaging for the north side which could work in the Marina Beach Master Plan. Based on that conversation, 100-foot buffer are required for this type of stream; Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 13 Packet Page 16 of 391 however restoration can allow a 25% reduction and there is opportunity for buffer averaging. It was her understanding that could all be accommodated within this park. She reiterated her main priority was Willow Creek; it is beautiful, natural area that can be enjoyed by fish, dogs and people. Councilmember Buckshnis expressed appreciation for all the work that has been done. She relayed Keeley O'Connell, Val Stewart, and Joe Scordino are present to answer any questions about the environment, shoreline, buffers, etc. She summarized Willow Creek was not being reestablished because that would go through the parking lot; an entirely new channel was being created hence the different CAO requirements. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO APPROVE THE FINAL MASTER PLAN FOR MARINA BEACH. Councilmember Nelson commented this is a great design. He participated in one of the public meeting and agreed it was very collaborative. He was fully supportive of the proposed master plan. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Hite reported the existing play area in Marina Beach Park has been removed because it was beyond repair. The play area went out for bid, the PAC was engaged in the selection today and the goal was to have the equipment installed before summer. She assured the play equipment could be moved to the new play area when Marina Beach is developed. C. SNOHOMISH COUNTY ILA AMENDMENT NO.2 Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite explained this is amendment #2 to the Conservation Futures funds for Civic Field. The Conservation Future funds require the City file and record a conservation easement. The language in the easement has been negotiated over the past week; she thanked City Attorney Jeff Taraday for his assistance negotiating with Snohomish County. She pointed out revised language in Section IV.B, allowing more development within Civic Field. Conservation Future funds are allocated for passive recreation but active recreation language was added which is consistent with the RCW regarding Conservation Futures. She referred to another change in Section V.F regarding 10% impervious area where language was added so that accessible pathways would not be considered impervious surface. She was satisfied with the language which will help to master plan Civic Field in the coming year. She requested Council approval of the agreement. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN AMENDMENT 2 TO THE ILA WITH SNOHOMISH COUNTY FOR CONSERVATION FUTURES FUNDS FOR THE PURCHASE OF CIVIC FIELD. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. D. ORDINANCE REESTABLISHING CITIZENS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION Economic Development & Community Services Director Patrick Doherty provided background: • On June 2, 2009, the Edmonds City Council passed Ordinance 3735, creating a Citizens Economic Development Commission (CEDC), arising from the Citizens' Levy Review Committee, which had been tasked with reviewing the financial situation of the City of Edmonds, and its recommendation to develop a broad vision and long-term strategies to make the City's fiscal situation sustainable without recurring to votes of the public for increased property taxes. • The original EDC was approved with a sunset date of December 31, 2010. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 14 Packet Page 17 of 391 • Through a series of 3 subsequent ordinances, a final sunset date for the Commission of 12/31/15 was established. • At the 2015 City Council Retreat a study subgroup was called for to study and discuss the CEDC, its purpose, usefulness, meeting format, subgroups, and whether to extend the Commission or allow it to sunset. o This subgroup, comprised of Councilmembers Bloom, Mesaros and Petso, met informally in October 2015 to discuss these issues, offering several observations and/or recommendations which were shared with full Council in November. o City Council considered the recommendations and chose to take no action, allowing the EDC to sunset on December 31, 2015, as set out in the corresponding Code provisions. • Mayor Earling and staff proposed reestablishing the CEDC at the 1/26/16 Council meeting, laying out the constituent parts of a proposed new ordinance in concept. • City Council offered additional language to the ordinance that would encourage the CEDC to invite ex-officio participation from other boards, commissions and agencies, as well as to encourage collaboration with such entities on programs or activities of mutual interest. He reviewed salient components of the proposal to amend Chapter 10.75, "Citizens Economic Development Commission": • 10.75.010 Membership — Term of appointments o Nine members o Each Councilmember appoints one; Mayor appoints two. o Members must be residents and should exhibit experience in fields such as private or nonprofit business, economics, real estate, finance, development, education, or other similar fields. o Ultimately two-year terms, initially staggered by two- and three-year terms o One Councilmember liaison as ex-officio member o No term limits o No sunset o Port Commission, Chamber of Commerce and Planning Board encouraged to appoint ex- officio members 10.75.020 Officers, Meetings, Forum o Commission shall elect Chair and Vice -Chair, with similar duties as in previous code o Quorum is a simple majority of filled positions o Regular meeting days, times and place shall be established to avoid "special meeting" status and extra notice requirements every time o All meetings open to public 10.75.030 Powers and Duties o Advise and make recommendations to Mayor and City Council, and as appropriate to other boards or commissions of the City, on matters independently generated or specifically referred to it by the Mayor or City Council related to: ■ Strategies, programs or activities intended to generate economic development and consequently increase jobs and municipal revenue o Annual report to Council and Mayor o Commission is encouraged to work in conjunction with other boards, commissions or other agencies/entities on proposals, recommendations or projects of common interest, which may be presented to Mayor or Council jointly Mr. Doherty recommended approval of the ordinance. COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO ADD THE FOLLOWING LANGUAGE: THE COMMISSION SHALL Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 15 Packet Page 18 of 391 DELIVER AN ANNUAL REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL IN WRITTEN AND ORAL FORM DURING THE FIRST QUARTER OF EVERY YEAR AND WHEN APPROPRIATE DURING OTHER TIMES AS DIRECTED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL. Mr. Doherty advised the language in the current ordinance stated the report was to be delivered in December. The amendment is intended to avoid having reports due in December when the Council's agendas are quite busy. Councilmember Buckshnis commented her thought was to have the report due in February. Mr. Doherty preferred the first quarter, recognizing the intent was to have the report provided as soon as possible after the first of the year but to allow some flexibility. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Council President Johnson said she discussed with Ms. Hope the issue of coordinating land use recommendations between the Planning Board and EDC. She recalled when the EDC was first established, there was an awkward joint presentation but that never quite worked out. She asked Ms. Hope to describe options for coordinating recommendations of the EDC and Planning Board regarding land use matters. Ms. Hope said the proposed language regarding the EDC coordinating with boards and commissions could work. However, as Council President Johnson was interested in more specificity, options include having the EDC chair periodically confer with the Planning Board chair or have the EDC present land use recommendations to the Planning Board before presenting it to the City Council. With an effective staff board/commission relationship, if land use issues arose at the EDC, she was certain Mr. Doherty would alert her and she would do the same for issues at the Planning Board of interest to the EDC. Mr. Doherty referred to new language added to 10.75.030. C, "The commission is encouraged to work in conjunction with other boards and commissions on proposals, recommendations, projects or activities of mutual interest, or as otherwise directed by city council." He envisioned with a smaller group of nine, an active Council liaison and the language encourage cooperation and collaboration, the EDC should not go too far on land use issues before someone pointed out they were encouraged to work together. He suggested the bodies that are collaborating decide how best to make that collaboration happen. Council President Johnson explained she raised this issue because as a former Planning Board member and the Planning Board liaison to the EDC she saw this as a problem. She wanted to predispose how it was handled so there wouldn't be problems in the future. She expected coordination but especially with regard to land use issues, the Council relies on the Planning Board. COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON MOVED TO HAVE THE EDC PRESENT ANY LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PLANNING BOARD. MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas requested a further explanation. Council President Johnson explained in the past the EDC has had land use subcommittees and has made recommendations directly to the Council regarding land use issues. The previous requirement was for a joint presentation on the annual report to the City Council but that never happened so the idea of a natural coordination never happened. She wanted to ensure any EDC recommendations regarding land use, which is the Planning Board's area of expertise, were made to the Planning Board. COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO HAVE THE EDC PRESENT ANY LAND USE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE PLANNING BOARD. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 16 Packet Page 19 of 391 Councilmember Buckshnis suggested this could be handled by having a Planning Board member be part of team like when the EDC first began. Mr. Doherty said the proposed ordinance requests the Planning Board provide an ex-officio member. He explained the previous ordinance language, "The planning board and economic development commission shall make joint recommendations on such subjects to the city council on or about the first meeting in December." was replaced with language stating the commission will work with other boards and commissions and other entities on areas of common interest. He envisioned that problem would not arise due to the Planning Board liaison, the Council liaison and this more directed language. He acknowledged a little bit of policing would be required. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas commented all those people were members of EDC previously and it did not work well. She questioned how EDC land use suggestions would get to the Planning Board to be vetted before they come to the City Council. Mr. Doherty said the code does not specify exactly how that happens but it could occur at different points in the Planning Board's consideration. For example, in the Highway 99 subarea plan, provisions regarding land use will ultimately go to the Planning Board and on to the City Council. Along that path, the EDC may want to input such as ways to incentivize development. He anticipated the ordinance language would instruct the EDC to find ways to engage with the Planning Board whether a joint meeting, submitting their recommendations, a companion piece, etc. It was difficult to know the best mechanism for that interaction in advance for every issue. The City Council liaison should interject to the EDC the need to collaborate with the Planning Board. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked Councilmembers Tibbott and Nelson, former Planning Board members, their thoughts. Councilmember Tibbott agreed the vagueness of the language lends itself to a variety of options. Any proposed land use change would need to go through the Planning Board and he felt the proposed language was workable. Councilmember Nelson concurred. Councilmember Mesaros commented it sounded like was a management problem rather than a structural problem. The proposed structure is correct; it just needs to be managed well and followed through on because in Council President Johnson's observation, they were not. There are two sides to communication; the Council needs to demand the EDC and Planning Board live up to their sides of the communication. MOTION FAILED (1-6), COUNCIL PRESIDENT JOHNSON VOTING YES. COUNCILMEMBER TIBBOTT MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NO. 4018, REESTABLISHING THE CITIZENS ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas said she will not support motion, not because she does not support the general idea of the EDC but she objects to the experience members are required to have. She believed that would prevent a large blue collar group of citizens to include occupations such bartenders, daycare workers, bus drivers, artists, nurses, etc. as well as stay-at-home parents and caregivers. Mr. Taraday relayed the motion included the amendment that was adopted prior to the main motion, to require the report to Council be made in the first quarter. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER FRALEY-MONILLAS VOTING NO. Mayor Earling reported the positions will be advertised for about two weeks beginning tomorrow. Councilmembers will be informed of the pool of candidates and a response will be requested within two weeks with a goal of having the EDC up and running in early March. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 17 Packet Page 20 of 391 E. RECONSIDERATION OF THE MAYOR'S VETO OF ORDINANCE NO. 4017 - AMENDING THE CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS CONTAINED IN EDMONDS COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTERS 23.40 ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREAS GENERAL PROVISIONS, 23.50 WETLANDS, 23.60 CRITICAL AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS, 23.70 FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS, 23.80 GEOLOGICALLY HAZARDOUS AREAS, AND 23.90 FISH AND WILDLIFE HABITAT CONSERVATION AREAS, AND AMENDING ECDC SECTION 19.00.025, A PROVISION OF THE BUILDING CODE RELATED TO FREQUENTLY FLOODED AREAS City Attorney Jeff Taraday advised the statute states there is an obligation to enter the rationale for the veto into the journal. He suggested there be a formal acknowledgement of receipt of the basis of the veto. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas acknowledged receipt of the veto. Mayor Earling acknowledged he sent the veto. F. CONSIDERATION OF THE CRITICAL AREAS ORDINANCE This item was pulled from the agenda via action taken during Agenda Item 2. 6. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling encouraged Councilmembers to attend tomorrow's signing of the final documents for the purchase of Civic Field tomorrow at 10 a.m. Mayor Earling reminded of his State of the City presentation on February 11 at 8:30 a.m. at the Edmonds Theater. There will be free popcorn. 7. COUNCIL COMMENTS Councilmember Buckshnis invited the Council to attend WRIA 8's Salmon Recovery Summit on Thursday. She expressed her appreciation for the Council agreeing to pull Item 5F; she plans to prepare several amendments in response to citizen input. She thanked the citizens who have provided comments. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas reported at the Special Olympics Regional Tournament the four Edmonds teams that participated received gold, silver and bronze medals in basketball. Councilmember Mesaros reported at his first Public Facilities District meeting last week, a stakeholders' event later this month was announced. He will email Councilmembers the date and encouraged them to attend. Councilmember Teitzel commented the CAO is a very delicate issue. Edmonds is over 95% built out so the question is how to respect property owners' rights to modify their property and also support environmental health. He was encouraged by a letter from the Department of Ecology that acknowledges water quality may be improved with reduced buffers in exchange for restoration. He plans to continue talking to citizens, researching and reading in order to make a well informed decision. He sought a win - win, improving environmental health and not unduly restricting property owners' rights. Councilmember Tibbott reminded of the upcoming Edmonds School District Levy election; ballots are due by Tuesday next week. This is a great opportunity to support technology in schools as well as to support children and families in the district. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 18 Packet Page 21 of 391 Council President Johnson announced a SNOCOM open house on Thursday. She sought Council direction regarding whether to hold a public hearing on the CAO. Councilmember Fraley-Monillas asked whether it would be a public hearing to gain input into the new CAO or a public hearing after the ordinance is amended. As a result of the Mayor's veto, Council President Johnson explained the Council now has a clean slate and can make amendments to the last version of the ordinance prepared in October for the December 15 meeting. Due to the amount of time that has elapsed, members of the public and Council have requested another public hearing. Although legal requirements have been met by the public hearing at the Planning Board and at the City Council, her question to the Council was whether to have another public hearing. She suggested providing notice and having the public hearing in two weeks. City Attorney Jeff Taraday recommended if the Council chose to have another public hearing, the Council first flesh out all the conceivable possible versions of an ordinance and amendments and have the public hearing on all of them. That would put the Council on very solid ground as to whether another public hearing was required due to the amendments. Councilmember Buckshnis said she did not vote for many of the previous amendments. She plans to provide several amendments using the old ordinance. She suggested a study session to identify all the amendments and then decide whether to have a public hearing. She has spent 20-30 hours during the past two weeks talking with citizens and recommended Councilmembers review the document and propose amendments. Senior Planner Lien said he is on vacation for the February 16. A work session could be held on February 23 to discuss amendments, followed by a public hearing in March and a decision made after the public hearing or at a subsequent meeting in March. Councilmember Buckshnis recommended Councilmembers work off the ordinance that was presented to Council on December 15 prior to Council amendments. Council President Johnson summarized the Council would hold a work session on February 23 where Councilmembers propose all their amendments. Following a public hearing, the Council could vote. Councilmember Teitzel relayed his concern the Council was now revisiting an item that was discussed in great detail on December 15. He was hopeful the Council was not setting a precedent, whereby a decision was made and the Council was now undertaking another public hearing process due to public concern. Councilmember Buckshnis pointed out the veto changed everything. Mayor Earling commented there was always that potential again. 8. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) This item was not needed. 9. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION This item was not needed. 10. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 9:48 p.m. Edmonds City Council Draft Minutes February 2, 2016 Page 19 Packet Page 22 of 391 AM-8325 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 02/09/2016 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 #218372 through #218509 dated February 4, 2016 for $251,567.08. Approval of payroll direct deposit #62055 through #62063 for $518,345.07, benefit checks #62064 through #62071 and wire payments of $482,483.86 for the pay period January 16, 2016 through January 31, 2016. 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• Fiscal Impact: Claims $251,567.08 2016 1,252,396.01 Fiscal Impact Payroll Employee checks and direct deposit $518,345.07 Payroll Benefit checks and wire payments $482,483.86 Total Payroll $1,000,828.93 Attarhmontc Claim cks 02-04-16 Project Numbers 02-04-16 Packet Page 23 of 391 Payroll Suminary 02-05-16 Payroll Benefit 02-05-16 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Finance Scott James 02/04/2016 10:17 AM City Clerk Scott Passey 02/04/2016 10:56 AM Mayor Dave Earling 02/04/2016 11:13 AM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 02/04/2016 12:47 PM Form Started By: Nori Jacobson Started On: 02/04/2016 09:41 AM Final Approval Date: 02/04/2016 Packet Page 24 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 1 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 218372 2/2/2016 037376 SNO CO PUD NO 1 218373 2/4/2016 075085 1 LINGUA LLC 218374 2/4/2016 072627 911 ETC INC 218375 2/4/2016 070322 A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount E7AC,PUD E7AC.PUD SERVICE CONNECTION E7AC.PUD SERVICE CONNECTION 112.000.68.595.33.41.00 763.00 Total : 763.00 126 INTERPRETER FEE FOR ONLINE S INTERPRETER FEE FOR ONLINE S 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 50.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 4.75 Total : 54.75 35910 MONTHLY 911 DATABASE MAINT Monthly 911 database maint 001.000.31.518.88.48.00 100.00 Total : 100.00 15-33037 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 178.14 15-34312 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 170.02 15-34484 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 163.64 15-34510 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 159.00 15-34704 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 176.98 15-34769 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 182.20 Page: 1 Packet Page 25 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 2 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218375 2/4/2016 070322 A&A LANGUAGE SERVICES INC (Continued) 15-35330 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 165.38 15-35512 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 140.00 15-35609 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 140.00 15-36419 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 150.00 15-36568 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.523.30.41.01 163.64 Total: 1,789.00 218376 2/4/2016 069798 A.M. LEONARD INC C116002234 PM: HOSE REEL, PRUNER, SOIL KI` PM: HOSE REEL, PRUNER, SOIL KI` 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 1,456.27 C116002735 PM: SHEAR PRUNER CORONA PM: SHEAR PRUNER CORONA 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 76.47 Total: 1,532.74 218377 2/4/2016 069803 AIRVAC 13290 FS 16 - 4-STAGE FILTER PACKS FS 16 - 4-Stage Filter Packs 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1,500.00 Freight 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 220.00 Total: 1,720.00 218378 2/4/2016 069667 AMERICAN MARKETING 21029 CP BENCH PLAQUE CP BENCH PLAQUE 127.000.64.575.50.31.00 139.94 Page: 2 Packet Page 26 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 3 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218378 2/4/2016 069667 AMERICAN MARKETING (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 127.000.64.575.50.31.00 13.29 Total: 153.23 218379 2/4/2016 074695 AMERICAN MESSAGING W4101046QB WATER WATCH PAGER FEES WATER WATCH PAGER FEES 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 4.47 Total: 4.47 218380 2/4/2016 001375 AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 264703-1613 APA MEMBERSHIP FOR DIRECTOR APA membership for director for 2016 001.000.61.557.20.49.00 438.00 Total: 438.00 218381 2/4/2016 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES 1988418893 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 1988429519 WWTP-UNIFORMS, MATS TOWELS Uniforms 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 40.07 Mats and Towels 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 76.74 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.24.00 3.81 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.41.00 7.29 1988429820 PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE PARKS MAINT UNIFORM SERVICE 001.000.64.576.80.24.00 40.08 1988429821 FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS FACILITIES DIVISION UNIFORMS 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 18.12 9.5% Sales Tax Page: 3 Packet Page 27 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 4 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218381 2/4/2016 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES (Continued) 001.000.66.518.30.24.00 1.72 1988433896 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MAT: 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 MATE 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 5.06 PUBLIC WORKS OMC LOBBY MATE 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 MAT: 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 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 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.41.00 0.48 1988433897 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 Page: 4 Packet Page 28 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 5 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218381 2/4/2016 069751 ARAMARK UNIFORM SERVICES (Continued) 511.000.77.548.68.41.00 1.14 Total: 255.70 218382 2/4/2016 075523 ART WALK EDMONDS 6 ART WALK PARTICIPATION FEE ART WALK PARTICIPATION FEE 117.100.64.573.20.49.00 150.00 Total: 150.00 218383 2/4/2016 064807 ATS AUTOMATION INC S 078573 ALERTON SYSTEMS - 2/1-4/30/16 Alerton Systems - 2/1-4/30/16 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 2,866.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 272.32 Total: 3,138.82 218384 2/4/2016 001795 AUTOGRAPHICS 80769 FLEET SHOP SUPPLIES Fleet Shop Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 481.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 45.70 Total: 526.70 218385 2/4/2016 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER 85906 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS UB Outsourcing area #500 Printing 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 37.49 UB Outsourcing area #500 Printing 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 37.49 UB Outsourcing area #500 Printing 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 38.62 UB Outsourcing area #500 Postage 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 140.54 9.6% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 3.60 9.6% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 3.60 Page: 5 Packet Page 29 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 6 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218385 2/4/2016 070305 AUTOMATIC FUNDS TRANSFER (Continued) 9.6% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 3.71 UB Outsourcing area #500 Postage 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 140.54 86024 OUT SOURCING OF UTILITY BILLS UB Outsourcing area #600 Printing 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 33.84 UB Outsourcing area #600 Printing 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 33.84 UB Outsourcing area #600 Printing 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 34.86 UB Outsourcing area #600 Postage 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 130.74 UB Outsourcing area #600 Postage 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 130.74 9.6% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.49.00 3.25 9.6% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 3.25 9.6% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 3.34 Total: 779.45 218386 2/4/2016 001801 AUTOMATIC WILBERT VAULT CO 40654 ROUGH BOX-FAVERTY ROUGH BOX-FAVERTY 130.000.64.536.20.34.00 430.00 Total: 430.00 218387 2/4/2016 001527 AWWA 7001141563 WATER - ANNUAL RENEWAL - K KL Water - Annual Renewal - K Kuhnhau 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 86.00 Total: 86.00 218388 2/4/2016 061659 BAILEY'S TRADITIONAL TAEKWON 20673 TAEKWON-DO 20673 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTIOl' 20673 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTIOI` Page: 6 Packet Page 30 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 7 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218388 2/4/2016 061659 BAILEY'S TRADITIONAL TAEKWON (Continued) 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 66.00 20677 TAEKWON-DO 20677 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTIOl' 20677 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTIOl' 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 188.00 Total: 254.00 218389 2/4/2016 075525 BALIWALA, SUSAN REFUND REFUND PET TAG PAID TWICE - B, REF 2016 PET TAG PAID TWICE 001.000.322.30.000.00 5.00 Total: 5.00 218390 2/4/2016 071348 BERGERABAM 313557 FISHING PIER REHAB - PROF SVC,' Fishing Pier Rehab - Prof Svcs thru 016.000.66.518.30.41.00 4,823.40 Total: 4,823.40 218391 2/4/2016 074307 BLUE STAR GAS 5491 FLEET AUTO PROPANE 316.2 GAL Fleet Auto Propane 316.2 Gal 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 253.56 8868 FLEET AUTO PROPANE 834.4 GAL Fleet Auto Propane 834.4 Gal 511.000.77.548.68.34.12 761.96 Total: 1,015.52 218392 2/4/2016 075526 BOAN, ALICIA 1/22 REFUND CREDIT 1/22/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 1/22/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 001.000.239.200 25.80 Total: 25.80 218393 2/4/2016 065739 BOBBY WOLFORD TRUCKING & 7191 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 360.00 7192 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 720.00 7198 STORM DUMP FEES Page: 7 Packet Page 31 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 8 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218393 2/4/2016 065739 BOBBY WOLFORD TRUCKING & (Continued) Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 400.00 7365 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 268.00 Total: 1,748.00 218394 2/4/2016 075524 BOCK CONSULTING 01/06/2016 VOCATIONAL CONSULTING AND SE Vocational consulting and services 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 330.00 Total: 330.00 218395 2/4/2016 075527 BOELTER, DANIELLE 1/22 REFUND 1/22/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 1/22/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 001.000.239.200 47.20 Total: 47.20 218396 2/4/2016 075528 BRAUN, DAGMER 1/25 REFUND 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 001.000.239.200 34.00 Total: 34.00 218397 2/4/2016 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES 15693872 FLEET COPIER - JAN 16 Fleet Copier - Jan 16 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 33.02 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 3.14 15693873 PW ADMIN COPIER PW Office Copier for Jan 16 001.000.65.518.20.45.00 68.55 PW Office Copier for Jan 16 111.000.68.542.90.45.00 38.85 PW Office Copier for Jan 16 422.000.72.531.90.45.00 38.85 PW Office Copier for Jan 16 Page: 8 Packet Page 32 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 9 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 218397 2/4/2016 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 27.42 PW Office Copier for Jan 16 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 27.42 PW Office Copier for Jan 16 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 27.41 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.518.20.45.00 6.51 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.45.00 3.69 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.45.00 3.69 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 2.61 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 2.61 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.45.00 2.59 15693874 WATER SEWER COPIER JAN 16 Water Sewer Copier Jan 16 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 70.68 Water Sewer Copier Jan 16 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 70.68 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 6.72 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 6.71 15693876 COPIER RENTAL COPIER RENTAL 001.000.23.523.30.45.00 65.17 15696943 ENG. COPIER - JANUARY 2016 Eng. Copier - January 2016 001.000.67.518.21.45.00 578.38 15710781 CANON LEASE CHARGES lease pmt for 1030 & 5051 Page: 9 Packet Page 33 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 10 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218397 2/4/2016 073029 CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES (Continued) 001.000.61.557.20.45.00 92.65 lease pmt for 1030 & 5051 001.000.22.518.10.45.00 92.68 lease pmt for 1030 & 5051 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 92.65 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.61.557.20.45.00 8.80 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.22.518.10.45.00 8.81 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.21.513.10.45.00 8.80 Total: 1,389.09 218398 2/4/2016 075023 CAROLYN DOUGLAS COMMUNICATIONf 50 COMMUNICATIONS & COMMUNITY Communications and community outr 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 2,500.00 Total: 2,500.00 218399 2/4/2016 071443 CED - KENT 2340-642978 PLAZA RM - SUPPLIES Plaza Rm - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 166.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 15.82 2340-643232 CITY HALL - ELECTRICAL SUPPLIE City Hall - Electrical Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 246.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 23.37 Total: 451.69 218400 2/4/2016 068484 CEMEX LLC 9432444364 CITY PARK SPRAY PARK BENCH P/ CITY PARK SPRAY PARK BENCH P/ 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 701.75 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 66.67 Page: 10 Packet Page 34 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 11 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218400 2/4/2016 068484 068484 CEMEX LLC (Continued) Total: 768.42 218401 2/4/2016 019215 CITY OF LYNNWOOD 12029 TRAFFIC - SIGNAL MAINT - 10/1-12/ TRAFFIC - SIGNAL MAINT - 10/1-12/ 111.000.68.542.64.51.00 753.74 12035 INV#12035 CUST#47 - EDMONDS P PRISONER R&B FOR DEC 2015 001.000.39.523.60.51.00 90.00 12036 INV#12036 CUST#47 - EDMONDS P NARCOTICS SGT OCT-DEC 2015 104.000.41.521.21.51.00 11,034.79 Total: 11,878.53 218402 2/4/2016 065683 CORRY'S FINE DRY CLEANING JAN 2016 DRY CLEANING DEC 15/JAN 16 - El CLEANING/LAUNDRY DEC 15/JAN ' 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 398.63 Total: 398.63 218403 2/4/2016 073912 CROWN FILMS/CUSTOM BIOPLASTICS 80867 PM: DOG WASTE BAGS PM: DOG WASTE BAGS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 881.68 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 83.76 Total: 965.44 218404 2/4/2016 065961 CRYOTECH DEICING TECHNOLOGY IN37727 STREET - CMA DEICER — Street - CMA Deicer-- 111.000.68.542.66.31.00 12,810.00 Freight 111.000.68.542.66.31.00 1,973.97 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.66.31.00 1,404.49 Total: 16,188.46 218405 2/4/2016 060914 CUMMINS NORTHWEST LLC 001-86518 UNIT 66 - SENSOR BRACKET Unit 66 - Sensor Bracket 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 52.51 Page: 11 Packet Page 35 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 12 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218405 2/4/2016 060914 CUMMINS NORTHWEST LLC (Continued) Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 20.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.89 018-15556 UNIT 66 - JUNCTION BOX Unit 66 - Junction Box 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 51.99 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 12.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 6.08 Total: 149.47 218406 2/4/2016 074444 DATAQUEST LLC CIEDMONDS-20160131 CIEDMONDS-20160131 CREDIT CHECK - JAN 2016 001.000.41.521.10.41.00 20.00 Total: 20.00 218407 2/4/2016 006626 DEPT OF ECOLOGY 2016-WAR045513 STORMWATER - MUNICIPAL GENE[ Stormwater - Municipal General Perrr 422.000.72.531.90.51.00 28,312.65 Total: 28,312.65 218408 2/4/2016 070864 DEX MEDIA 610025445697 C/A 730211600 01/2016 Web Hosting for Internet 001.000.31.518.88.42.00 34.95 610025445824 C/A 730211599 Basic e-commerce hosting 01/02/16 - 001.000.31.518.88.42.00 34.95 Total: 69.90 218409 2/4/2016 064531 DINES, JEANNIE 16-3630 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES 01/26/2011 01/26/2016 CITY COUNCIL MINUTE; 001.000.25.514.30.41.00 247.50 Tota I : 247.50 Page: 12 Packet Page 36 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 13 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218410 2/4/2016 070244 DUANE HARTMAN & ASSOCIATES INC 16-2523.1 ESJB.SERVICES THRU 1/26/16 ESJB.Services thru 1/26/16 421.200.74.594.34.41.00 15,751.26 Total: 15,751.26 218411 2/4/2016 075529 DUNAVAN, GAIL 1/25 REFUND 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 001.000.239.200 6.71 Total: 6.71 218412 2/4/2016 063037 EARLING, DAVE 01292016 STATE CAPITAL TRIPS Mileage for 3 trips to State Capital 001.000.21.513.10.43.00 252.56 Total: 252.56 218413 2/4/2016 074492 EARTHCORPS 5436 317-15-01 WILLOW CREEK DAYLIG 317-15-01 WILLOW CREEK DAYLIG 125.000.64.575.50.41.00 1,737.20 Total: 1,737.20 218414 2/4/2016 007287 ECONOMIC ALLIANCE SNOHOMISH CO 2016-135 2016 EASC MEMBERSHIP DUES 2016 Economic Alliance Snohomish 001.000.39.513.10.49.00 10,000.00 Total: 10,000.00 218415 2/4/2016 007905 EDMONDS FAMILY MEDICINE CLINIC E1642616/E1649245 NEW EMPLOYEE PROCEDURE New Employee Procedure 001.000.22.521.10.41.00 412.00 Total: 412.00 218416 2/4/2016 063448 EDMONDS LIONS CLUB 2016 Flag Program 2016 EDMONDS LIONS CLUB FLAG 2016 Flag program 001.000.39.513.10.49.00 500.00 Total: 500.00 218417 2/4/2016 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES AR28296 COPIER MAINT COPIER MAINT Page: 13 Packet Page 37 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 14 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 218417 2/4/2016 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES (Continued) AR28396 AR28421 PO # Description/Account Amount 001.000.23.512.50.48.00 5.02 WATER SEWER COPY USE Water Sewer Copy Use 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 17.41 Water Sewer Copy Use 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 17.40 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 1.66 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 1.65 PW COPY USE PW Copy Use 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 14.17 PW Copy Use 111.000.68.542.90.31.00 8.03 PW Copy Use 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 8.03 PW Copy Use 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 5.67 PW Copy Use 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 5.67 PW Copy Use 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 5.65 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.65.518.20.31.00 1.35 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.31.00 0.76 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 0.76 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 0.54 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 0.54 9.5% Sales Tax Page: 14 Packet Page 38 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 15 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218417 2/4/2016 008812 ELECTRONIC BUSINESS MACHINES (Continued) 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 0.54 AR28596 COPIER MAINT COPIER MAINT 001.000.23.512.50.48.00 122.95 AR28675 FLEET COPY USE Fleet Copy Use 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 13.92 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 1.32 AR28677 P&R PRINTER C1030 #A6995 P&R PRINTER C1030 #A6995 001.000.64.571.21.45.00 17.13 AR29239 MK5532 CITY CLERKS COPIER ME - CITY CLERKS COPIER METER REA 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 357.93 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.25.514.30.45.00 34.00 AR29240 CUST# MK5533 C5051 GQM52286 C Meter charges 12/30/15 - 1/29/16 B&` 001.000.31.514.23.48.00 68.71 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.48.00 6.53 AR29246 P&R COPIER C5051 #A7027 P&R COPIER C5051 #A7027 001.000.64.571.21.45.00 123.58 Total: 840.92 218418 2/4/2016 009350 EVERETT DAILY HERALD EDH678659 LEGAL AD, CITY APPLICATION- JEN LEGAL AD, CITY APPLICATION- JEN 001.000.62.558.60.41.40 58.48 Total: 58.48 218419 2/4/2016 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY WAMOU38495 WWTP-SMALL EQUIPMENT 1-1AA F/G BRUTE 4' STEP LADDER 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 469.97 Page: 15 Packet Page 39 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 16 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218419 2/4/2016 066378 FASTENAL COMPANY (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 44.65 Total: 514.62 218420 2/4/2016 009815 FERGUSON ENTERPRISES INC 0493435 WATER METER - #2025 M-METER- Water Meter- #2025 M-Meter-01-01 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 1,182.40 Water - Washer Supplies 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 180.00 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 112.33 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 17.10 0493437 WATER METER INVENTORY - #202! Water Meter Inventory - #2025 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 295.60 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.30 28.08 Total: 1,815.51 218421 2/4/2016 075530 FRANEY, GINGER 1/25 REFUND 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 001.000.239.200 26.00 Total: 26.00 218422 2/4/2016 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 GR 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 41.23 253-017-7256 W WTP TELEMETRY - 8 VOICEGRAI W WTP TELEMETRY - 8 VOICEGRAI 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 223.48 425-745-5055 MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL PHOI` Page: 16 Packet Page 40 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 17 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218422 2/4/2016 011900 FRONTIER (Continued) MEADOWDALE PRESCHOOL PHOI` 001.000.64.571.29.42.00 90.40 PARKS MAINT IP LINE (10 + TAX) 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 10.95 425-771-0158 FIRE STATION #16 ALARM AND FA} FIRE STATION #16 ALARM AND FA} 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 129.82 425-771-5553 WWTP AUTO DIALER- 1 BUSINESS WWTP AUTO DIALER- 1 BUSINESS 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 114.43 425-776-6829 CITY HALL ALARM LINES 121 5TH P CITY HALL FIRE AND INTRUSION AI 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 131.02 509-022-0049 LIFT STATION #2 VG SPECIAL ACCI LIFT STATION #2 VG SPECIAL ACCI 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 26.21 Total: 809.35 218423 2/4/2016 002500 GALLS LLC DBA BLUMENTHAL 004751465 1NV#004751465 ACCT#1 00 1074529- ELITE DUTY BELT - JOHNSEN 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 49.95 STORY DUTY BOOTS-JOHNSEN 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 129.99 9.6% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 17.28 004778425 1NV#004778425 ACCT#1 00 1074529- METAL NAME TAG - BICKLEY 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 10.95 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.24.00 1.04 Tota I : 209.21 218424 2/4/2016 075538 GAMEZ, OMAR 13016 MEETING TRAVEL REFUND MEETING TRAVEL REFUND 001.000.23.523.30.43.00 21.06 Page: 17 Packet Page 41 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 18 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218424 2/4/2016 075538 075538 GAMEZ, OMAR (Continued) Total: 21.06 218425 2/4/2016 073922 GAVIOLA, NIKKA 20687 TAEKWON-DO 20687 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTIOl' 20687 TAEKWON-DO INSTRUCTIOl' 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 374.50 Total: 374.50 218426 2/4/2016 012199 GRAINGER 9936071753 MUSEUM - BATTERIES Museum - Batteries 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 40.08 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 3.81 9940525075 CITY HALL - DIFFUSER SUPPLIES City Hall - Diffuser Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 269.03 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 25.57 Total: 338.49 218427 2/4/2016 061410 GRCC/WETRC 149648 WWTP-OPERATOR TRAINING WASHINGTON OPERATOR TRAINI� 423.000.76.535.80.49.71 225.00 149650 WWTP-OPERATOR WORKSHOP/TF ROBERT SLENKER-WASHINGTON 423.000.76.535.80.49.71 225.00 149652 W WTP-OPERATOR TRAINING WASHINGTON OPERATOR TRAININ 423.000.76.535.80.49.71 225.00 Total: 675.00 218428 2/4/2016 067615 GTS INTERIOR SUPPLY 40002285-00 GREEN RESOURCE CENTER - CEII Green Resource Center - Ceiling Tile: 001.000.62.524.10.49.00 1,053.42 Total: 1,053.42 218429 2/4/2016 073960 GUTTER KING INC 1601164 INSTALL GUTTER ON SPRAY PARK INSTALL GUTTER ON SPRAY PARK Page: 18 Packet Page 42 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 19 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218429 2/4/2016 073960 GUTTER KING INC (Continued) 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 525.00 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 49.88 Total: 574.88 218430 2/4/2016 069733 H B JAEGER COMPANY LLC 167779/1 WATER INVENTORY - #548 - Water Inventory - #548 - 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 2,690.86 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 255.63 Total: 2,946.49 218431 2/4/2016 012560 HACH COMPANY 9752614 WATER QUALITY - TESTING KITS Water Quality - Testing Kits 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 613.80 Freight 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 41.67 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 62.27 Total: 717.74 218432 2/4/2016 074804 HARLES, JANINE 197336 PHOTOGRAPHY FOR JANUARY 20' Photography for January 2016 001.000.61.558.70.41.00 200.00 Total: 200.00 218433 2/4/2016 010900 HD FOWLER CO INC 14116260 WATER INVENTORY - #0334 W-PIF Water Inventory - #0334 W-PIPECO- 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 3,641.40 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.34.20 345.93 Total: 3,987.33 218434 2/4/2016 074966 HIATT, ELLEN COE 2016 0101 COMMUNICATIONS AND MARKETI� Communications and marketing cons Page: 19 Packet Page 43 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 20 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218434 2/4/2016 074966 HIATT, ELLEN (Continued) 120.000.31.575.42.41.00 1,500.00 Total: 1,500.00 218435 2/4/2016 074746 HIGUCHI, ROD 20669 UKULELE 20669 UKULELE INSTRUCTION 20669 UKULELE INSTRUCTION 001.000.64.571.22.41.00 647.90 Total: 647.90 218436 2/4/2016 060165 HWA GEOSCIENCES INC 26388 E4JB.SERVICES THRU 01/23/16 E4JB.Services thru 01/23/16 421.000.74.594.34.41.10 2,548.91 Total: 2,548.91 218437 2/4/2016 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED 2740479 RETURNED ITEM - SEE CM 274699, Nylon ribbon returned - see credit me 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 13.48 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 1.28 2742122 ROLLED RECEIPT PAPER RETURN Rolled receipt paper returned for 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 37.96 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 3.61 2744347 OFFICE SUPPLIES- BLDG OFFICE SUPPLIES- BLDG, stamps 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 51.42 2746522 DSD SUPPLIES- ERASERS DSD SUPPLIES- ERASERS 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 7.25 2746994 NYLON RIBBON RETURNED FOR C Nylon ribbon returned for credit - 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 -13.48 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 -1.28 2747214 MINUTE BOOK & ENVELOPES Page: 20 Packet Page 44 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 21 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218437 2/4/2016 073548 INDOFF INCORPORATED (Continued) MINUTE BOOK AND CATALOG ENVI 001.000.25.514.30.31.00 327.76 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.25.514.30.31.00 31.13 2747306 PENS- DEV SERVICES PENS- DEV SERVICES 001.000.62.524.10.31.00 55.54 2748502 SWIFFER DUSTER REFILLS Swiffer duster refills 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 12.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 1.14 2748579 PLASTIC BINDING COMBS & BUDG Fellowes Plastic Combs - 5/8" 100 pk 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 72.55 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 6.90 2748582 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.23.512.50.31.00 98.22 2748583 SUPPLIES SUPPLIES 001.000.23.523.30.31.00 105.89 2749065 ROLLED RECEIPT PAPER RETURN Rolled receipt paper returned for 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 -37.96 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.514.23.31.00 -3.61 Total: 769.80 218438 2/4/2016 075487 INTEGRITY SAFETY SERVICES INC 154-6103 FAC, WWTP, STORM, WATER/SEW Fac, WWTP, Storm, Water/Sewer - 001.000.64.576.80.49.00 200.00 Fac, WWTP, Storm, Water/Sewer - 423.000.76.535.80.49.71 200.00 Page: 21 Packet Page 45 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 22 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218438 2/4/2016 075487 INTEGRITY SAFETY SERVICES INC (Continued) Fac, WWTP, Storm, Water/Sewer - 422.000.72.531.90.43.00 200.00 Fac, WWTP, Storm, Water/Sewer - 421.000.74.534.80.49.00 100.00 Fac, WWTP, Storm, Water/Sewer - 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 100.00 Total: 800.00 218439 2/4/2016 014940 INTERSTATE BATTERY SYSTEMS 300-10002981 PM: BRAKE CLEAN NON CLOR, SAI PM: BRAKE CLEAN NON CLOR, SAI 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 91.44 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 8.69 Total: 100.13 218440 2/4/2016 075356 JENNIFER ZIEGLER PUBLIC 007 STATE LOBBYIST JANUARY 2016 State lobbyist for January 2016 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 3,358.00 Total: 3,358.00 218441 2/4/2016 068677 KONECRANES AMERICA INC SEA01083363 FLEET - CRANE ANNUAL INSPECTI Fleet - Crane Annual Inspection 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 775.00 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 73.63 Total: 848.63 218442 2/4/2016 074417 LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTIAN SMITH 122 PUBLIC DEFENDER PUBLIC DEFENDER 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 300.00 Total: 300.00 218443 2/4/2016 072059 LEE, NICOLE 1570 INTERPRETER FEE INTERPRETER FEE 001.000.23.512.50.41.01 120.25 Page: 22 Packet Page 46 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 23 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218443 2/4/2016 072059 072059 LEE, NICOLE (Continued) Total: 120.25 218444 2/4/2016 067725 LES SCHWAB TIRE CENTER 80500140013 UNIT 681 -ALIGNMENT Unit 681 - Alignment 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 56.25 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.48.00 5.34 Total: 61.59 218445 2/4/2016 075492 LEVERAGE INFORMATION SYSTEMS 1630220 CATALYST 4500-X 16 PORT 10G I I Catalyst 4500-X 16 Port 10G I Base 001.000.31.518.88.48.00 920.45 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.31.518.88.48.00 87.44 Total: 1,007.89 218446 2/4/2016 018980 LYNNWOOD HONDA 941315 UNIT 13 - FILTERS Unit 13 - Filters 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 24.93 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 2.37 Total: 27.30 218447 2/4/2016 069862 MAKERS ARCHITECTURE AND 1438-13 ECDC REWRITE ECDC REWRITE 001.000.62.524.10.41.00 4,625.55 Total: 4,625.55 218448 2/4/2016 075531 MARCOE, JUDITH 1/25 REFUND 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 001.000.239.200 23.50 Total: 23.50 218449 2/4/2016 074713 MAZENGIA, KERRY 1/25 REFUND 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 001.000.239.200 5.60 Page: 23 Packet Page 47 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 24 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218449 2/4/2016 074713 074713 MAZENGIA, KERRY (Continued) Total: 5.60 218450 2/4/2016 075425 MCARTHUR, AMELIA 1/12-1/26 GYM ATTEND 1/12-1/26/16 VOLLEYBALL GYM AT7 1 /12-1 /26/16 VOLLEYBALL GYM AT7 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 90.00 1/7-1/28 GYM ATTEND 1/7-1/28/16 VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTE 1/7-1/28/16 VOLLEYBALL GYM ATTE 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 120.00 Total: 210.00 218451 2/4/2016 072223 MILLER, DOUG 1/6-1/27 GYM MONITOR 1/6-1/27/16 BASKETBALL GYM MON 1/6-1/27/16 BASKETBALL GYM MON 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 100.00 Total: 100.00 218452 2/4/2016 020900 MILLERS EQUIP & RENTALL INC 227696 PM: HEDGE TRIMMER, GLOVES, BE PM: HEDGE TRIMMER, GLOVES, BE 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 610.97 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 58.04 227701 PM: PRUNER ADAPTER, PRUNER F PM: PRUNER ADAPTER, PRUNER F 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 109.98 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 10.45 Total: 789.44 218453 2/4/2016 075532 NAGAHARA, DORIS 1/25 REFUND 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 001.000.239.200 58.00 Total: 58.00 218454 2/4/2016 067834 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTALS 4347854 CITY PARK SPRAY PARK FENCE RE CITY PARK SPRAY PARK FENCE RE 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 315.36 9.5% Sales Tax 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 29.96 Page: 24 Packet Page 48 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 25 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218454 2/4/2016 067834 067834 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION RENTAI (Continued) Total: 345.32 218455 2/4/2016 023870 NATIONAL REC & PARK ASSOC 295580201-16 2016 GROUP MEMBERSHIP 2016 GROUP MEMBERSHIP 001.000.64.571.21.49.00 425.00 Total: 425.00 218456 2/4/2016 064570 NATIONAL SAFETY INC 0427216-IN WWTP-SMALL EQUIPMENT IN VENTIS PUMP BLK 4 GAS WITH 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 940.50 Freight 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 14.34 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.35.00 90.71 Total: 1,045.55 218457 2/4/2016 070855 NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS 10040975 JANUARY MONTHLY FEE January Monthly Fee 001.000.22.518.10.41.00 768.00 Total: 768.00 218458 2/4/2016 024302 NELSON PETROLEUM 0573060-IN FLEET - FILTER INVENTORY Fleet - Filter Inventory 511.000.77.548.68.34.40 40.88 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.34.40 3.89 0573444-IN FLEET - FILTER INVENTORY Fleet - Filter Inventory 511.000.77.548.68.34.40 17.72 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.34.40 1.68 Total: 64.17 218459 2/4/2016 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC 2-1515418 HAINES WHARF PARK HONEY BUC HAINES WHARF PARK HONEY BUC 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 218.78 2-1518166 CM EDMONDS ELEMENTARY HONE Page: 25 Packet Page 49 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 26 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218459 2/4/2016 061013 NORTHWEST CASCADE INC (Continued) CM EDMONDS ELEMENTARY HONE 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 -83.74 2-1518734 WILLOW CREEK FISH HATCHERY f WILLOW CREEK FISH HATCHERY f 001.000.64.576.80.45.00 113.85 Total: 248.89 218460 2/4/2016 070306 OBERG, WILLIAM 9 LEOFF 1 CLAIM REIMBURSEMENT LEOFF 1 Claim Reimbursement 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 64.94 Total: 64.94 218461 2/4/2016 063511 OFFICE MAX INC 040121 P&R: CHAIR P&R: CHAIR 001.000.64.571.21.35.00 159.99 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.21.35.00 15.20 043800 P&R: PAPER P&R: PAPER 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 102.99 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 9.78 072101 P&R: CARD STOCK, HOLE PUNCH, P&R: CARD STOCK, HOLE PUNCH, 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 49.97 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.571.21.31.00 4.75 865701 P&R: FILE FOLDERS P&R: FILE FOLDERS 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 11.18 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.31.00 1.06 Total : 354.92 218462 2/4/2016 070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER January, 2016 COURT, BLDG CODE & JIS TRANSI• Page: 26 Packet Page 50 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 27 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice 218462 2/4/2016 070166 OFFICE OF THE STATE TREASURER (Continued) 218463 2/4/2016 064951 OTIS ELEVATOR CO SS06279G216 PO # Description/Account Amount Emergency Medical Services & Traun 001.000.237.120 978.45 PSEA 1, 2 & 3 Account 001.000.237.130 21,111.61 Building Code Fee Account 001.000.237.150 266.50 State Patrol Death Investigation 001.000.237.330 119.91 Judicial Information Systems Account 001.000.237.180 4,470.57 School Zone Safety Account 001.000.237.200 110.28 Washington Auto Theft Prevention 001.000.237.250 1,930.98 Traumatic Brain Injury 001.000.237.260 378.45 Accessible Communities Acct 001.000.237.290 225.51 Multi -Model Transportation 001.000.237.300 225.56 Hwy Safety Acct 001.000.237.320 190.28 Crime Lab Blood Breath Analysis 001.000.237.170 129.82 WSP Hwy Acct 001.000.237.340 679.91 Total : 30,817.83 PW ELEVATOR MAINT SERVICE CC PW Elevator Maint Service Contract f 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 3,354.36 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 318.66 Total : 3,673.02 Page: 27 Packet Page 51 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 28 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218464 2/4/2016 002203 OWEN EQUIPMENT COMPANY 00078420 UNIT 66 - MODULE COVERS Unit 66 - Module Covers 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 157.15 Freight 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 24.70 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 17.28 Total: 199.13 218465 2/4/2016 060945 PACIFIC POWER BATTERIES 19003831 UNIT G01-SWR -BATTERY Unit G01-SWR -Battery 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 153.02 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 14.54 19003888 UNIT E105PO - SUPPLIES Unit E105PO - Supplies 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 10.86 9.5% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 1.03 Total: 179.45 218466 2/4/2016 027060 PACIFIC TOPSOILS 209792 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 120.00 209803 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 120.00 209814 STORM DUMP FEES Storm Dump Fees 422.000.72.531.10.49.00 120.00 Total: 360.00 218467 2/4/2016 074422 PARTSMASTER, DIV OF NCH CORP 20978970 FLEET - RATCHET WRENCH Fleet - Ratchet Wrench 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 95.24 Freight Page: 28 Packet Page 52 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 29 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218467 2/4/2016 074422 PARTSMASTER, DIV OF NCH CORP (Continued) 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 14.29 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.35.00 10.41 Total: 119.94 218468 2/4/2016 028860 PLATT ELECTRIC SUPPLY INC 1569030 TRAFFIC - EYE CONTROL TWIST L( Traffic - Eye Control Twist Locks (5) 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 101.79 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 9.67 1608509 FAC - SUPPLIES FAC - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 18.70 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 1.78 1616741 CITY HALL - ELECTRICAL SUPPLIE City Hall - Electrical Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 896.60 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 85.18 1677247 CITY HALL - SUPPLIES City Hall - Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 45.32 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 4.31 Total: 1,163.35 218469 2/4/2016 071811 PONY MAIL BOX & BUSINESS CTR 217607 CUES - SEWER - CAMERA SHIPPIN Cues - Sewer - Camera Shipping Fee 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 126.15 217654 SETCOM - FLEET RETURN POSTAL Setcom - Fleet Return Postage 511.000.77.548.68.42.00 54.55 Total: 180.70 Page: 29 Packet Page 53 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 30 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218470 2/4/2016 029800 PRINZ, DANIEL 10 LEOFF 1 CLAIM REIMBURSEMENT LEOFF 1 Claim Reimbursement 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 1,258.80 Total: 1,258.80 218471 2/4/2016 064088 PROTECTION ONE 291104 ALARM MONITORING - PARKS MAIL ALARM MONITORING FOR PARKS l 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 21.33 ALARM MONITORING FOR PARKS 1 001.000.64.576.80.42.00 21.33 ALARM MONITORING FOR FIRE ST, 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 130.38 Total: 173.04 218472 2/4/2016 071911 PROTZ, MARGARET 20794 FELDENKRAIS WS 20794 FELDENKRAIS WORKSHOP 20794 FELDENKRAIS WORKSHOP 001.000.64.571.27.41.00 252.00 Total: 252.00 218473 2/4/2016 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY 200000704821 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70( FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70( 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 2,100.36 200002411383 YOST PARK/POOL 9535 BOWDOIN YOST PARK/POOL 9535 BOWDOIN 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 151.92 200007876143 OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON OLD PUBLIC WORKS 200 DAYTON 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 491.74 200009595790 FIRE STATION # 16 8429 196TH ST FIRE STATION # 16 8429 196TH ST 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 881.90 200011439656 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 375.12 200016558856 CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N / ME CIVIC CENTER 250 5TH AVE N / ME Page: 30 Packet Page 54 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 31 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218473 2/4/2016 046900 PUGET SOUND ENERGY (Continued) 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 364.08 200016815843 FIRE STATION #17 275 6TH AVE N / FIRE STATION #17 275 6TH AVE N / 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 1,152.70 200017676343 FLEET MAINTENANCE BAY 21105 7 FLEET MAINTENANCE BAY 21105 7 511.000.77.548.68.47.00 430.01 200019375639 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801 1 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801 1 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 171.15 200019895354 SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / � SNO-ISLE LIBRARY 650 MAIN ST / � 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 509.82 200020415911 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH 001.000.65.518.20.47.00 32.36 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 111.000.68.542.90.47.00 122.95 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 421.000.74.534.80.47.00 122.95 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 122.95 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 511.000.77.548.68.47.00 122.95 PUBLIC WORKS OMC 7110 210TH ; 422.000.72.531.90.47.00 122.94 200021829581 WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / METER 00( WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / METER 00( 423.000.76.535.80.47.63 813.54 200024711901 CITY PARK BUILDING 600 3RD AVE CITY PARK BUILDING 600 3RD AVE 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 257.79 Total: 8,347.23 218474 2/4/2016 067447 RILEY, CHARLES H. 11 LEOFF 1 CLAIM REIMBURSEMENT Page: 31 Packet Page 55 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 32 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218474 2/4/2016 067447 RILEY, CHARLES H. (Continued) LEOFF 1 Claim Reimbursement 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 1,444.98 Total: 1,444.98 218475 2/4/2016 064769 ROMAINE ELECTRIC 5-007612 UNIT E105PO - BATTERY Unit E105PO - Battery 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 125.17 9.5% Sales Tax 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 11.89 Total: 137.06 218476 2/4/2016 069062 RONGERUDE, JOHN 8262 PUBLIC DEFENDER PUBLIC DEFENDER 001.000.39.512.52.41.00 350.00 Total: 350.00 218477 2/4/2016 068489 SIRENNET.COM 0194621-IN UNIT EQ96PO - LIGHTING Unit EQ96PO - Lighting 511.100.77.594.48.64.00 444.00 Total: 444.00 218478 2/4/2016 037303 SNO CO FIRE DIST # 1 16-102 Q4-15 EMS BILLING & POSTAGE Q4-15 Ambulance billings & postage 001.000.39.522.70.41.00 14,119.52 Total: 14,119.52 218479 2/4/2016 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 2002-0291-9 LIFT STATION #8 113 RAILROAD AV LIFT STATION #8 113 RAILROAD AV 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 90.37 2002-7495-9 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23602 76TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 23602 76TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 16.29 2003-8645-6 CLUBHOUSE 6801 MEADOWDALE CLUBHOUSE 6801 MEADOWDALE 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 56.88 2004-2241-8 FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70( Page: 32 Packet Page 56 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 33 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218479 2/4/2016 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) FRANCES ANDERSON CENTER 70( 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 1,472.28 2004-9315-3 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 76TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 22000 76TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 27.82 2007-4860-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 9730 220TH ST SW TRAFFIC LIGHT 9730 220TH ST SW 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 18.54 2009-1385-3 DECORATIVE LIGHTING 115 2ND X DECORATIVE LIGHTING 115 2ND X 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 26.89 2009-4334-8 TRAFFIC LIGHT 23202 EDMONDS V TRAFFIC LIGHT 23202 EDMONDS V 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 56.95 2010-5432-7 BRACKETT'S LANDING NORTH 50 f BRACKETT'S LANDING NORTH 50 f 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 67.47 2011-9222-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 20408 76TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 20408 76TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 16.46 2012-6598-0 LIFT STATION #12 16121 75TH PL � LIFT STATION #12 16121 75TH PL � 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 233.06 2013-7496-4 LIFT STATION #11 6811 1/2 157TH P LIFT STATION #11 6811 1/2 157TH P 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 23.75 2015-3292-6 LIFT STATION #7 121 W DAYTON S- LIFT STATION #7 121 W DAYTON S- 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 239.08 2015-8215-2 TRAFFIC LIGHT 19600 80TH AVE W TRAFFIC LIGHT 19600 80TH AVE W 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 27.67 2015-9448-8 LIFT STATION #15 7710 168TH PL S LIFT STATION #15 7710 168TH PL S 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 21.71 Page: 33 Packet Page 57 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 34 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218479 2/4/2016 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) 2016-1027-6 OVERHEAD STREET LIGHTING AT i OVERHEAD STREET LIGHTING AT 1 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 8.30 2016-5690-7 DECORATIVE LIGHTING 413 MAIN,' DECORATIVE LIGHTING 413 MAIN,' 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 374.83 2017-6210-1 415 5TH AVE S 415 5TH AVE S 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 29.27 2019-2991-6 WWTP FLOW METER 23219 74TH F WWTP FLOW METER 23219 74TH / 423.000.76.535.80.47.62 18.54 2020-7719-4 FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE FIRE STATION #20 23009 88TH AVE 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 531.98 2020-8787-0 LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / MEl LIFT STATION #6 100 PINE ST / MEl 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 129.10 2021-3965-5 BRACKETT'S LANDING SOUTH 100 BRACKETT'S LANDING SOUTH 100 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 27.07 2022-8909-6 TRAFFIC LIGHT 22400 HWY 99 / ME TRAFFIC LIGHT 22400 HWY 99 / ME 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 60.85 2024-2158-2 LOG CABIN & DECORATIVE LIGHTI LOG CABIN & DECORATIVE LIGHTI 001.000.66.518.30.47.00 271.33 2024-9953-9 LIFT STATION #1 105 CASPERS ST LIFT STATION #1 105 CASPERS ST 423.000.75.535.80.47.10 574.13 2042-9221-3 CHARGE STATION #1 552 MAIN ST CHARGE STATION #1 552 MAIN ST 111.000.68.542.64.47.00 95.35 2044-6743-5 HAZEL MILLER PLAZA HAZEL MILLER PLAZA Page: 34 Packet Page 58 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 35 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218479 2/4/2016 037375 SNO CO PUD NO 1 (Continued) 001.000.64.576.80.47.00 46.03 2205-4758-2 TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 95TH AVE TRAFFIC LIGHT SR104 @ 95TH AVE 111.000.68.542.63.47.00 53.59 Total: 4,615.59 218480 2/4/2016 063941 SNO CO SHERIFFS OFFICE 2015-2983 INV 2015-2983 EDMONDS - NOV 20 NORTHSOUND EMERG. MEDICINE- 001.000.39.523.60.41.00 482.00 PROVIDENCE EVERETT - -- 001.000.39.523.60.41.00 1,184.67 INMATE PHARMACEUTICALS 11/15 001.000.39.523.60.31.00 333.95 2015-2999 INV 2015-2999 EDMONDS JAIL ME[ PROVIDENCE EVERETT- 001.000.39.523.60.41.00 663.20 NORTHSOUND EMERG MEDICINE- 001.000.39.523.60.41.00 865.00 PROVIDENCE EVERETT- 001.000.39.523.60.41.00 1,957.12 INMATE PHARMACEUTICALS 12/15 001.000.39.523.60.31.00 191.19 2015-2999 INV 2015-2999 EDMONDS - INMATE CREDIT FOR INMATE PHARMACEU 001.000.39.523.60.31.00 -2.16 Total: 5,674.97 218481 2/4/2016 070167 SNOHOMISH COUNTY TREASURER January 2016 Crime Victims Court Remittance Crime Victims Court Remittance 001.000.237.140 520.51 Tota I : 520.51 218482 2/4/2016 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 Page: 35 Packet Page 59 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 36 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218482 2/4/2016 038300 SOUND DISPOSAL CO (Continued) 103584 WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / RECYCLINi WWTP 200 2ND AVE S / RECYCLIN, 423.000.76.535.80.47.66 29.95 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: 2,270.22 218483 2/4/2016 038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS 11325/4 STORM WORK JEANS, HOODY, TS Storm Work Jeans, Hoody, TShirts - , 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 365.80 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 34.75 11341/4 STREET - WORK PANTS, TSHIRTS Street - Work Pants, TShirts - Hiatt 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 127.95 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 12.16 11511/4 SEWER - WORK JEANS - T HARRIE Sewer - Work Jeans - T Harris 423.000.75.535.80.24.00 169.75 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.24.00 16.13 11531/4 STREET - WORK TSHIRTS, JEANS Street - Work TShirts, Jeans - T Bach 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 350.60 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 33.31 12045/4 STREET - EXCHANGE HOODY - T H Page: 36 Packet Page 60 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 37 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218483 2/4/2016 038410 SOUND SAFETY PRODUCTS (Continued) Street - Exchange Hoody - T Hanson 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 5.35 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 0.51 12080/4 STORM - T SHIRTS, HOODY Storm - T Shirts, Hoody 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 112.30 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.24.00 10.67 12279/4 STREET - WORK JEANS, TSHIRTS, Street - Work Jeans, TShirts, Hoody - 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 355.50 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 33.77 38459/1 STREET - WORK T SHIRTS, JEANS Street - Work T Shirts, Jeans, Hoody 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 378.35 9.2% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.90.24.00 34.81 Total: 2,041.71 218484 2/4/2016 040250 STEUBER DISTRIBUTING 2811849 GREENHOUSE SUPPLIES: MIX, OS GREENHOUSE SUPPLIES: MIX, OS 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 1,542.00 9.5% Sales Tax 125.000.64.576.80.31.00 146.49 Total: 1,688.49 218485 2/4/2016 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY S101481130.001 WATER/SEWER - POWER AND LIGI Water/Sewer - Power and Lighting 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 206.59 Water/Sewer - Power and Lighting 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 206.59 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 19.63 Page: 37 Packet Page 61 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 38 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218485 2/4/2016 040430 STONEWAY ELECTRIC SUPPLY (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 19.62 S101494111.001 CITY HALL - ELECTRICAL SUPPLIE City Hall - Electrical Supplies 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 60.27 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 5.73 S101494111.002 CITY HALL - STUDS City Hall - Studs 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 37.53 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 3.57 S101503258.001 LIBRARY - FLUORESCENT LIGHTS Library - Fluorescent Lights 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 51.25 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 4.87 Total: 615.65 218486 2/4/2016 074797 SUPER CHARGE MARKETING LLC 2126 SOCIAL MEDIA SERVICES FOR JAN Social media services for January 20 001.000.61.557.20.41.00 300.00 Total: 300.00 218487 2/4/2016 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC 18102490 STREET - SUPPLIES Street - Supplies 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 167.92 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.31.31.00 15.95 18102654 FLEET SHOP SUPPLIES Fleet Shop Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 40.57 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 3.85 18102655 FLEET SHOP SUPPLIES Page: 38 Packet Page 62 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 39 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218487 2/4/2016 040917 TACOMA SCREW PRODUCTS INC (Continued) Fleet Shop Supplies 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 22.16 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.20 2.11 Total: 252.56 218488 2/4/2016 073970 TALLMAN, TYLER 1/4-1/25 GYM MONITOR 1/4-1/25/16 PICKLE -BALL GYM MON 1/4-1/25/16 PICKLE -BALL GYM MON 001.000.64.571.25.41.00 70.00 Total: 70.00 218489 2/4/2016 065459 THE HERALD SUBSCRIPTION 10925948 WWTP-HERALD SUBSCRIPTION WWTP HERALD SUBSCRIPTION FC 423.000.76.535.80.49.00 195.00 Total: 195.00 218490 2/4/2016 075533 THOMPSON, MYRELLA 1/25 REFUND 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 001.000.239.200 72.00 Total: 72.00 218491 2/4/2016 038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR US53022 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE MUSEUI ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE MUSEU 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 351.37 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 33.38 US53294 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE SNO-ISI ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE SNO-ISI 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 1,247.15 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 118.48 US53301 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE F. ANDE ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE FRANC[ 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 1,134.01 9.5% Sales Tax Page: 39 Packet Page 63 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 40 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218491 2/4/2016 038315 THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR (Continued) 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 107.73 US53869 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE CIVIC C ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE CIVIC C 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 1,148.54 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 109.11 US54073 ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE SENIOR ELEVATOR MAINTENANCE SENIOR 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 274.77 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.48.00 26.10 Total: 4,550.64 218492 2/4/2016 070744 TIGER OAK PUBLICATIONS INC 2016-159046 BUSINESS RECRUITMENT AD IN SE Business recruitment ad in February 001.000.61.558.70.41.40 1,200.00 Total: 1,200.00 218493 2/4/2016 041960 TOWN & COUNTRY FENCE INC 52158 STREET - SUPPLIES Street - Supplies 111.000.68.542.61.31.00 41.50 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.61.31.00 3.95 52222 HICKMAN PARK FENCE REPAIR HICKMAN PARK FENCE REPAIR 001.000.64.576.80.48.00 405.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.64.576.80.48.00 38.48 Total: 488.93 218494 2/4/2016 042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY 40351 FAC MAINT KEYS Fac Maint Keys 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 20.50 PS Keys 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 10.65 Page: 40 Packet Page 64 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 41 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218494 2/4/2016 042800 TRI-CITIES SECURITY (Continued) FAC Keys 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 13.15 Fleet Keys 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 11.50 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 4.21 9.5% Sales Tax 511.000.77.548.68.31.10 1.09 Total: 61.10 218495 2/4/2016 044300 US POSTAL SERVICE PO Box 2008 2016 ANNUAL RENTAL FEE FOR EC 2016 Annual Rental Fee for Edmonds 421.000.74.534.80.45.00 499.33 2016 Annual Rental Fee for Edmonds 423.000.75.535.80.45.00 499.33 2016 Annual Rental Fee for Edmonds 422.000.72.531.90.45.00 499.34 Total: 1,498.00 218496 2/4/2016 075534 VAN MIEGHEM, JOE 1/25 REFUND 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 001.000.239.200 2.00 Total: 2.00 218497 2/4/2016 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS 9759303257 C/A571242650-0001 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Bid Dept 001.000.62.524.20.42.00 332.58 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Bid Dept 001.000.62.524.20.31.00 45.15 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 75.69 iPad Cell Service Council 001.000.11.511.60.42.00 300.10 Page: 41 Packet Page 65 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 42 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 218497 2/4/2016 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount (Continued) 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 95.68 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Engineering 001.000.67.518.21.42.00 750.58 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Engineering 001.000.67.518.21.35.00 580.34 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Facilities 001.000.66.518.30.42.00 91.52 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Finance 001.000.31.514.23.42.00 95.68 iPhone/iPad Cell Service HR 001.000.22.518.10.42.00 95.68 iPhone/iPad Cell Service IS 001.000.31.518.88.42.00 387.43 iPhone/iPad Cell Service IS 001.000.31.518.88.35.00 328.49 iPhone/iPad Cell Service Mayor's Offi 001.000.21.513.10.42.00 95.68 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 1,104.60 Air cards Police Dept 001.000.41.521.22.42.00 841.50 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 Page: 42 Packet Page 66 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 43 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor 218497 2/4/2016 067865 VERIZON WIRELESS Invoice (Continued) 9759303257 9759423274 218498 2/4/2016 069889 VETERINARY SPECIALTY CENTER 235200 PO # Description/Account Amount 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 7.58 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Street C 111.000.68.542.90.42.00 171.54 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Fleet 511.000.77.548.68.42.00 55.67 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Water/,r 421.000.74.534.80.42.00 120.79 iPhone/iPad Cell Service PW Water/,r 423.000.75.535.80.42.00 120.78 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 iPad Cell Service Storm 422.000.72.531.90.42.00 155.88 iPhone/iPad Cell Service WWTP 423.000.76.535.80.42.00 197.40 SURFACE TABLET RETURNED FOF Surface tablet returned for credit 001.000.31.518.88.35.00 -602.24 C/A 772540262-00001 Lift Station access 001.000.31.518.88.42.00 74.72 Total : 6,214.66 INV#235200 CLIET #25492 - EDMOI` EMERGENCY SERVICE - #9249 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 102.00 HYDROMORPHONE INJECTION 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 49.32 DOMITOR/ANTISEDAN GROUP Page: 43 Packet Page 67 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 44 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218498 2/4/2016 069889 VETERINARY SPECIALTY CENTER (Continued) 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 98.62 INTRAOCULAR PRESSURE TONO-1 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 39.90 CORNEAL STAIN FLUORESCEIN 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 30.50 HOSPITALIZATION LEVEL I 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 106.59 RIMADYL 25MG CHEW TAB 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 26.00 CODEINE SULFATE 15 MG 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 28.30 TOBRAMYCIN OPHTH SOLUTION 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 35.40 ADMINISTER MEDICATION 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 12.50 BIOHAZARD FEE 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 5.95 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.70.41.00 8.52 Total: 543.60 218499 2/4/2016 069816 VWR INTERNATIONAL INC 8043656457 WWTP-SUPPLIES.LAB 1-ITEM NO. 11384-130- 423.000.76.535.80.31.31 89.83 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.76.535.80.31.31 8.53 Total: 98.36 218500 2/4/2016 067917 WALLY'S TOWING INC 55059 INV#55059 - EDMONDS PD TOW 2008 ACURA #AMU0443 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 166.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.22.41.00 15.77 Total: 181.77 Page: 44 Packet Page 68 of 391 vchlist 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM Voucher List City of Edmonds Page: 45 Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218501 2/4/2016 075154 WALTER E NELSON CO 528786 FAC MAINT - CUSTODIAL VACUUM Fac Maint - Custodial Vacuum Repair 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 956.67 Freight 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 13.69 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 92.18 529197 FAC MAINT - DISINFECTANTS, LINE Fac Maint - Disinfectants, Liners, Han 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 538.45 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.66.518.30.31.00 51.15 Total: 1,652.14 218502 2/4/2016 066094 WARE, HOLLI C 1/25 REFUND 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 1/25/16 REFUND CREDIT ON ACCO 001.000.239.200 22.00 Total: 22.00 218503 2/4/2016 075283 WAVE BROADBAND 102-261607 FIBER HIGH SPEED INTERNET SEF High Speed Internet service 02/01/16 001.000.31.518.87.42.00 816.00 Total: 816.00 218504 2/4/2016 073552 WELCO SALES LLC 6925 CAROLYN LAFAVE BUSINESS CAR[ 500 BUSINESS CARDS FOR CAROL 001.000.21.513.10.31.00 45.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.21.513.10.31.00 4.28 6933 UTILITY BILLING - BILLING PAPER,' Utility Billing - Billing Paper Stock 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 56.67 Utility Billing - Billing Paper Stock 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 56.67 Utility Billing - Billing Paper Stock 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 56.66 Page: 45 Packet Page 69 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 46 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # Description/Account Amount 218504 2/4/2016 073552 WELCO SALES LLC (Continued) 9.5% Sales Tax 421.000.74.534.80.31.00 5.38 9.5% Sales Tax 422.000.72.531.90.31.00 5.38 9.5% Sales Tax 423.000.75.535.80.31.00 5.39 6943 INV#6943 - EDMONDS PD SET UP OF 4 NAMES 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 48.00 PRINTING OF 4 NEW CARDS 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 81.00 9.5% Sales Tax 001.000.41.521.10.31.00 12.26 Total: 376.69 218505 2/4/2016 069605 WEST COAST CODE CONSULTANTS 2015-EDM-JAN FIRE PLAN REVIEW- MEMORY CAF FIRE PLAN REVIEW- MEMORY CAF 001.000.62.524.20.41.00 255.00 Total: 255.00 218506 2/4/2016 061047 WWCPA 2016 Renewal 2016 ANNUAL CERT RENEWAL - R 2016 Annual Cert Renewal - R Wichi 423.000.75.535.80.49.00 15.00 Total: 15.00 218507 2/4/2016 051050 WYATT, ARTHUR D 12 LEOFF 1 CLAIM REIMBURSEMENT LEOFF 1 Claim Reimbursement 009.000.39.517.20.23.00 207.09 Total: 207.09 218508 2/4/2016 075310 WYSER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY E4MA.Pmt 6 E4MA.PMT 6 FINAL THRU 01/19/16 E4MA.Pmt 6 FINAL thru 01/19/16 132.000.64.594.76.65.00 2,570.70 E4MA.Ret 6 thru 01/19/16 132.000.223.400 -123.00 Page: 46 Packet Page 70 of 391 vchlist Voucher List Page: 47 02/04/2016 9:27:38AM City of Edmonds Bank code : usbank Voucher Date Vendor Invoice PO # 218508 2/4/2016 075310 075310 WYSER CONSTRUCTION COMPAN) (Continued) 218509 2/4/2016 051282 ZUMAR INDUSTRIES INC 0180202 0180345 138 Vouchers for bank code : usbank 138 Vouchers in this report Description/Account Amount Total : 2,447.70 TRAFFIC - SIGN BLANKS FOR 76TI- Traffic - Sign Blanks for 76th & 224th 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 501.25 Freight 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 23.58 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 49.86 TRAFFIC -SIGN BLANKS 18X18 ALI Traffic -Sign Blanks 18x18 Alum 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 203.40 Freight 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 14.31 9.5% Sales Tax 111.000.68.542.64.31.00 20.68 Total : 813.08 Bank total : 251,567.08 Total vouchers : 251,567.08 Page 47 Packet Page 71 of 391 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 STIR 15th St. SW Walkway (Edmonds Way to 8th Ave) c424 E3DC STM 190th PI SW Wall Construction c428 E3FF STIR 2009 Street Overlay Program c294 E9CA WTR 2010 Waterline Replacement Program c363 EOJA STIR 2011 Residential Neighborhood Traffic Calming c343 E1AB WTR 2011 Waterline Replacement Program c333 E1JA STM 2012 Citywide Storm Drainage Improvements c382 E21FE 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 E3FA STM 2013 Lake Ballinger Basin Study & Associated Projects c407 E31FB SWR 2013 Sewerline Replacement Project c398 E3GA WTR 2013 Waterline Replacement Program c397 E3JA STIR 2014 Chip Seals c451 E4CB STM 2014 Drainage Improvements c433 E41FA STM 2014 Lake Ballinger Associated Projects c436 E4FD STIR 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 STIR 2015 Overlay Program c463 ESCA SWR 2015 Sewerline Replacement Project c441 E4GA SWR 2015 Sewerline Overlays i007 ESCC STIR 2015 Traffic Calming c471 ESAB WTR 2015 Waterline Overlays c475 ESCB WTR 2015 Waterline Replacement Program c440 E4J13 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 STIR 220 7th Ave N Sidewalk c421 E3DA Revised 2/3/2016 Packet Page 72 of 391 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number STR 220th Street Overlay Project c462 E4CD 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 E1 CA 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 Revised 2/3/2016 Packet Page 73 of 391 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number PM Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor c282 EBMA 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 E1EA STR SR104/City Park Mid -Block Crossing c454 E4DB Revised 2/3/2016 Packet Page 74 of 391 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Protect Title Number Number General SR99 Enhancement Program c238 E6MA 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/l 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 2/3/2016 Packet Page 75 of 391 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 2/3/2016 Packet Page 76 of 391 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 2/3/2016 Packet Page 77 of 391 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 E41-11A c446 Sewer Outfall Groundwater Monitoring WTR ir E4JA c422 2014 Waterline Replacement Program WTR E4J113 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 STIR E5AB c471 2015 Traffic Calming 2015 Overlay Progra WTR E5CB c475 2015 Waterline Overlays AmdW2015 Sewerline Replacement Project STIR E5DA c474 Bikelink Project Edmonds Waterfront Access Analysis STM E51FA c466 2015 Citywide Drainage Improvements/Rehab Projects c467 Update Stormwater Management Code & Associated Projects STM E5FC c472 Dayton Street Storm Improvements (6th Ave - 8th Ave) SWR E5GA c469 WWTP E51-11A c481 WTR E5J113 c482 FAC E5LA c476 solo STIR E6DA c245 c256 General E6MA c238 W 265 STIR E7AC i005 - Infiltration Faci 2016-17 Sanitary Sewer Replacement Projects Lake Ballinger Trunk Se Study WWTP Outfall Pipe Modifications 2016-17 Waterline Replacement Projects Dayton St. Utility Replacement Project (3rd Ave to 9th Ave) me eservoir Re -coati AN UDarades - Council Chambers Standard Details U 76th Avenue West/75th Place West Walkway Project Caspers/Ninth Avenue/Puget Drive (SR524) Walkway Project SR99 Enhancement Program Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements 228th St. SW Corridor Improvements Wor Shell Valley Emergency Access Road STM E7FG m013 NPDES Revised 2/3/2016 Packet Page 78 of 391 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Engineering Number) Engineering Protect Protect Accounting Funding Number Number Protect Title PM E7MA c276 Dayton Street Plaza SWR E8GA c298 Lift Station 2 Improvements (Separated from Us 13 - 09/01/08) SWR IAK c301 City -Wide Sewer Improvements PM E81VIA c282 Fourth Avenue Cultural Corridor Marina Beach Additional Parking STR E9CA c294 2009 Street Overlay Program 226th Street Walkway Project STM E9FB c307 Talbot Rd. Storm Drain Project/Perrinville Creek Mitigation SWR c304 Sewer Lift Station Rehabilitation Desig MV PM E91VIA c321 Senior Center Parking Lot & Landscaping Improvements Revised 2/3/2016 Packet Page 79 of 391 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 2/3/2016 Packet Page 80 of 391 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 2/3/2016 Packet Page 81 of 391 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 2/3/2016 Packet Page 82 of 391 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 SWR E5CC i007 2015 Sewerline Overlays STM E7FG m013 NPDES UTILITIES E5NA solo Standard Details Updates SWR E5GB sol l Lake Ballinger Trunk Sewer Study Revised 2/3/2016 Packet Page 83 of 391 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 2/3/2016 Packet Page 84 of 391 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 2/3/2016 Packet Page 85 of 391 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Funding Protect Title STIR Main Street Lighting and Sidewalk Enhancements Project Accounting Number c265 Engineering Project Number E7AA Revised 2/3/2016 Packet Page 86 of 391 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 Overlays i007 ESCC 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 Revised 2/3/2016 Packet Page 87 of 391 PROJECT NUMBERS (By Project Title) Project Engineering Accounting Project Funding Project Title Number Number WTR 224th Waterline Relocation (2013) c418 E3J13 WTR 76th Ave W Waterline Extension with Lynnwood c344 E1JB 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 2/3/2016 Packet Page 88 of 391 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 767 (01/16/2016 to 01/31/2016) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount -ed2 REGULAR HOURS Educational Pay Correction 0.00 -156.28 112 ABSENT NO PAY NON HIRED 80.00 0.00 121 SICK SICK LEAVE 760.00 27,603.06 122 VACATION VACATION 422.00 16,655.70 123 HOLIDAY HOLIDAY HOURS 44.00 1,574.17 124 HOLIDAY FLOATER HOLIDAY 62.00 2,036.01 125 COMP HOURS COMPENSATORY TIME 167.75 6,315.98 129 SICK Police Sick Leave L & 1 3.00 116.59 131 MILITARY MILITARY LEAVE 80.00 2,565.00 141 BEREAVEMENT BEREAVEMENT 30.00 925.33 150 REGULAR HOURS Kelly Day Used 199.00 7,125.97 155 COMP HOURS COMPTIME AUTO PAY 163.15 6,789.25 157 SICK SICK LEAVE PAYOFF 110.19 5,336.99 158 VACATION VACATION PAYOFF 177.71 7,745.77 160 VACATION MANAGEMENT LEAVE 45.00 2,541.97 170 REGULAR HOURS COUNCIL BASE PAY 700.00 7,000.00 174 REGULAR HOURS COUNCIL PRESIDENTS PAY 0.00 130.00 175 REGULAR HOURS COUNCIL PAY FOR NO MEDICAL 0.00 2,830.08 190 REGULAR HOURS REGULAR HOURS 14,503.25 560,542.49 191 REGULAR HOURS FIRE PENSION PAYMENTS 4.00 2,150.85 195 REGULAR HOURS ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE 80.00 3,939.00 196 REGULAR HOURS LIGHT DUTY 77.00 2,992.41 210 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME -STRAIGHT 174.00 7,195.13 215 OVERTIME HOURS WATER WATCH STANDBY 60.00 2,919.04 216 MISCELLANEOUS STANDBY TREATMENT PLANT 18.00 1,613.75 220 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME 1.5 299.50 17,791.86 225 OVERTIME HOURS OVERTIME -DOUBLE 18.25 1,192.25 410 MISCELLANEOUS WORKING OUT OF CLASS 0.00 43.12 411 SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL SHIFT DIFFERENTIAL 0.00 1,098.84 600 RETROACTIVE PAY RETROACTIVE PAY 0.00 657.11 602 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP 78.00 0.00 603 COMP HOURS Holiday Comp 1.0 45.00 0.00 604 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP TIME 157.25 0.00 606 COMP HOURS ACCRUED COMP TIME 7.50 0.00 02/04/2016 Page 1 of 2 Packet Page 89 of 391 Payroll Earnings Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 767 (01/16/2016 to 01/31/2016) Hour Type Hour Class Description Hours Amount acc MISCELLANEOUS ACCREDITATION PAY 0.00 24.95 acs MISCELLANEOUS ACCRED/POLICE SUPPORT 0.00 171.67 boc MISCELLANEOUS BOC II Certification 0.00 84.53 colre MISCELLANEOUS Collision Reconstructionist 0.00 107.89 cpl MISCELLANEOUS TRAINING CORPORAL 0.00 147.28 crt MISCELLANEOUS CERTIFICATION III PAY 0.00 622.35 det MISCELLANEOUS DETECTIVE PAY 0.00 102.75 det4 MISCELLANEOUS Detective 4% 0.00 986.42 ed1 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 2% 0.00 731.26 ed2 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 4% 0.00 873.40 ed3 EDUCATION PAY EDUCATION PAY 6% 0.00 4,551.63 hol HOLIDAY HOLIDAY 1,183.80 47,374.86 k9 MISCELLANEOUS K-9 PAY 0.00 102.75 Iq1 LONGEVITY LONGEVITY PAY 2% 0.00 956.79 Ig10 LONGEVITY LONGEVITY 5.5% 0.00 549.04 Ig11 LONGEVITY LONGEVITY PAY 2.5% 0.00 878.62 Iq2 LONGEVITY PAY LONGEVITY PAY 4% 0.00 993.80 Iq3 LONGEVITY PAY LONGEVITY 6% 0.00 5,415.06 Iq4 LONGEVITY Lonqevitv 1 % 0.00 206.78 Iq6 LONGEVITY Longevity .5% 0.00 261.77 Iq7 LONGEVITY Longevity 1.5% 0.00 966.45 mels SICK Medical Leave Sick 64.00 2,543.60 mtc MISCELLANEOUS MOTORCYCLE PAY 0.00 196.02 pds MISCELLANEOUS Public Disclosure Specialist 0.00 47.12 phv MISCELLANEOUS PHYSICAL FITNESS PAY 0.00 1,825.43 prof MISCELLANEOUS PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS SER 0.00 157.56 sdp MISCELLANEOUS SPECIAL DUTY PAY 5% 0.00 514.51 sqt MISCELLANEOUS ADMINISTRATIVE SERGEANT 0.00 154.66 traf MISCELLANEOUS TRAFFIC 0.00 323.67 vab VACATION VACATION ADD BACK 36.50 0.00 19,849.85 $771,144.06 Total Net Pay: $518,345.07 02/04/2016 Page 2 of 2 Packet Page 90 of 391 Benefit Checks Summary Report City of Edmonds Pay Period: 767 - 01/16/2016 to 01/31/2016 Bank: usbank - US Bank Check # Date Payee # Name Check Amt Direct Deposit 62064 02/05/2016 epoa EPOA-1 POLICE 1,265.00 0.00 62065 02/05/2016 epoa4 EPOA-4 POLICE SUPPORT 117.00 0.00 62066 02/05/2016 jhan JOHN HANCOCK 1,028.10 0.00 62067 02/05/2016 flex NAVIA BENEFIT SOLUTIONS 952.49 0.00 62068 02/05/2016 cope SEIU COPE 52.00 0.00 62069 02/05/2016 seiu SEIU LOCAL 925 3,766.94 0.00 62070 02/05/2016 uw UNITED WAY OF SNOHOMISH COUNTY 858.24 0.00 62071 02/05/2016 icma VANTAGE TRANSFER AGENTS 304884 2,456.31 0.00 10,496.08 0.00 Bank: wire - US BANK Check # Date Payee # Name Check Amt Direct Deposit 2340 02/05/2016 pens DEPT OF RETIREMENT SYSTEMS 236,655.86 0.00 2341 02/05/2016 aflac AFLAC 5,983.13 0.00 2345 02/05/2016 us US BANK 106,445.96 0.00 2346 02/05/2016 mebt WTRISC FBO #N3177B1 97,072.73 0.00 2347 02/05/2016 wadc WASHINGTON STATE TREASURER 20,738.00 0.00 2349 02/05/2016 pb NATIONWIDE RETIREMENT SOLUTION 5,043.60 0.00 2350 02/05/2016 oe OFFICE OF SUPPORT ENFORCEMENT 48.50 0.00 471,987.78 0.00 Grand Totals: 482,483.86 0.00 2/4/2016 Page 1 of 1 Packet Page 91 of 391 AM-8315 3. C. City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 02/09/2016 Time: Consent Submitted By: Linda Hynd Department: City Clerk's Office Type: Action Information Subiect Title Acknowledge receipt of a Claim for Damages from Jeanette Nyman ($150.00) and from Gary D. Atkinson ($3,604.98). Recommendation Acknowledge receipt of the Claims for Damages by minute entry. Previous Council Action N/A Narrative Jeanette Nyman 13514 36th Avenue NE Seattle, WA 98125 ($150.00) Gary D. Atkinson 621 View Place Edmonds, WA 98020 ($3,604.98) Nyman Claim for Damages Atkinson Claim for Damages Attachments Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Mayor Dave Earling 02/01/2016 12:45 PM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 02/04/2016 10:56 AM Form Started By: Linda Hynd Started On: 02/01/2016 12:31 PM Final Approval Date: 02/04/2016 Packet Page 92 of 391 RECEIVED CITY OF EDMONDS FEB 0 12016 CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM Date Claim Form MOMS CITE CLERK Received by Cit r Please take note that P e* who currentl resides at I�~ f -� 12G , mailing address home phone # _ 11y1 o2warlCS�phone # 7Q a 7_rf5 Pand who resided at at the time of the occurrence and whose date of birth is �! �' is claiming damages against i yliVY`G fJin the sum of $ r . arising out of the following circumstances listed below. DATE OF OCCURRENCE: LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE: DESCRIPTION: 1,1115 ! TIME: �� () 4. ex l 1?A -;TO'k b,4 vw ep ,-) -ARLHJ4 -� Describe the conduct and circumstance that brought about the injury or damage. Also describe the injury or damage. e' rwe. rn h l.� c Y1 atta an extra shee r additional information, if n`�d d) Ncf 1 b[n 'rat a --a ` -e ►, ekyKpu 11d' r i'd� i C �R�[ 5 'ti 1' 4Ltc 2, Provide a list of withesses, if applicable, to toccurrence incl' ding names, addresses, and phone numbers. t y _ Gi h V eu V Attach copies of all documientation relating to e�penses, injuries, losses, and/or estimates for repair.0 Have you submitted a claim for damages to your insurance company? If so, please provide the name of the insurance company: and the policy #: _h urn L V---No * * ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AUTOMOBILE CLAIMS ONLY * * License Plate # Driver License # Type Auto: rnnKi lqc[ 7 (year) �ke� (model) DRIVER: C� OWNER: Address: i' Address: a Phone#: q,5 ' Phone#: Passengers: Name: Address: Form Revised 05/06/14 Name: Address: Page 1 of 2 Packet Page 93 of 391 F * NOTE: THIS FORM MUST BE SIGNED AND NOTARIZED * * 1, jeaa� k� min , being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the claimant for the above described; that I have read the above claim, know the contents thereof and believe the sam 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 sub�ct to disclosur? ptM%ant to RCW 42.56, Signature of Claimant(s) State of Washington County of I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that -rP.a F'inQ`f� Nby e s the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that (he/she) signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be (his/her) free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Please present the completed claim form to: Form Reiised 05/06/14 City Clerk's Office City of Edmonds 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA, 98020 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Page 2 of 2 Packet Page 94 of 391 Work Order 39600221526 Customer ID: A080510476 Name: JEANETTE NYMAN Address: City, State, EDMONDS, WA 98026 Phone: (206) 295-3660 Comments: spare is on RF Vehicle: 1997 TOYOTA CAMRY Color: Mileage: 97,871 License: AWB9678 Oty Product Code Product Description Price/ea FET Amount 1 15709 Pass - w/Rubber Stem $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 1 135149 P195/70R-14 90S ECLIPSE ALL SEASONS BW $89.79 $0.00 $89.79 1 13713 TUBELESS VALVE STEM $4.50 $0.00 $4.50 1 13718 WHEEL SPIN BALANCE $13.50 $0.00 $13.50 Parts Subtotal: $94.29 Labor Subtotal: $13.50 Sales Tax: $10.35 Tire Tax: $1.00 Invoice $119.14 Payment Method: CREDIT Approval# Card# XXXXXXXXXXXX6595 $119.14 DOT: N3J9CDH4215 oty: 1 Wheel Position: RF Notes To Review RECOMMEND ALIGNMENT DUE TO IMPACT TO RF. MISSING RF HUBCAP PRIOR With Customer: Service Checklist: Visual Tire Inspection I Front I Recommended Service I Recommended Service Declined I Comments: LF LOW ON TREAD Remember to rotate your tires every 5,000 miles for maximum mileage - and it's free! Les Schwab electronically registers your tire purchase with the tire manufacturer at no charge to you, in accordance with NHTSA's tire registration requirements. Your car may have a tire pressure monitoring system that uses a warning light to alert the driver of low tire pressure or system failure. Pursuant to NHTSA, Les Schwab must install all tire and wheel combinations with functioning TPMS sensors; including tires and custom wheels or winter tires and wheels. The TPMS light may illuminate after routine service and require additional action. We offer and recommend monthly air checks. Free air checks for the life of the tires. Invoice Date/Time: 01-25-2016 02:03 PM Page 1 of 2 Packet Page 95 of 391 RECEIVED FEB 0 4 2016 EDMONDS CITY CLERK CITY OF EDMONDS CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FORM Date Claim Form Received by City a- - /� Please take note that _�_{� 1- � I] A I k 1 h S o 1, , who currently resides at 6 2 / V T JJW R/ ete e W14 q �0,20 _ mailing address G -2/ N I E w P/G c e Ecl m o ti ds 9-?0-�o home phone # i%?S-6 9'0- �l/, work phone # )G 9"3 S79nd who resided at G e, 4,�v Z4 l k- r'a� s O.S G 1 at the time of the occurrence AnYAose dtte of birth is YS� , is claiming damages againstCi/ �. a Fr'li„oil rl s in the sum of $ U 1? 00 arising out of the following circumstances listed below. DATE OF OCCURRENCE: di C' 1,2 0/6 TIME: 1. 30 /Y17 to AN LOCATION OF OCCURRENCE: _6 21 V �L [_ _k:� _J- Cr C t-- }z d 9' 9 0.2 0 DESCRIPTION: Piz Describe the conduct and circumstance that brought about the injury or damage. Also describe the injury or damage (attach an extra sheet for additional inf6rmation, if needed) 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. Have you submitted a claim for damages to your insurance company? Yes No If so, please provide the name of the insurance company: —A-I!M I (_ a � U � 1�1 "4 � �h S 0 k& ItC E C o m b 0-1 y and the policy #: 9 6/ .2 9'6 2 0 Y S * * ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR AUTOMOBILE CLAIMS ONLY License Plate # A V 3 y 9,3 Driver License # Type Auto: G G A( a'h 416 c, r C--X irci 'i D 12.*49� (make) (model) DRIVER: f) A -t-- OWNER: ..1 a eq Address: �c j 1� 7 F t� _f' 1 cti_ c �_ Address: F o Phone#: .Z Phone#: Passengers: Name: _ _ No rt a Name: Address: Address: Page t of 2 Form Revised 05/06/14 Packet Page 96 of 391 * NOTE: THIS FORM MUST BE SIGNED AND NOTARIZED * * I, C ce a v Q-A �, -o' x v A , being first duly sworn, depose and say that I am the claimant for the above described; hat I have 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 subject to disclosure pursuant to RCW 42.56. x Signature of Claimant(s) State of Washington County of I h a n vn, I S I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Wmv�A 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. Dated- Li Sin ure Title My appointment expires: Please present the completed claim form to: Form Revised 05/06/14 City Clerk's Office City of Edmonds 121 5th Avenue North Edmonds, WA, 98020 8:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Notary Public State of Washington DENISE L ROSCOE My Appointment Expires May 27, 2017 Page 2 of 2 Packet Page 97 of 391 •r1��1�. Y' •rs. r 4• r�� fv 4 �•r ' 1 Y li - �r•1 •S • Y. - Y. Rr i . �}•�. li 1 1 �i Ilk .3.r . _ _ iS j � "" wca�IwA�� • y . 73 � sH f: 1" ' •� •.r i YES' " y`� e! ' ^7'�'�Ni'��_�+-. }.� .Syik r�`^r� .• �._fxryy �-'•� •�i.,1 �, r� ��� •r J s�+' S � : �`.y�� ��!"_. �. 1:.•tis ;�•:� . �`.`IR: .� 7r SM1 �. �� •� T•1 f {'Y +.ft14CYyy'� ".r :. s� ,' •..'"-i::.,- r �.� J.:�' - :� ar ry.%}-: _ - -r'' t: _ .. j jai"�.•.::e TM1' � +.` �:' :.lr ,� '�'• ;:'�' _ Nip f'.;,..; �7': � " r ��' - ,y�-�i• .::s�, ?„~=;';�f;•��;�: !p. ^.7..�• �. ,, �••�G� rr�i �' `lri:' •yti. l' �i:j''! :'� non '�S'- ■ r:�: F�i-.._ y r'� 1•�•`� +�• _ �� '_,� .;� •. .t �,ti L: ,.':•- t:.- '�S,r� �•�i +�+ R�•ry�. i14;'� •a � .Y�,4• �� � .� � : ,•. :-..�;.� ��,:is_:r: ,r �'' .�'.i; • ,., � 7 .,,c •s �1�'` a.l:i: .,i.� �, � ,�t '" a -��..�,Ji,^•, ;;;v Y ,w•" •'`�•^in ry ' i'•,:'-• _ , .a4;1.:-`: �, R ._i :: :.1'a•..=.. r.:"�.i'_n 'f .�..� .+� ��: �: L=`a i� •'.J'+' .Y3 �"�. •s' ,{ .;yr� ;�r-•'. ".. - �•Y.- .r v -/. 'i=�" r 7„�4k - t: .{�. '�`¢A�i Yi_'2� " - �. Y. ,} �, �-t ��i�i'` le•v iY= ik' i Y .'i-•A, •,i. �• :1 ��. 'l �'- �'�i•.VS��Y'Ki, "-.� .rr�=�"i+t�+�.i�.yi:� - �� "��'}•�: �;;': _•t<` •�;�- :'�'� n . '::�,• �?'.-'v?�t: ,�. ,ram b _ r".y.. h" . t et�_ .r�`-:.i- •g,; �� • vi:�' `•��' •s'•r . '�`::.1• ..:9 �:r. �:.•�Y7� . { f�. � •� `prat �•- �,i? s, y. ''� .irriS .��., r Z r •+li:� . ax Y.Il:; :r K � ' �'l,- a �"'r'-„ � . - ^_c� ..r r � l : �i:�.:;ulp �!��'`j} �� j Z'+;i:�• '�ZI' �[yr��4 ."i...x` -�'.'•. i..- ;.`�:: '. r �ir� r" -;ti^s; ,,.rr';j�;iYri"'��i .�..�d :�1.[T�►-�- map 1 '. +i i. } - --.^.,~ I.'', �` } •� ' AM-8294 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 02/09/2016 Time: Consent Submitted For: Dave Earling Department: Mayor's Office Type: Action Submitted By: Carolyn LaFave Information Subiect Title Confirmation of Athene Tarrant to the Architectural Design Board in position #3 - layman. Recommendation Please confirm Athene Tarrant to position #3 - layman, on the Architectural Design Board. Previous Council Action 3. A Narrative Mayor Earling is recommending confirmation of Athene Tarrant to position #3 - layman, of the Architectural Design Board. ADB terms are for four years, limited to two consecutive terms, and are subject to Council confirmation. This will be Ms. Tarrant's first term. Inbox City Clerk Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Carolyn LaFave Final Approval Date: 01/27/2016 Form Review Reviewed By Date Scott Passey 01/27/2016 11:25 AM Dave Earling 01/27/2016 12:54 PM Scott Passey 01/27/2016 02:35 PM Started On: 01/26/2016 12:37 PM Packet Page 101 of 391 AM-8296 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 02/09/2016 Time: Consent Submitted For: Dave Earling Department: Mayor's Office Type: Action Submitted By: Carolyn LaFave Information Subiect Title Confirmation of Lesly Kaplan to the Arts Commission in position #7 - literary. Recommendation Please confirm Lesly Kaplan to position #7 - literary, of the Arts Commission. Previous Council Action 3. E. Narrative Mayor Earling, staff, and the Edmonds Arts Commission are recommending confirmation of Lesly Kaplan to position #7 - literary, of the Arts Commission. Arts Commission terms are for four years and subject to council confirmation. Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Frances Chapin Scott Passey 02/05/2016 10:00 AM City Clerk Scott Passey 02/05/2016 10:00 AM Mayor Dave Earling 02/05/2016 10:32 AM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 02/05/2016 10:45 AM Form Started By: Carolyn LaFave Started On: 01/26/2016 02:41 PM Final Approval Date: 02/05/2016 Packet Page 102 of 391 AM-8324 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 02/09/2016 Time: Consent Submitted For: Phil Williams Department: Engineering Committee: Submitted By: Scott Passey Type: Action Information Subiect Title Fishing Pier Rehabilitation Project Contract Award 3. F. Recommendation Award the Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehabilitation construction contract to Razz Construction, Inc. in the amount of $1,004,317.58 and authorize a $101,000 management reserve for changes and unforeseen conditions during construction. Previous Council Action On February 18, 2014, Council authorized the extension of an ILA with the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) for $190,000 to cover the design services for the Edmonds Fishing Pier Rehabilitation Project. On October 21, 2014, Council approved the mayor to sign a contract for those design services with BergerABAM, for a total of $128,600. On November 24, 2015, Council authorized the advertising to bid the project documents as developed with the assistance of BergerABAM. In December, the Council authorized the mayor to sign an amendment to the ILA with the WDFW to use $1,300,000 of state grant funding for the project work. Narrative A copy of the bid tabulation is attached to this agenda item. There were seven submissions received at the bid opening on January 14th, varying in total (including WSST) from $1,004,317.58 to $1,376,156.52. The engineer's estimate for the entirety of the work was toward the higher side of this range at $1,248,824. Since bids were opened, staff members have evaluated references and met with the apparent low bidder, Razz Construction, to review the proposed project approach. As formulated, the bids consisted first of a base of project work covering repairs to damaged concrete across the entire structure, guardrail repair and recoating, and electrical work to update pier lighting fixtures to LED and CFL technology. The pier's fish cleaning stations also benefit by a replacement of the waterline that serves them, and they receive new roofs and paint, as well as attention to renewing their sinks and enclosure units. The alternates that were also part of the bid submissions include an upgrade to an HDPE guardrail and steel nosing to further protect it, coating of the pier light posts, and the replacement of the wind break enclosures, benches, and partitions. Finally, there were two alternate pieces to bring an information kiosk and weather station to the pier. Packet Page 103 of 391 The following is a summary of the construction budget and available funds for the project: Description Budget Construction Contract $1,004,318 Construction Management & Material Testing $200,000 Management Reserve $101,000 Total $1,305,318 Funding Source Funds State Funding $800,000 Aquatic Lands Enhancement Account Grant $500,000 132 Parks Fund $100,000 Total $1,400,000 Staff recommends that the award for the Fishing Pier Rehabilitation Project be made to Razz Construction in the total amount of $1,004,317.58, and that an additional management reserve of $101,000 be established by Council for this project. This award will cover the base project work as well as every additive and alternate bid item described above. The project is anticipated to begin in February and be completed by July, 2016. FP Bids Inbox Reviewed By Engineering Robert English Public Works Megan Luttrell Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Final Approval Date: 02/05/2016 Attachments Form Review Date 02/04/2016 04:26 PM 02/04/2016 05:14 PM 02/04/2016 07:41 PM 02/05/2016 07:38 AM Started On: 02/03/2016 04:19 PM Packet Page 104 of 391 E a O O O O O O O O N N v O O M O 11:� M r'� 0�0 O�Ow 111: ~ �w >1 >4 >4 >0 V ral d sF, s9 vj v3 v3 v3 as Ffi sR O M M O O O G O O vi V'! O O C7 O O O kn C en � kn O O O M W) M � M 0 T p N en � � 7 rr U u a � sn 6e Ge Os Vs Vs Fs, v, sA w O O O O O O O N N O W o 0 0 0 0 eq r- 000 O O O 1D d �6. M N N o, ~ O z ++ 11 000 o .: N cl C >4 >r .0 >4 >0 � o U 0 0 0 0 0 0 o Wii In 0 0� o 0 0 0 00 0 0; Io o o 0 0 o W) o .. kn vi C O V'1 O O O N O M •--i 'CD O\ \O G .r .-i ^'� .~r M >m >1 >0 >m >4 u +' E o 15 Fsi s5 vi sis srj 69 rA rfi 59 � d F vi y O +' a 3 a m a a— a a Q"Cl o Un a� � W) 1�0 F W ^o ^o a c W o 1.a + v� F F F F F F Qn d r U w o ca N M le W)110 t- 3 F ca m z w 0 z E E R L F kW P.+ 11 o0s91 C E a 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 o v�i vim, 0 0 0 0 0 0 o a a ❑ 6 •C O� N M M N 00 Q� � �O ri N l� C .�. N ��• a d L U U W V9 b9 bR b9 609 V9 vi 69 69 w O o 0 00 0 0 o v00i v°°i W o n en +r o 0 0 y v M N VI \O li Nt z L 00 N \Q oo 0 "p C>0 'r U N a U4 69 6e us am vj 1 1 r � O O O M o N �e N 06 Co � a a z 613 Al Wn vi 1 vi 6R vs vj 61 F L C o U _ L ;3 d oa in Iz cq • d o W W W W W W H �� :D ❑ d �. A C7 ❑ s w M a d o o a F F F F F F rj� d E p U y L1Dd F e d d d z o a a z w 0 z 01 m E M 10E ofZ091 AM-8322 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 02/09/2016 Time: 15 Minutes Submitted For: Dave Earling Department: Mayor's Office Type: Information Submitted By: Carolyn LaFave Information 5. A. Subiect Title Edmonds Sister City Commission presentation on the 2015 student exchange to Hekinan, Japan. Recommendation Previous Council Action Narrative Karyn Heinekin, 2015 ESCC student exchange chaperone and ESCC Commissioner, along with some of the 2015 Edmonds' exchange students, will provide a short presentation on their trip to Hekinan, Japan. Inbox City Clerk Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Carolyn LaFave Final Approval Date: 02/04/2016 Form Review Reviewed By Date Scott Passey 02/03/2016 09:27 AM Dave Earling 02/03/2016 09:33 AM Scott Passey 02/04/2016 10:56 AM Started On: 02/03/2016 08:41 AM Packet Page 107 of 391 AM-8327 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 02/09/2016 Time: 30 Minutes Submitted By: Shane Hope Department: Development Services Type: Information Information Subiect Title Update on Planning for Highway 99 Area Recommendation Consider information and ask any questions Previous Council Action City Council approved funding for Highway 99 subarea planning project Narrative ISSUE AT HAND 6. A. Planning for the Highway 99 Subarea has begun. The consultants for this project will present information about the planning process and expectations for this project. City Council questions and comments are welcome. (Note: The visual presentation from the consultants is not yet available, but will be provided at or before the Feb. 9 Council meeting.) BACKGROUND The Highway 99 area through Edmonds is about a 2-mile stretch. Land uses around it are varied --including medical, commercial, and residential. (See attached map, which shows the specific subarea bounded by a dark line.) While this area has been studied, a fresh look that includes envisioning the future is valuable. One reason is that some of this area has potential for development and change over the long term and planning can help shape the direction this takes. Another reason is that transportation improvements, including pedestrian improvements, need to be identified; this relates to obtaining state funding for the Edmonds portion of the Highway 99 corridor. A special City webpage has been developed that has background information about the Highway 99 area: http://www.edmondswa.gov/2011-07-27-22-31-43/highway-99-planning-project.html. This includes the studies done in 2004, as well as other related materials. Attachmt 1: Highway 99 Subarea Map Attachments Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Packet Page 108 of 391 City Clerk Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Shane Hope Final Approval Date: 02/04/2016 Scott Passey Dave Earling Scott Passey 02/04/2016 12:12 PM 02/04/2016 01:13 PM 02/04/2016 02:12 PM Started On: 02/04/2016 11:40 AM Packet Page 109 of 391 HIGHWAY 99 CORRIDOR x, Subarea Planning Project a w rL��I-z w �sor w Q x Of Edmonds 3 w Woodway F y 3 3 w HS 3 a �� � • a w w Q v ■ 216TH ST SW 3 > F C, 10 x c0 = x CST' ■ ■ a 0000 o~�p 218TH ST _ DSO N wqY S�P� 219TH 5 220TH ST SW 222ND ST SW �� � 3 w a x n 224TH ST SW 3 J 3 LU a 225TH P a z a 226TH ST SW 00 226TH PL SW 0 228TH ST SW 229TH ST SW 3 230TH ST SW 231STSTSW "' a 00 00 � 0 � n HOLLY LN M 00 i 234 AU MADRONA LN 236TH ST SW ST SW I��FSW ST SW a �7 + w t �.I � 242ND ST SW ��IILE�I ■■ +■1■■■■�■ 244T W ■■L—�, s� �3pTyST Sly 3 Ballinger Park 3 o' 222ND ST SW k 10 3 w a 3 3 Q a N 10 T 3 228TH S7- S a 230TH ST SW x o 3 J D_ x 232ND ST SW 3 w a x Mountlake Terrace 235TH PL SW P&R h� h ti 0 0.125 0.25 0.5 Miles Legend BRT Zoning Commercial ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ a �■■■■■■� Hi -Rise Overlay Hi -Rise Node Single Family _ _ _ i BN Neighborhood Business g Q Proposed HWY 99 Study Area RS-8 Single Family, 8,000 sq. ft. lots BC Community Business Existing Building Footprint RSW-12 Waterfront Single Family, 12,000 sq. ft. lots CG General Commercial Multi Family CG2 General Commercial RM-3 Multi Family, 3,000 sq. ft. of lot area per unit Other - RM-2.4 Multi Family, 2,400 sq. ft. of lot area per unit MU Medical Use - RM-1.5 Multi Family, 1,500 sq. ft. of lot area per unit P Public Use Packet Page 110 of 391 AM-8326 6. B. City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 02/09/2016 Time: 10 Minutes Submitted By: Carrie Hite Department: Parks and Recreation Type: Action Information Subiect Title Proposed Amendment No 1 Snohomish Public Defense Association Recommendation Council forward this for approval on the consent agenda. Previous Council Action Council approved an agreement for Public Defense Services from Snohomish Public Defense Association to begin on January 2016. Narrative On January 1, 2015, the misdemeanor caseload limits for public defense attorneys adopted by the Washington State Supreme Court in the new Standards for Indigent Defense took effect. The City published an RFQ for Public Defense Services, with these new caseload standards, and subsequently contracted with the Snohomish Public Defense Association ( SPDA). The City also entered into a Professional Services Agreement with Mr. Bob Boruchowicz to provide oversight of the public defense services. Upon review of the contract with Snohomish PDA, Mr. Boruchowicz is recommending a few language revisions, which are captured in the attached Amendment No. 1. In addition, Ms. Kathleen Kyle, the Executive Director for the Snohomish PDA is requesting financial assistance of $16,500 to ease the transition and stay in compliance with the caseload limits identified in the Washington State law. With the transfer of cases from Feldman and Lee and the way that quarterly attorney certification works (CrRLJ 3.1), the 2 lawyers assigned to Edmonds are way over the anticipated numbers for January 2016. The case assignments impact the Attorney Compensation formula (XXVII Compensation, D. Caseload Adjustment — page 10 of the contract) in a manner that was not anticipated. The contract contemplated 150 cases per quarter. With the transfer of cases, SPDA received the anticipated 150 cases plus 200+ cases from Feldman and Lee. Ms. Kyle, in accordance with the current law was concerned about the 2 lawyers being able to quarterly Packet Page 111 of 391 certify as they will well exceed the first quarter assignments and likely be over for the year (even staffing 2 FTE attorneys for what was anticipated at 1.75 FTE case referrals.) Ms. Kyle is proposing a solution to hire a temporary lawyer (probably 3 months of work) to work in the City of Edmonds full time — which allows them to absorb the bubble of cases from Feldman and Lee, let the regular caseload work itself out, and would allow the current 2 attorneys to certify at the beginning of the 2nd quarter (at the end of March 2016.) This temporary attorney would cost less than using the existing caseload adjustment formula. It would cost $16,500.00 for 3 months of an attorney as opposed to $9390.54 per month for the first 4-6 months. The Mayor is recommending the Council approve this amendment, changing some of the language and allocating an additional $16,500 to allow the Snohomish PDA to stay under the caseload limits. Ms. Kyle will be present to answer any questions. Amendment No 1 Original Agreement 11.2.15 Council agenda 11.2.15 Council MInutes Inbox City Clerk Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Carrie Hite Final Approval Date: 02/04/2016 Attachments Form Review Reviewed By Date Scott Passey 02/04/2016 10:00 AM Dave Earling 02/04/2016 10:33 AM Scott Passey 02/04/2016 10:56 AM Started On: 02/04/2016 09:52 AM Packet Page 112 of 391 ti qx EL7Ar� City of Edmonds Dave Earling Mayor 121 FIFTH AVENUE N. • EDMONDS, WA 98020 •425-771-0251 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT FOR INDIGENT DEFENSE SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF EDMONDS Effective January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2018 WHEREAS, the City of Edmonds, Washington (the "City") and the Snohomish County Public Defender Association (the "Contractor"), entered into an underlying professional services agreement for the provision of indigent legal defense services for 2016 through 2018 ("Underlying Agreement"); and WHEREAS, the Underlying Agreement provides for contract oversight services by a third party "Public Defense Supervisor" and it has been brought to the parties' attention that such third party is more appropriately referred to as a "Public Defense Assessor"; and WHEREAS, the Underlying Agreement provides for certain reporting requirements by the Contractor to the City and it has been brought to the parties' attention that such reporting requirements require the addition of a report on "Information on the use of expert witnesses" and clarification of the report relating to the use of immigration experts; and WHEREAS, the Underlying Agreement provides that payment for attorney compensation will be governed by a caseload adjustment formula; and it has been brought to the City's attention that this formula did not take into account the cases to be transferred to the Contractor from the previous provider of indigent defense legal services; and the parties agree that it is in the best interests of both parties to adjust the amount of compensation to be provided by the City in 2016 to allow the Contractor to hire a temporary attorney to assist with such cases; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Underlying Agreement to make the necessary revisions to Sections XIX ("City Contract Administrator — Contract Oversight"), XX ("Reports of Contractor"), XXI ("Complaints and Corrective Action"), XXWII ("Compensation"), and XXXIII ("Notices"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits accruing, it is agreed by and between the parties to the Underlying Agreement as follows: Packet Page 113 of 391 Amendment No. I to Professional Services Agreement, Page 2 1. The provisions of the Underlying Agreement between the City and the Contractor for indigent defense legal services, attached hereto as Attachment A and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth, is amended in, but only in, the following respects: I. Section XIX ("City Contract Administrator — Contract Oversight") shall be revised as follows: The City intends to engage the services of a Public Defense Assessor to manage and monitor this Agreement. All reports or certifications required by this Agreement shall be delivered to the Public Defense Assessor at the address set forth in Section XXXIII below. To assist the Public Defense Assessor in managing and monitoring this Agreement, Contractor shall, in addition to providing the reports set forth in Section XX below, report to the Public Defense Assessor any disciplinary action by the Washington State Bar Association against an attorney providing services under this Agreement, and any finding by a court that any such attorney has provided ineffective assistance of counsel. II. Section XX ("Reports of Contractor") shall be revised as follows: Contractor shall maintain a case reporting and case management information system, and shall submit reports to the City's Public Defense Assessor as follows: A. Reports shall be submitted on a no less than a quarterly basis and shall be a condition of payment pursuant to Section XXVII. B. Reports shall contain the following information: 1. The names of defendants to which Contractor was appointed during the reporting period, the charges, and the associated case numbers; 2. The date of appointment; 3. The case weight assigned to the case if a case weighting system has been approved and implemented; 4. The number of appellate level cases pending; 5. Copies of the most recent Indigent Defense Standards Certifications filed with the Court by each Attorney providing services under this Agreement; 6. Information on Contractor's caseload distribution; 7. Information on Contractor's case supervision; 8. The number of pending trials and the type(s) of charges to be addressed in each; 9. The number of substantive motions undertaken; 10. The number of hours spent by each attorney on each of their cases; 11. Information on the use of investigators; 12. Information on the use of expert witnesses; 13. Information on consultations with the Washington Defender Association immigration staff or with a similar immigration expert; and 14. Information on the disposition of concluded cases. C. Contractor shall not be required to compromise any attorney -client privilege Packet Page 114 of 391 Amendment No. I to Professional Services Agreement, Page 3 (RCW 5.60.060) or Client Confidentiality (RPC 1.6) when providing these reports. However, because it is necessary for the effective management and monitoring of this Agreement, it is understood that the Public Defense Assessor is intended to be part of the confidential relationship with the Contractor and the clients it represents. The Public Defense Assessor's communications with the City in relation to the monitoring and reporting obligations of this Agreement shall comply with the requirements of the Rules of Professional Conduct, including RPC 1.6. III. Section XXI ("Complaints and Corrective Action") shall be revised as follows: A. Complaints Directed to Public Defense Assessor. Any unresolved complaints regarding Contractor or an attorney or Rule 9 intern providing services pursuant to this Agreement, whether received by the City, the Contractor, or the Court, shall be directed to the Public Defense Assessor. B. Investigation. In the event a complaint is received by or directed to the Public Defense Assessor and is not timely resolved by the Contractor to the satisfaction of the complainant, the Public Defense Assessor will investigate the complaint by reviewing the complaint, discussing the matter with the complaining party, discussing the matter with the Contractor, and determining whether a violation of this Agreement has occurred. The Public Defense Assessor may consult with legal counsel or another expert as deemed necessary in order to resolve the complaint. In addition, the Public Defense Assessor may consult with the Washington State Bar Association when appropriate. C. Corrective Action Plan or Termination. In the event the Public Defense Assessor determines that a violation has occurred, he or she may develop a corrective action plan or terminate this Agreement in the event it is determined that termination is appropriate. Contractor shall cooperate in any investigation of a complaint, and any corrective action plan developed by the Public Defense Assessor. IV. Section XXVVII ("Compensation"), subsection A.a., shall be revised as follows: A. Payment for Services. a. 2016. The City shall provide to Contractor for services rendered under this Agreement the sum of TWENTY-TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED EIGHTY- NINE DOLLARS AND FIFTY CENTS ($22,589.50) per month from January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016. Of this sum, THIRTEEN THOUSAND, ONE HUNDRED THIRTY-THREE DOLLARS AND SIXTY-THREE CENTS ($13,133,63) is paid for attorney compensation, ONE THOUSAND, THREE HUNDRED SEVENTY-ONE DOLLARS AND TWO CENTS ($1,371.02) is paid Packet Page 115 of 391 Amendment No. I to Professional Services Agreement, Page 4 for the provision of investigator services, and EIGHT THOUSAND, EIGHTY-FOUR DOLLARS AND EIGHTY-SIX CENTS ($8,084.86) is paid for administrative expenses. In addition, the City shall provide to Contractor the amount of SIXTEEN THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS AND NO CENTS ($16,500.00) for the purpose of employing a temporary full time attorney to assist with the cases to be transferred to Contractor from the previous provider of indigent defense legal :T""IIFKIMI I V. Section XXXIII ("Notices") shall be revised as follows: All notices and other written documentation shall be sent to the parties at the following addresses unless otherwise requested in writing: City of Edmonds: Contractor: Public Defense Assessor Snohomish County Public Defender Association c/o Mayor's Office 2722 Colby Avenue, Suite 200 121 Fifth Ave. N Everett, WA 98201 Edmonds, WA 98020 2. In all other respects, the Underlying Agreement shall remain in full force and effect, amended as set forth herein, but only as set forth herein. DATED this day of CITY OF EDMONDS 2016. SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER ASSOCIATION David O. Earling By: Its: ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Scott Passey, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney Packet Page 116 of 391 Amendment No. I to Professional Services Agreement, Page 5 STATE OF WASHINGTON) )ss COUNTY OF ) On this day of , 2016, before me, the under -signed, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared , and executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be his/her free and voluntary act and for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: Packet Page 117 of 391 CITY OF EDMONDS CONTRACT NO.6627 AGREEMENT FOR INDIGENT DEFENSE SERVICES This Agreement is entered into between the City of Edmonds, a Washington municipal corporation, ("City") and the Snohomish County Public Defender Association ("Contractor"). I. DEFINITIONS A. Attorney. Attorneys shall mean attorneys working for the Snohomish County Public Defender Association, and where appropriate, shall include Rule 9 interns. B. Case. A Case shall mean the filing of a document with the court naming a person as defendant or respondent, to which an Attorney is appointed in order to provide representation. In courts of limited jurisdiction multiple citations from the same incident can be counted as one case. C. Contractor. Contractor shall mean the Snohomish County Public Defender Association, and shall mean each attorney working for the Contractor. D. Defendant. Defendant shall mean a person charged with a misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor offense that is filed by the City into the Edmonds Municipal Court, and for whom the Contractor must provide services pursuant to Section III of this Agreement. II. DURATION OF AGREEMENT This Agreement shall terminate on December 31, 2018, unless extended or terminated earlier in a manner permitted by this Agreement. III. SCOPE OF WORK AND DUTIES OF CONTRACTOR A. Criminal Defense Representation — To Whom Provided. Except in cases in which a conflict of interest exists, Contractor shall provide criminal defense representation to the following: 1. All Defendants for which the Contractor has been appointed by the Edmonds Municipal Court or City as attorney of record pursuant to the Court's or City's determination of indigence of the defendant. 2. All suspects who are permitted access to a public defender while detained pursuant to an investigation for any gross or simple misdemeanor being investigated by the City of Edmonds Police Department, including, but not limited to: the offenses of driving under the influence (RCW 46.61.502), driving under twenty-one consuming alcohol (RCW 46.61.503) or physical control of a vehicle under the influence (RCW 46.61.504) for the purposes of consulting with the Contractor prior to deciding whether to provide a sample of breath or blood. 3. All persons who are not represented by private counsel and who appear for arraignment in the Edmonds Municipal Court shall be entitled to an explanation of the rights, information regarding maximum and minimum penalties if convicted and information regarding the process and handling of the matter by the Edmonds Municipal Court. 4. All Defendants who, while in the custody of the Snohomish County Jail or City of Lynnwood Jail who are not represented by private or conflict counsel, who appear in court on charges filed by the City of Edmonds, shall be entitled to the same level of contact as described above in section 3. Packet Page 118 of 391 B. Provisional and Temporary Appointments. Contractor shall be available to provide limited representation on behalf of otherwise unrepresented Defendants at arraignments and during in - custody hearings despite said Defendant not being appointed pursuant to a determination of indigence. If Contractor is appointed to a case pursuant to determination of indigence at an arraignment or in - custody hearing, Contractor should not recommend a Defendant plead guilty without first having reviewed discovery from the prosecuting attorney and adequately discussed the case in private with the Defendant and any witnesses the Contractor deems necessary to make such recommendation. C. Re resentation Provided to Defendants Investigated for Gross Misdemeanor or Misdemeanor Crimes. Current contractor shall be available 24 hours per day, seven days per week, by telephone for the purposes of providing representation to otherwise unrepresented suspects or Defendants who are in custody and under investigation for any gross or simple misdemeanor being investigated by the City of Edmonds Police Department, including, but not limited to: driving under the influence (RCW 46.61.502), driving under twenty-one consuming alcohol (RCW 46.61.503), physical control of a vehicle under the influence (RCW 46.61.504) or any other misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor. Contractor shall provide the Edmonds Police Department with telephone numbers of its attorneys that provide direct access to the attorneys, and shall keep such telephone numbers up to date. Contractor may designate times in which specific attorneys may be reached, and shall provide the numbers of alternate attorneys if the designated attorney cannot be reached. D. Duration of Representation of Defendant. In cases in which the Contractor is appointed as attorney of record, and unless Contractor is permitted by the court to withdraw at an earlier time, Contractor shall represent the defendant at all stages of the criminal process, from the time of appointment as attorney of record through the appeals process (provided that funding for appeals beyond superior court shall be pursuant to the terms of Title 15 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure), as well as during any period in which the court retains jurisdiction over the terms and conditions of any sentence or deferral. E. Anticjpated Attorney Caseload. The parties anticipate that 650 cases will be assigned to Contractor annually and that one and three quarter attorney positions be assigned to these cases. F. lundraisir3. Contractor will assist the City in raising funds to assist with the costs of its public defense services. Such assistance will include, but may not be limited to, applying for State grant funds. The City will make all reasonable efforts necessary to assist Contractor in this regard. IV. APPEARANCE AT HEARINGS Contractor shall appear at all hearings scheduled by the Edmonds Municipal Court in which it represents Defendants, as well as all arraignment calendars and all in -custody calendars. Contractor shall provide a sufficient number of attorneys at the various court calendars to ensure that Defendants have a sufficient amount of time to consult with the Contractor's attorneys prior to each defendant's case being heard, and to ensure that the court calendars are not delayed due to insufficient staffing of Contractor's attorneys at the calendars. 2 Packet Page 119 of 391 V. REPRESENTATION OF DEFENDANTS WHILE ON THE RECORD Contractor shall be with and actively representing an appointed Defendant at all times while the appointed Defendant's case is considered on the court record, and shall adequately inform the Defendant of the developments in his or her case such that the Defendant proceeds during any court hearing in a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary manner. VI. DEFENDANT ACCESS TO CONTRACTOR A. Contact Prior to Court Hearings. Contractor shall be available to appointed Defendants to ensure that appointed Defendants are provided with effective assistance of counsel. Defendant access to the Contractor prior to court hearings is paramount. Contractor shall endeavor to confer with appointed Defendants about cases prior to court hearings. B. Tol l Free Calls. Appointed Defendants shall be provided access to the Contractor by means of a toll -free local call made available by the Contractor. C. Time to Respond. Contractor shall respond to defendant inquiries within a reasonable time to ensure the effective assistance of counsel, whether such inquiries are received by letter, telephone, email, or otherwise. D. Local Office Required. At all times during the term of this Agreement, Contractor shall maintain an office at its current location or within 5 miles of either the Edmonds Municipal Court or the City of Edmonds. The office of the Contractor shall accommodate confidential meetings with Defendants, shall be equipped with telephone, facsimile, and internet services, shall receive adequate cellular telephone service, and shall be the location at which mail and service of process is received. E. Availability for and Contact with In -Custody Defendants. Contractor shall evaluate the cases of all appointed Defendants in the custody of the Snohomish County Jail or City of Lynnwood Jail prior to the time of the Defendant's trial, and shall meet with such in -custody Defendants as the Contractor deems appropriate for providing effective assistance of counsel. At a minimum, Contractor shall meet with all appointed misdemeanant Defendants who are in -custody within two (2) business days of the Contractor being notified of its appointment as that defendant's legal representative. In addition, Contractor shall schedule no less than two periods of time each week in which to meet with appointed Defendants who are in the custody of the Snohomish County Jail or City of Lynnwood Jail. These two periods of time shall be for the purposes of responding to inmate requests, responding to letters and telephone calls, and preparing for the defense of the jailed Defendants. These two periods shall be separate in time, not necessarily in days, from court hearings held at the Snohomish County Jail or City of Lynnwood Jail. VII. QUALITY OF REPRESENTATION Contractor shall provide services in a professional and skilled manner consistent with Washington's Rules of Professional Conduct, applicable case law, the Constitutions of the United States and Washington, and the court rules that define the duties of counsel and the rights of defendants. Contractor shall be familiar with and comply with the New Standards for Indigent Defense as adopted by the Washington State Supreme Court on June 15, 2012, and as thereafter amended (hereafter "the Indigent Defense Standards"). At all times during the representation of a defendant, the Contractor's primary responsibility shall be to protect the interests of the defendant. Packet Page 120 of 391 VIII. QUALIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTOR ATTORNEYS - TRAINING A. Oual i fications. All attorneys employed by Contractor for the purposes of providing the services called for in this contract shall, at a minimum, satisfy the minimum qualifications to practice law as established by the Washington Supreme Court; be familiar with and follow the statutes, court rules, case law and constitutional law applicable to misdemeanor criminal defense work in the state of Washington; be familiar with and abide by Washington's Rules of Professional Conduct; be familiar with and abide by the Indigent Defense Standards; be familiar with the consequences to each particular defendant of any conviction or adjudication including but not limited to jail time, financial penalties, restitution, mental health or drug and alcohol treatment obligations, license suspensions, and immigration or civil commitment implications; be familiar with mental health and substance abuse issues applicable to each defendant; be able to recognize the need for expert services including but not limited to investigators; and be able to satisfy the terms and conditions of this Agreement. B. Training. For each attorney of the Contractor providing services under this Agreement, a minimum of seven (7) hours of reportable continuing legal education credits per year shall be in the areas of criminal defense law, criminal process, trial advocacy, legal writing, appellate work, law practice management, or any other subject that, in the opinion of the Contractor, is applicable to providing criminal defense services. If Contractor employs more than seven (7) attorneys, Contractor shall conduct in house training pursuant to the Indigent Defense Standards. IX. USE OF RULE 9 INTERNS A. Workload of Rule 9 Interns. Contractor may employ interns qualified under Admission to Practice Rule 9 who perform work pursuant to this Agreement. Rule 9 interns shall remain under the supervision of the Contractor, and an attorney for Contractor shall remain responsible for the cases for which the Rule 9 provides services. Any applicable case load limits for full time Rule 9 Interns who have not graduated from law school shall be one quarter (1/4) of the case load limit of an Attorney working the same number of hours. B. Ouali.ftcations of Rule 9 Interns. Rule 9 interns shall be required to abide by Sections VII and VIII except that Rule 9 interns shall not be required to complete the training requirements of Section VIII, and in place of the requirement to satisfy the minimum qualifications to practice law as established by the Washington Supreme Court, the Rule 9 intern must comply with the provisions of APR 9. Rule 9 interns shall be closely monitored by the more senior attorneys of the Contractor. X. DISCOVERY TO BE PROVIDED The City's Prosecuting Attorney's Office shall provide Contractor one (1) copy of all discoverable material concerning each assigned case pursuant to the rules of discovery and without charge as soon as possible after appointment. For those individuals who are held in custody, discovery shall be provided within one (1) business day. XI. NUMBER OF ATTORNEYS EMPLOYED Contractor shall employ a sufficient number of Attorneys to comply with caseload limits. 4 Packet Page 121 of 391 XII. CASELOAD LIMITS PER FULLTIME EQUIVALENT POSITION A. Caseload Limits in General. Contractor shall maintain a caseload such that it can provide each and every Defendant effective assistance of counsel as required by this Agreement. Subject to the remaining subsections of this section, a fulltime equivalent attorney position should be appointed to no more than 400 unweighted cases per year. B. Case Defined. For the purposes of this section, the term "case" shall mean a group of criminal charges related to a single incident filed against a Defendant to which an Attorney is appointed pursuant to a finding of indigence. C. Caseload Limit Reduction. Each Attorney's caseload limit shall be reduced by the approximate percentage of time the Attorney spends representing private clients or defendants that have not been formally appointed pursuant to a finding of indigence. D. Alternative Caseload limits and Case Weighting. In the event the City or Contractor determine that it is necessary or advisable to use a caseload limit that differs from the case load limits specified in this section, either party may propose to the other an alternative standard for caseload limits so long as such standard is fully consistent with the Indigent Defense Standards. If the parties agree the proposed alternative standard is fully consistent with the Indigent Defense Standards and such alternative standards do not create an undue administrative burden on either party, the alternative standard shall be formally approved by the Contractor and the City's Mayor and incorporated within this Agreement. E. Post -Sentence Re resentation. All post -sentencing hearings will be counted as part of Contractor's continuing representation of Defendants as set forth in Section III, above. All new clients appointed to Contractor at post sentencing -review hearings will be counted as one case. XIII. COMPLIANCE WITH INDIGENT DEFENSE STANDARDS A. Caseload Monitoring, Contractor shall continually monitor the caseload and performance of Contractor as a whole and each attorney providing services pursuant to this Agreement. Contractor shall provide projections at least three months in advance regarding the caseload limits based upon the number of attorneys employed by Contractor and trends in case filings. B. Caseload Level Shiftin . In the event an attorney is handling a caseload such that the attorney is unable to provide effective assistance of counsel to each and every defendant or is otherwise on track to exceed his/her caseload limit, Contractor shall reduce the caseload of that attorney, and shift the reduced portion of the caseload to another Attorney employed by the Contractor. C. Certification of Compliance. Each Attorney shall be in compliance with and shall certify compliance with the Indigent Defense Standards to the Snohomish County South District Court and the Edmonds Municipal Court on a quarterly basis or more frequently as required by the Indigent Defense Standards and in the form required by the Indigent Defense Standards. XIV. EXPERTS AND INVESTIGATORS Contractor may retain experts and investigators of the Contractor's choosing as deemed necessary to the effective defense of the defendant, and may apply to the court for such services pursuant to applicable court rules. The fees for expert witnesses shall be included in the costs that the City pays Contractor except as ordered by the Court pursuant to CrRLJ 3.1(f). Packet Page 122 of 391 The Contractor shall retain an investigator of its choosing as deemed necessary for the effective defense of the defendant, this cost shall be part of the flat fee set forth in this agreement. XV. COSTS OF TRANSCRIPTION The City agrees to reimburse the Contractor for all reasonable costs associated with obtaining and transcribing trial court records for appeal purposes if such costs have not been waived. XVI. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Contractor shall maintain a database of client information sufficient for the Contractor to determine the existence of any conflicts of interest. In the event representation of a defendant would constitute a conflict of interest, Contractor shall take such action as is appropriate pursuant to the Rules of Professional Conduct. In the event the Contractor is disqualified or excused as counsel of record due to a conflict of interest, Contractor shall not be required to pay any compensation to another attorney assigned to represent the defendant. XVII. INTERNAL PERFORMANCE MONITORING AND ATTORNEY SUPERVISION Contractor shall establish a program for managing the performance of attorneys who provide the services called for in this Agreement. The performance monitoring program shall have the purpose of ensuring that each defendant receives effective assistance of counsel, and the terms and conditions of this Agreement are met. Contractor shall provide the City with a blank copy of the performance evaluation form used and report to the City on an annual basis whether it has conducted annual evaluations of attorneys who provide services under this Agreement. XVIII. REMOVAL OF ATTORNEY A. Removal bv Contractor. In the event Contractor determines, through its internal performance monitoring and attorney supervision program that an Attorney or Rule 9 intern working for Contractor fails to comply with the terms of this Agreement, then Contractor shall immediately take action to prevent that Attorney or Rule 9 intern from providing the services called for in this Agreement. B. Recommendation of Removal by City. In the event the City determines that an attorney working for the Contractor has breached this Agreement, the City may, at its sole discretion and as an alternative to termination of this Agreement, require Contractor to take action to prevent that attorney from providing the services called for in this Agreement or otherwise cure the breach. XIX. CITY CONTRACT ADMINISTRATOR — CONTRACT OVERSIGHT The City intends to engage the services of a Public Defense Supervisor to manage and monitor this Agreement. All reports or certifications required by this Agreement shall be delivered to the Public Defense Supervisor at the address set forth in Section XXXIII below. To assist the Public Defense Supervisor in managing and monitoring this Agreement, Contractor shall, in addition to providing the reports set forth in Section XX below, report to the Public Defense Supervisor any disciplinary action by the Washington State Bar Association against an attorney providing services under this Agreement, and any finding by a court that any such attorney has provided ineffective assistance of counsel. C$I Packet Page 123 of 391 XX. REPORTS OF CONTRACTOR Contractor shall maintain a case reporting and case management information system, and shall submit reports to the City's Public Defense Supervisor as follows: A. Reports shall be submitted on a no less than a quarterly basis and shall be a condition of payment pursuant to Section XXVII. B. Reports shall contain the following information: 1. The names of defendants to which Contractor was appointed during the reporting period, the charges, and the associated case numbers; 2. The date of appointment; 3. The case weight assigned to the case if a case weighting system has been approved and implemented; 4. The number of appellate level cases pending; 5. Copies of the most recent Indigent Defense Standards Certifications filed with the Court by each Attorney providing services under this Agreement; 6. Information on Contractor's caseload distribution; 7. Information on Contractor's case supervision; 8. The number of pending trials and the type(s) of charges to be addressed in each; 9. The number of substantive motions undertaken; 10. The number of hours spent by each attorney on each of their cases; 11. Information on the use of investigators; 12. Information on consultations with the Immigration and Naturalization Service; and 13. Information on the disposition of concluded cases. C. Contractor shall not be required to compromise any attorney -client privilege (RCW 5.60.060) or Client Confidentiality (RPC 1.6) when providing these reports. However, because it is necessary for the effective management and monitoring of this Agreement, it is understood that the Public Defense Supervisor is intended to be part of the confidential relationship with the Contractor and the clients it represents. The Public Defense Supervisor's communications with the City in relation to the monitoring and reporting obligations of this Agreement shall comply with the requirements of the Rules of Professional Conduct, including RPC 1.6. XXI. COMPLAINTS AND CORRECTIVE ACTION A. Complaints Directed to Public Defense Su ervisor. Any unresolved complaints regarding Contractor or an attorney or Rule 9 intern providing services pursuant to this Agreement, whether received by the City, the Contractor, or the Court, shall be directed to the Public Defense Supervisor. B. Investigation. In the event a complaint is received by or directed to the Public Defense Supervisor and is not timely resolved by the Contractor to the satisfaction of the complainant, the Public Defense Supervisor will investigate the complaint by reviewing the complaint, discussing the matter with the complaining party, discussing the matter with the Contractor, and determining whether a violation of this Agreement has occurred. The Public Defense Supervisor may consult with legal counsel or another expert as deemed necessary in order to resolve the complaint. In addition, the Public Defense Supervisor may consult with the Washington State Bar Association when appropriate. C. Corrective Action Plan or Termination. In the event the Public Defense Supervisor determines that a violation has occurred, he or she may develop a corrective action plan or terminate this Agreement 7 Packet Page 124 of 391 in the event it is determined that termination is appropriate. Contractor shall cooperate in any investigation of a complaint, and any corrective action plan developed by the Public Defense Supervisor. XXII. TERMINATION A. For Cause. The City or the Contractor may terminate this Agreement immediately in the event the other party breaches the Agreement and such breach is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of the injured party in a timely manner after notice of breach has been provided to the other party. Each and every term of this Agreement is material. The failure of any party to comply with any term of this Agreement shall constitute a breach of this Agreement. B. For Reasons Beyond Control of Parties. Either party may terminate this Agreement without recourse by the other where performance is rendered impossible or impracticable for reasons beyond such party's reasonable control such as, but not limited to, acts of nature; war or warlike operations; civil commotion; riot; labor dispute including strike, walkout, or lockout; sabotage; or superior governmental regulation or control. C. Without Cause. Either party may terminate this Agreement at any time without cause upon giving the non -terminating party not less than one hundred and twenty (120) days prior written notice. XXIII. CONTINUATION OF REPRESENTATION AFTER TERMINATION In the event of termination of this Agreement, Contractor shall continue representation of Defendants to whom Contractor was assigned prior to the termination until such time as another defense attorney has been appointed to represent such Defendants. Upon reassignment of such Defendants to another defense attorney, Contractor shall promptly deliver all related client files to such defense attorney. Except in cases in which the Contractor is unable to provide services in conformance with this Agreement, Contractor shall not submit to the court a motion to withdraw from representing defendants to which the Contractor was assigned until such time as new counsel has submitted a motion to substitute counsel. For each case in which Contractor makes one or more in -court appearances with a Defendant, not including appearances that consist solely of successful continuance motions, the City shall pay Contractor a one time payment of one hundred and fifty dollars for all post termination services provided in the case. XXIV. NON-DISCRIMINATION Contractor shall not discriminate on the basis of sex, race, nationality, sexual orientation, color, creed, disability, age, religion or any other state or federal protected category in the hiring of employees or the provision of services pursuant to a contract with the City. XXV. PROOF OF LIABILITY INSURANCE Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurance of the types and in the amounts described in Exhibit A attached and incorporated by this reference. XXVI. INDEMNIFICATION Contractor shall indemnify, defend, and hold the City, its elected officials, officers, and employees harmless from any and all claims whatsoever related to or arising from the performance of the Contractor's obligations pursuant to this Agreement, including but not limited to claims arising out of the errors and omissions of the Contractor relating to the representation or lack of representation of Packet Page 125 of 391 clients, and/or by reason of accident, injury, or death caused to any persons or property of any kind occurring during the performance or lack thereof of the work required by this Agreement, or traveling to or from any place to perform the work required by this Agreement, except to the extent they are caused by the sole negligence of the City. The failure of Contractor to carry insurance in a quantity sufficient to defend a claim or lawsuit, or cover any judgment that results, shall not operate to limit Contractor's indemnification or defense of the City. This indemnification section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. XXVII. COMPENSATION A. Payment for Services. a. 2016. The City shall provide to Contractor for services rendered under this Agreement the sum of TWENTY-TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED EIGHTY-NINE DOLLARS AND FIFTY CENTS ($22,589.50) per month from January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016. Of this sum, THIRTEEN THOUSAND, ONE HUNDRED THIRTY-THREE DOLLARS AND SIXTY-THREE CENTS ($13,133,63) is paid for attorney compensation, ONE THOUSAND, THREE HUNDRED SEVENTY-ONE DOLLARS AND TWO CENTS ($1,371.02) is paid for the provision of investigator services, and EIGHT THOUSAND, EIGHTY-FOUR DOLLARS AND EIGHTY-SIX CENTS ($8,084.86) is paid for administrative expenses. b. 2017. The City shall provide to Contractor an increase of 4% for 2017 for services rendered under this Agreement. This includes the sum of TWENTY-THREE THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED SEVENTY-NINE DOLLARS AND EIGHT CENTS ($23,493.09) per month from January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2017. Of this sum, THIRTEEN THOUSAND, NINE HUNDRED FORTY-THREE DOLLARS AND NINETY-SEVEN CENTS ($13,658.98) is paid for attorney compensation, ONE THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED TWENTY-FIVE DOLLARS AND EIGHTY-SIX CENTS ($1,425.86) is paid for the provision of investigator services, and EIGHT THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED EIGHT DOLLARS AND TWENTY-FIVE CENTS ($8,408.25) is paid for administrative expenses. c. 2018. The City shall provide to Contractor an increase of 4% for 2018 for services rendered under this Agreement. This includes the sum of TWENTY-FOUR THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED TWENTY-NINE DOLLARS AND TWENTY CENTS ($24,432.81) per month from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2018. Of this sum, FOURTEEN THOUSAND, FIVE HUNDRED ONE DOLLARS AND SEVENTY-THREE CENTS ($14,205.34) is paid for attorney compensation, ONE THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY-TWO DOLLARS AND EIGHTY-NINE CENTS ($1,482.89) is paid for the provision of investigator services, and EIGHT THOUSAND, SEVEN HUNDRED FORTY-FOUR DOLLARS AND FIFTY-EIGHT CENTS ($8,744.58) is paid for administrative expenses. These payments shall be full compensation for all services and material necessary to accomplish the objectives of this Agreement, including but not limited to administrative costs associated with providing legal representation. These administrative costs include, but are not limited to: travel, telephones, law library, including electronic legal research; financial accounting; case management systems; computers and software; office space and supplies; training; meeting the reporting requirements imposed by this Agreement; and other costs necessarily incurred in the day-to-day management of this Agreement. Contractor shall bill the City each month for services rendered herein. In the event this Agreement is terminated pursuant to the provisions set forth in this Packet Page 126 of 391 Agreement, the Contractor's compensation shall be prorated based upon the days which have elapsed between the effective date of the termination and the first day of the month after termination. B. Bil� ling. Contractor shall bill the City, in care of the Mayor or designee, on the first day of the month, or the first workday thereafter for the monthly installment set forth in subsection A of this section, and any transcription costs as permitted by this Agreement. C. Payment. The City shall make payments within 30 days of receipt of Contractor's bill. Except as provided elsewhere in this Agreement, the payment set forth in this section shall be inclusive of administrative costs, support costs, and all costs associated with the conduct of the Contractor's business. D. Caseload Adjustments: The following formula protects the City and the Association from having individual attorney caseloads exceed the mandatory maximum of 400 cases as set by the Supreme Court in the Criminal Rule for Courts of Limited Jurisdiction 3.1 (CrRLJ 3.1), adopting Standard for Indigent Defense 3.4. Its application would keep individual attorney caseloads almost uniformly within the 300 to 400 range. In addition it keeps the City and Association in compliance with the Washington State Bar Association standards. Standard Three calls for a misdemeanor caseload of 300 cases. A misdemeanor caseload may adjusted to no more than 400 cases, depending upon: • The caseload distribution between simple misdemeanors and complex misdemeanors; or • Jurisdictional policies such as post -filing diversion and opportunity to negotiate resolution of large number of cases as non -criminal violations; • Other court administrative procedures that permit a defense lawyer to handle more cases. The attorney caseloads will be adjusted at the end of each calendar quarter in accordance with the following formula, and the attorney compensation shall be adjusted as indicated: Case Referrals Prior Quarter Attorney Caseloads Attorney Compensation Adjustment 75 Case Referrals 1.00 Attorney Caseload 57.25% 100 Case Referrals 1.25 Attorney Caseloads 71.5% 125 Case Referrals 1.50 Attorney Caseloads 85.75% 150 Case Referrals 1.75 Attorney Caseloads Remains 175 Case Referrals 2.00 Attorney Caseloads 114.3% 200 Case Referrals 2.25 Attorney Caseloads 128.6% 225 Case Referrals 2.50 Attorney Caseloads 143% 250 Case Referrals 2.75 Attorney Caseloads 157.25% 275 Case Referrals 3.00 Attorney Caseloads 171.5% XXVIII. SUBCONTRACTING PROHIBITED Except in extraordinary circumstances or as temporarily necessary to avoid violation of the Indigent Defense Standards, Contractor shall not subcontract with another attorney or law firm to provide the services required herein. Contractor shall remain directly involved in and responsible for the representation of all assigned defendants. 10 Packet Page 127 of 391 XXIX. ASSIGNMENT PROHIBITED No assignment or transfer of this Agreement or of any interest in this Agreement shall be made by either of the parties, without prior written consent of the non -assigning party. XXX. AGREEMENT APPLICABLE TO ALL EMPLOYEES AND VOLUNTEERS The terms of this Agreement shall apply to all persons who are employed by, or who volunteer for, the Contractor, including but not limited to attorneys, interns, paralegals, office assistants, secretaries, and investigators. XXXI. STATUS OF CONTRACTOR AS INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AND NOT EMPLOYEE This Agreement calls for the performance of the services of Contractor as an independent contractor and Contractor will not be considered an employee of the City for any purpose. Contractor shall secure at its own expense and be responsible for any and all payment of income tax, social security, state disability insurance compensation, unemployment compensation, worker's compensation, and all other payroll deductions for the Contractor and its officers, agents, and employees and the costs of all professional or business licenses in connection with the services to be performed hereunder. Contractor shall be solely responsible for any and all claims or lawsuits filed against Contractor by personnel employed by the Attorney related to the conditions or terms of employment by the Contractor, and the Contractor shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its employees and officers from any such claims or lawsuits. Contractor further agrees that its employees are not considered employees of the City for the purposes of participating in any state or federal program, including but not limited to the retirement program provided by the Washington Department of Retirement Services, and in the event that a claim is made to the contrary by any employee or volunteer of the Contractor, Contractor shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City and its employees and officers from any such claims or lawsuits and shall pay all awards ordered against the City for such claims or lawsuits. XXXII. ADDITIONAL SERVICES Contractor may be requested to perform additional services beyond the original scope of services as defined in section 1 of this Agreement. Such work will be undertaken only upon written authorization of the City based upon an agreed amount of compensation. XXXIII. NOTICES All notices and other written documentation shall be sent to the parties at the following addresses unless otherwise requested in writing: City of Edmonds: Contractor: Public Defense Supervisor Snohomish County Public Defender Association c/o Mayor's Office 2722 Colby Avenue, Suite 200 121 Fifth Ave. N Everett, WA 98201 Edmonds, WA 98020 11 Packet Page 128 of 391 XXXIV. ENTIRE AGREEMENT — AMENDMENTS This instrument contains the entire Agreement between the parties for the contemplated work and services to commence January 1, 2016, and it may not be enlarged, modified, altered, or amended except in writing signed and endorsed by the parties. XXXV. DUPLICATE ORIGINALS This Agreement is executed in duplicate originals. XXXVI. EFFECTIVE DATE The terms of this Agreement shall take effect on January 1, 2016. WHEREFORE, the parties agree to be bound by the terms and conditions set forth above. C1T EDMONDS CA.-, • DaA O. Earling, Mayor ATTEST/AUTHE ATE: Sc sey, lty Clerk APPR0 A ',TO FORM: O icc of the City Attorney SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENDER ASSOCIATION 12 U Packet Page 129 of 391 EXHIBIT A INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR SERVICES AGREEMENTS Insurance Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by Contractor, their agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors. A. Minimum Scope of Insurance Contractor shall obtain insurance of the types described below: 1. Professional Liability insurance appropriate to Contractor's profession. B. Minimum Amounts of Insurance Contractor shall maintain the following insurance limits: 1. Professional Liability_insurance shall be written with limits no less than $1,000,000 per claim and $1,000,000 policy aggregate limit. C. Other Insurance Provisions The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions for Automobile Liability and Commercial General Liability insurance: 1. Contractor's insurance coverage shall be primary insurance naming the City as an additional insured. Any Insurance, self-insurance, or insurance pool coverage maintained by the City shall be excess of the Contractor's insurance and shall not contribute with it. 2. Contractor's insurance shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be cancelled by either party, except after thirty (30) days prior written notice by certified mail, return receipt requested, has been given to the City. 3. City of Edmonds shall be named as an additional insured on all policies (except Professional Liability) as respects work performed by or on behalf of the Contractor and a copy of the endorsement naming the City as additional insured shall be attached to the Certificate of Insurance. The City reserves the right to receive a certified copy of all required insurance policies. The Contractor's Commercial General Liability insurance shall also contain a clause stating that coverage shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respects to the limits of the insurer's liability. 13 Packet Page 130 of 391 EXHIBIT A (Continued) D. Acceptability of Insurers Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best rating of not less than ANII. E. Verification of Coverage Contractor shall furnish the City with original certificates and a copy of the amendatory endorsements, including but not necessarily limited to the additional insured endorsement, evidencing the insurance requirements of the Contractor before commencement of the work. F. Subcontractors Contractor shall include all subcontractors as insureds under its policies or shall furnish separate certificates and endorsements for each subcontractor. All coverage for subcontractors shall be subject to all of the same insurance requirements as stated herein for Contractor. 14 Packet Page 131 of 391 AM-8076 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 11/02/2015 Time: 5 Minutes Submitted By: Carrie Hite Department: Human Resources Type: Action Information Subject Title Agreement for Indigent Defense Services Recommendation 7. A. Authorize the Mayor to sign a Professional Services Agreement with Snohomish County Public Defense Association to provide Indigent Defense Services. Previous Council Action Council authorized the Mayor to enter into a contract extension with Feldman and Lee, P.S. on March 18, 2014. In December 2014, Council authorized Mayor to sign new contract with Feldman and Lee, P.S. for 2015 for public defense services. Council adopted a budget amendment for 2014 in the amount of $66,000 to cover the contract amount that was amended by Council on April 1, 2014 for public defense services. Council allocated $240,000 to the 2015 budget for the Public Defender. Council allocated $25,000 to the 2015 budget for a Public Defense contract supervisor. Council gave direction to staff to secure the services of Eileen Farley to review our public defense services, draft an RFQ, and make recommendations. On June 2, 2105, the Council forwarded these amendments for approval on consent, with one edit to section XXVILD. On October 27, 2015 Council forwarded this for a five minute agenda item. Narrative Packet Page 132 of 391 Background: On January 1, 2015, the misdemeanor caseload limits for public defense attorneys adopted by the Washington State Supreme Court in the new Standards for Indigent Defense take effect. The court had in 2013 delayed the implementation of the caseload limits until that date, to provide time for the Washington State Office of Public Defense (OPD) to conduct a statewide attorney time study and to develop a model misdemeanor case weighting policy that is consistent with the indigent defense standards adopted by the court. Washington State Supreme Court Order No. 25700-A-1016, 04/08/2013. In compliance with the state Supreme Court's order, the OPD conducted the time study and has developed a Model Misdemeanor Case Weighting Policy. Under the caseload limits in Standard 3.4, full-time public defenders should not have caseloads exceeding 300 or 400 misdemeanor cases per year, depending on whether the jurisdiction has developed a "numerical case weighting" system, described in Standard 3.6. In jurisdictions adopting a numerical case weighting system, the caseload limit is 300 cases. Recent Court Ruling In addition to these new standards, a federal district court judge ruled on December 4th, 2013 that the public defense systems provided by the cities of Burlington and Mount Vernon violated the U.S Constitution's Sixth Amendment guarantee of effective assistance of legal counsel to indigent persons charged with crimes. The court found that the provision of public defense services prior to 2012 by the two cities "was marked by an almost complete absence of opportunities for the accused to confer with appointed counsel in a confidential setting," with most interactions between counsel and their indigent clients occurring in the courtroom. The court determined that the appointment of counsel was, for the most part, little more than a formality, a stepping stone on the way to a case closure or plea bargain having almost nothing to do with the individual indigent defendant. The court deemed this situation to be "the natural, foreseeable, and expected result of the caseloads the attorneys handled." The cities contracted with a different law firm in April 2012 and the per attorney caseload was reduced, but not to the court's satisfaction. The court determined that the new public defense firm "continues to handle caseloads far in excess of the per attorney limits set forth in the [Washington] Supreme Court's guidelines." Ultimately, Judge Lasnik concluded: The public defense system in Mount Vernon and Burlington has systemic flaws that deprive indigent criminal defendants of their Sixth Amendment right to the assistance of counsel. Although counsel are appointed in a timely manner, the sheer number of cases has compelled the public defenders to adopt case management practices that result in most defendants going to court for the first time — and sometimes accepting a plea bargain — never having had the opportunity to meet with their attorneys in a confidential setting. The court's remedy was to issue a "continuing injunction" against the cities that, among other things, required the cities to hire a "Public Defense Supervisor" to supervise and evaluate the cities' provision of public defense services and to ensure that indigent clients are provided certain specific services and receive adequate representation. The court did not impose numerical caseload limits. While cognizant of the cities' "interests in controlling the manner in which they perform their core functions, including the provision of services and the allocation of scarce resources," Judge Lasnik noted that they were nevertheless obligated to comply with the dictates of the Sixth Amendment. Other cities in the state that operate municipal courts — and the states' counties — will, of course, need to take heed of this court decision. Most of the cities ( and counties) have either hired Public Defense supervisors, or are in the process of having this discussion. Packet Page 133 of 391 Update: In February 18, 2014: Feldman and Lee gave notice to the City to terminate their contract effective 3/31/14. This was very short notice for us to turn around an RFP process, so staff negotiated an amendment for an increased amount of money to be effective 4/l/14-12/31/14. The Council adopted this amendment on March 18, 2014. December 9, 2014: Council reviewed the new standards and several recommendations from staff, including an additional extension with Feldman and Lee, contract with Eileen Farley to evaluate our system, services, draft an RFQ, and make recommendations. On December 16, 2014, Council adopted a one year contract amendment with Feldman and Lee, giving staff time to work with Eileen Farley to evaluate and initiate an RFQ process for Public Defense Services. Ms. Farley reviewed the city's public defense contract, services with Feldman and Lee, and made recommendations for contract amendments in order to comply with this new ruling. Please see attached report. In addition, Ms. Farley drafted an RFQ for the City's use in facilitating a competitive bid process to secure public defense services for 2016 and beyond. June 2, 2015: Staff brought forward recommendations from Eileen Farley, including contract amendments for Feldman and Lee, and a template RFQ to initiate a competitive process. Ms. Farley also recommended a process by which to evaluate the RFQ's in an objective manner. On June 9, 2015, Council adopted the contract amendments for Feldman and Lee. The City published the RFQ in late June 2015. The City received four applications. The City also worked with Eileen Farley to put together an independent panel to review the responses to the RFQ. At the recommendation of Ms. Farley, the City retained the services of Bob Boruchowitz to compile the panel, pose the questions, and work with the panel to evaluate the respondents. Please see attached memo from Mr. Bob Boruchowitz outlining the panel he selected and the process that he implemented. The panel unanimously recommended to the Mayor the selection of Snohomish County Public Defense Association to provide services for Edmonds. The Mayor is recommending the City enter into an agreement with the Snohomish County Public Defense Association. Attached is a three year Professional Services Agreement with Snohomish County Pubic Defense Association for Council's review. In addition to the panel, Mr. Boruchowitz also initiated an evaluation of public defense services from Feldman and Lee. The City has an interest in retaining his services next year as the Public Defense Supervisor, to continue the evaluation process of the City's public defense services. Included in this packet are the following attachments: 1. Professional Services Agreement with Snohomish County Public Defense Association. 2. Report from Eileen Farley 3. Memorandum from Bob Boruchowitz, re: the evaluation of the RFQ process. 4. RFQ that was published 5. Snohomish County Public Defense response to RFQ 6-17. All council agenda and minutes from previous discussions about the public defense services. Attachments Draft PSA Snohomish County PDA Farley memo Packet Page 134 of 391 Borochowitz memo RFQ published Snohomish County PDA response 2.18.14 Agenda Memo 2.18.14 Minutes 3.18.14 Agenda Memo 3.18.14 Minutes 12.9.14 Agenda Memo 12.9.14 Minutes 12.16.14 Agenda Memo 12.16.14 Minutes 6.2.15 Agenda Memo 6.2.15 Minutes 6.9.15 Agenda Memo 6.9.15 Minutes Form Review Inbox Reviewed By City Clerk Scott Passey Mayor Dave Earling Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey Form Started By: Carrie Hite Final Approval Date: 10/29/2015 Date 10/29/2015 09:33 AM 10/29/2015 09:35 AM 10/29/2015 09:35 AM Started On: 10/29/2015 08:26 AM Packet Page 135 of 391 EDMONDS CITY COUNCIL APPROVED MINUTES Special Meeting Monday, November 2, 2015 The Edmonds City Council meeting was called to order at 6:30 p.m. by Mayor Earling in the Council Chambers, 250 5t' Avenue North, Edmonds. ELECTED OFFICIALS PRESENT Dave Earling, Mayor Adrienne Fraley-Monillas, Council President Diane Buckshnis, Councilmember Kristiana Johnson, Councilmember Lora Petso, Councilmember Joan Bloom, Councilmember Thomas Mesaros, Councilmember Michael Nelson, Councilmember ALSO PRESENT Ari Girouard, Student Representative STAFF PRESENT Phil Williams, Public Works Director Scott James, Finance Director Shane Hope, Development Services Director Jerry Shuster, Stormwater Eng. Program Mgr. Bertrand Hauss, Transportation Engineer Rob English, City Engineer Kernen Lien, Senior Planner J. Hwang, Police Officer Jeff Taraday, City Attorney Scott Passey, City Clerk Jerrie Bevington, Camera Operator Jeannie Dines, Recorder 1. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS A REAL ESTATE MATTER PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(c). At 6:30 p.m., Mayor Earling announced that the City Council would meet in executive session to discuss real estate per RCW 42.30.110(1)(c). He stated that the executive session was scheduled to last approximately 30 minutes and would be held in the Jury Meeting Room, located in the Public Safety Complex. No action was anticipated to occur as a result of meeting in executive session. Elected officials present at the executive session were: Mayor Earling, and Councilmembers Johnson, Fraley-Monillas, Buckshnis, Petso, Mesaros and Nelson. Others present were City Attorney Jeff Taraday, Parks & Recreation Director Carrie Hite and City Clerk Scott Passey. The executive session concluded at 6:45 p.m. Mayor Earling reconvened the regular City Council meeting at 7:00 p.m. and led the flag salute. 2. ROLL CALL City Clerk Scott Passey called the roll. All elected officials were present. 3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE AGENDA IN CONTENT AND ORDER. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 4. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 1 Packet Page 136 of 391 Councilmember Petso requested Item E be removed from the Consent Agenda and Councilmember Bloom requested Item A be removed. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY- MONILLAS, TO APPROVE THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The agenda items approved are as follows: B. APPROVAL OF CLAIM CHECKS #216892 THROUGH #217006 DATED OCTOBER 29, 2015 FOR $392,482.48 C. ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF A CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FROM STATE FARM INSURANCE ($12,234.28) D. AUTHORIZATION FOR MAYOR TO SIGN A GRANT AGREEMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY FOR $633,750 TO DESIGN & CONSTRUCT A STORMWATER CONTROL FACILITY IN SEAVIEW PARK F. APPROVAL OF THE 2015 3RD QUARTER BUDGET AMENDMENT G. ADOPTION OF INDIGENT DEFENSE SERVICE STANDARDS H. AGREEMENTS FOR REPRESENTATION OF INDIGENT DEFENDANTS - CONFLICT COUNSEL ITEM E: ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE FOR A SITE SPECIFIC REZONE REQUEST BY RDJ GROUP LLC TO REZONE THE EASTERN PORTION OF THREE EXISTING SINGLE- FAMILY LOTS OF RECORD ADDRESSED 16404 AND 16414 75TH PL. W AND 16420 76TH AVE. W FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, RS-20, TO SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, RS42, AS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 20, 2015. (FILE NO. PLN20150034) Councilmember Petso explained this is an ordinance related to a closed record review of a decision to rezone property in a landslide hazard area with a history of landslides to a higher residential density. She voted against it at the time and will vote against it again tonight. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO APPROVE ITEM E. MOTION CARRIED (6-1), COUNCILMEMBER PETSO VOTING NO. ITEM A: APPROVAL OF DRAFT CITY COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF OCTOBER 27, 2015 Councilmember Bloom requested two references to the "OF zone" in Mr. Blomenkamp's comments on page 8 be changed to "OS zone." COUNCILMEMBER BLOOM MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS, TO APPROVE ITEM A AS AMENDED. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. 5. AUDIENCE COMMENTS Roger Hertrich, Edmonds, referred to information he provided the Council regarding hearings being held by Snohomish County related to changing specifications for height, setbacks, etc. for multifamily development in areas west of Highway 99. One of the areas is the Point Wells site. He suggested the City develop a policy for dealing with Snohomish County with regard to future annexation areas such as Esperance to ensure development under Snohomish County is similarity to Edmonds to avoid a development island when the area is annexed. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 2 Packet Page 137 of 391 6. STUDY ITEM A. DISCUSSION ON THE UPDATED 2015 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES Transportation Engineer Bertrand Hauss referenced the previous presentation regarding traffic impact fees, explaining the goal of tonight's discussion is for the City Council to provide direction to staff regarding the traffic impact fee update so that an ordinance can be drafted, potentially a public hearing scheduled and to adopt an ordinance by year end. Randy Young, Henderson Young & Company, highlighted information provided at the October 13, 2015 presentation: • Definition of impact fees • Reasons to change impact fees • Rules for impact fees • What impact fees can be used for • Calculations and comparisons He reviewed changes 2009 to 2015 • Added 6 projects • Increased cost of 7 carry-over projects • Reduced deficiency exclusion • Excluded external costs & trips • Eliminated long-term cost exclusion He displayed the Edmonds project list, a total of $21 million projects eligible for impact fees. He reviewed the calculation of impact fees and examples: • Step 1: Eligible costs divided by growth trips = cost per trip o $21,733,736 eligible costs divided by 3,930 growth trips = $5,530 cost per trip • Step 2: Impact fee per unit of development (cost per trip x trip rate = impact fee rate) o Apartment Example: $5,530 cost per trip x 0.74/ trip rate = $4,092/apartment o Office Example: $5,530 cost per trip x 0.00197/square foot trip rate = $10.89/square foot Mr. Young provided a comparison of cost per trip: Jurisdiction Cost per trip Kenmore $8,350 Lynnwood 7,944 Shoreline 6,124 Edmonds (update) 5,530 Bothell 5,426 Average of 8 others 4,486 Mill Creek 3,000 Snohomish County 2,453 Mukilteo 1,050 Edmonds (current) 1 1,050 Mountlake Terrace I714 Mr. Young provided alternatives to updating impact fees: 1. Raise taxes • Growth pays less, taxpayers pay more 2. Eliminate some projects Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 3 Packet Page 138 of 391 • Less cost, more congestion 3. Discount the cost per trip or phased increase • Growth pays somewhat less, more congestion Councilmember Mesaros recalled during the previous presentation he pointed out the percentage increase, from $1,050 to the proposed fee of $5,530, was a huge jump. He would find it easier to approve if it was phased in over four years. If the cost of building office space is $200/square foot, the proposed fee would be a 5% per square foot increase that the development must somehow incorporate into their financial plan. He remarked to a certain extent impact fees are a tax although they are not called a tax. Councilmember Buckshnis favored holding a public hearing to hear what developers have to say. She supported increasing impact fees, noting without impact fees, Edmonds would have to do something like Seattle's Prop 1. If developers build in Edmonds, they need to address their traffic impact. She was amenable to a 2, 3 or 4 year phasing. The City's roads need attention and this is one way to pay for them. Councilmember Nelson said growth creates impacts and everyone should pay their fair share including developers so that taxpayers do not bear the entire burden. He was open to phasing. Council President Fraley-Monillas commented Kenmore gets more traffic than they could possibly want due to the new tolls, Lynnwood and Shoreline have bumper -to -bumper traffic and Edmonds is reaching bumper -to -bumper in areas outside downtown during peak times. Taxpayers have been paying for the roads for decades and it is only fair that developers constructing new buildings pay their fair share for transportation improvements. She was concerned traffic will become so impossible that no one wants to come to Edmonds and recognized the ferry increases traffic in Edmonds. Councilmember Petso asked how often the traffic impact fee should be updated. Mr. Young answered cities typically update the impact fee following an update of the Transportation Plan, every 3-4 years or as long as 6-7 years. Councilmember Petso observed if the Council opted to phase in the impact fee over four years, it would have just reached the recommended level by the time the fee needs to be recalculated. Mr. Young agreed that could happen. Councilmember Petso preferred a 2-3 year phase -in period. Councilmember Bloom asked when the fees were last increased and what the fee amount was previously. Mr. Young answered the fee was last increased in 2009; the fee in 2004 was $763 and $1,050 in 2009. Councilmember Bloom asked whether other cities with larger fees such as Kenmore phased in their fees. Mr. Young did not have knowledge of all the cities; Shoreline adopted the full amount of their first impact fee with no phasing. Councilmember Bloom supported holding a public hearing. She did not support phasing in an increased fee based on the comparisons, traffic and project costs. Mr. Young said it is very common for cities to hold a public hearing although impact fee increases are not always controversial. In his experience nearly every public hearing on impact fees is attended by one representative of the development community, usually someone from the Master Builders. In some communities, a public hearing will also include testimony from commercial developers as well as people concerned with traffic congestion. Councilmember Johnson asked the total cost of projects in 2009 that formed the basis for the calculation. Mr. Young recalled it was $10-11 million and there was also a difference in the number of growth trips. Councilmember Johnson observed the proposed increase was five times the existing fee, but there were not five times more projects so the variable must be the growth trips. Mr. Young agreed, noting there was also a change in time horizon plus a change in the traffic model. The traffic modeling consultant was not here to address that. Councilmember Johnson requested that information be provided before the public hearing. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 4 Packet Page 139 of 391 Councilmember Johnson pointed out a tax and a fee are different. Mr. Young agreed there was an important distinction. Taxes are paid without regard to whether a benefit is received; the government has the authority to charge the tax and the government uses the funds however they feel is best. An impact fee is charged for a specific thing, there are specific laws that require demonstrating a rational nexus. For an impact fee, the jurisdiction must demonstrate the amount of the fee is related to the amount of impact via trip counts that reflect the relative amount of impact of different development types on transportation. Councilmember Mesaros commented the last update to the impact fee was a 25% increase; the proposed increase is over 400%. Council President Fraley-Monillas relayed these are truly the costs of development. Everyone wants to some level of development in Edmonds but you can't complain about roads and do nothing about it. It is important to update the fee since it has not been updated in six years. She was interested in a public hearing but did not support phasing. Mr. Young commented there are a lot of facets to this issue; while it's important to be careful and concerned about how rapidly rates are increased and how that affects local businesses, it is equally important to remember the ultimate effect on businesses is not very much. If it put developers out of businesses or severely impacted development, he doubted there would be over 70 other cities in Washington with impact fees for traffic, parks, fire protection, schools, etc. High growth communities tend to have the highest impact fees because they need the most money to keep up. Mayor Earling relayed it appeared the Council wanted to hold a public hearing, there was general comfort with the proposed $5,530 amount but there were different opinions with regard to phasing. He requested the City Attorney draft an ordinance, leaving blanks for the period of time the fee would be implemented. Mr. Young recalled an example of a 3-year phase -in was provided at the previous presentation; Council comments tonight mentioned 2 and 4 years. He suggested providing draft ordinances with 2, 3 and 4 year phasing for the public hearing. 7. ACTION ITEMS A. AGREEMENT FOR INDIGENT DEFENSE SERVICES Parks & Recreation/Human Resources Reporting Director Carrie Hite relayed staff s recommendation to authorize the Mayor to sign a Professional Services Agreement with Snohomish County Public Defense Association to provide Indigent Defense Services. A presentation was made at last week's meeting. A question from Councilmember Petso was referred to Snohomish County Public Defense Association Executive Director Kathleen Kyle and her response was forwarded to Council today. COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER NELSON, TO AUTHORIZE THE MAYOR TO SIGN A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH SNOHOMISH COUNTY PUBLIC DEFENSE ASSOCIATION TO PROVIDE INDIGENT DEFENSE SERVICES. MOTION CARRIED (6-0-1), COUNCILMEMBER PETSO ABSTAINING. B. CLOSED RECORD REVIEW AND ACTION ON HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF SETBACK VARIANCE FOR A SWEDISH HOSPITAL SIGN (PLN20150042) Mayor Earling explained the purpose of the closed record hearing is for the City Council to consider the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner related to the application of Swedish Medical Center for a setback variance. Tonight's hearing follows a Type III-B process where the Hearing Examiner forwards a recommendation to the City Council for a final decision. Unlike the hearing before the Hearing Examiner, participation in tonight's hearing is limited to parties of record. The parties of record include the applicant, any person who testified at the open record public hearing on the application, and any person Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 5 Packet Page 140 of 391 who individually submitted written comments concerning the application at the open record public hearing. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine (AFD) requires that this hearing be fair in form, substance and appearance. The hearing must not only be fair, it must also appear to be fair. He asked whether any member of the decision -making body had engaged in any oral or written communication with opponents or proponents of the project outside the presence of the other party. Councilmember Petso said she was contacted today by a citizen who thought he was a party of record and asked why he had not receive notice. Councilmembers Mesaros, Bloom, Johnson, Buckshnis, Nelson, Council President Fraley-Monillas, and Mayor Earling indicated they had no contact or communication to disclose. Mayor Earling asked whether any member of the Council had a conflict of interest or believed he/she could not hear and consider this application in a fair and objective manner. Councilmember Petso said she had no conflicts. She relayed the citizen who contacted her, Al Rutledge, is listed in the packet as having testified at the public hearing and he did not receive notice of tonight's hearing. Councilmembers Mesaros, Bloom, Johnson, Buckshnis, and Nelson, Council President Fraley-Monillas and Mayor Earling indicated they had no conflicts. Mayor Earling asked whether any member of the audience objected to any Councilmember or his participation as a decision maker in this hearing. There were no objections voiced. He asked whether the Council agreed to the following procedure for presentation of oral argument: • 5 minute introduction by staff • 5 minutes of oral argument by the applicant • 5 minutes from any other parties of record Upon voice vote, this procedure was acceptable to Council. Senior Planner Kernen Lien explained as this is a closed record review, he will use the same PowerPoint that was presented at the open record public hearing before the Hearing Examiner. Snohomish County Public Hospital District #2 is the property owner; a governmental agency is requesting the variance. He reviewed a public agency variance: • Type III-B process • Governmental Sign o ECDC 20.60.095 exempt except dimensional and placement standards ECDC 17.00.030 o Action of the Hearing Examiner shall be a recommendation to City Council He reviewed the required findings for a variance: • Special circumstances exist • Granting a variance would not be granting of a special privilege • Proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan • Proposal is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance • Not detrimental to surrounding properties • Proposal is the minimum variance necessary The staff report and the Hearing Examiner's report contain an analysis of the six criteria. Both staff and the Hearing Examiner felt the proposal was consistent with the criteria. He displayed an aerial view of Swedish -Edmonds Hospital and identified the new Ambulatory Care Center (ACC) addition which is the primary reason for the variance request. He displayed plans from the ACC addition, advising a new road Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 6 Packet Page 141 of 391 was constructed along the eastern side of the ACC addition. This is a directional sign to direct traffic to the new location of the emergency room entrance. The proposal is to place the sign 3 feet from the property line prior to prior to crossing the intersection of 216th Street SW and the new road along the eastern side of the ACC addition. The Medical Use zone has a 15-foot building setback which is the reason for the variance request. Staff and the Hearing Examiner recommend approval with conditions. Councilmember Mesaros inquired about the conditions. Mr. Lien said one condition was recommended by the Engineering Division to ensure none of the utilities are impacted by installation of the sign. Councilmember Petso referred to an email raising the issue of 14-day notice versus 15-day notice and asked whether that was taken care of or was it an outstanding procedural issue. Mr. Lien said that was in regard to the notice of application. The City code states a notice of application must be issued not less than 14 days prior to an open record hearing; State law states notice of application must be issued not less than 15 days prior to an open record hearing. The notice of application was initially published 14 days before the open recording hearing; that hearing was postponed and a new notice of application was published not less than 15 days prior to the open record hearing. Councilmember Petso asked whether the City was required to give notice to all parties of record. City Attorney Jeff Taraday answered the code specified notice requirements for a Type III-B hearing relate to the Hearing Examiner hearing. He was not certain that notice of the City Council's closed record review was provided. Councilmember Petso observed from Mr. Taraday's explanataion, a person who testified at the Hearing Examiner hearing would not be informed of the Council proceeding. Mr. Taraday did not think the code spoke to that. In summarizing Mr. Rutledge's remarks, the Hearing Examiner specifically stated Mr. Rutledge did not speak to the proposal. Applicant Tim Buell, representing Swedish Medical, said he had nothing to add to staff s presentation. He noted the person who spoke during the Hearing Examiner hearing spoke about a zoning issue on Highway 99 that did not have anything to do with the sign. Parties of Record There were no parties of record present who wished to speak. Council Questions & Deliberation With regard to notice, Mr. Lien said the only area of the code that addresses closed record hearings is related to closed record appeals, ECDC 20.07. For a closed record appeal, the code states all parties of record need to receive notice of the appeal. Mr. Taraday said in a closed record of appeal the code specifies the number of days to appeal a decision of the Hearing Examiner and an appeal brings the decision to the City Council. This is not that process. This is a closed record pre -decision hearing where the Hearing Examiner made a recommendation not a decision. The code distinguishes between the two but does not specify that any notice is required to be provided of the closed record hearing before the City Council. Mr. Lien explained he announced at the Hearing Examiner hearing that the closed record review was scheduled for November 2. All parties of record will receive notice of the final decision which can be appealed. COUNCILMEMBER BUCKSHNIS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER JOHNSON, TO UPHOLD THE HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THE SETBACK VARIANCE AND PASS RESOLUTION NO. 1342 INCLUDED IN EXHIBIT 5 ADOPTING THE HEARING EXAMINER'S FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS. MOTION CARRIED (6-0-1), COUNCILMEMBER PETSO ABSTAINING. 8. CONTINUED STUDY ITEMS Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 7 Packet Page 142 of 391 A. CONTINUED REVIEW OF CRITICAL AREA REGULATIONS UPDATE Senior Planner Kernen Lien commented this is the fourth meeting with the City Council to discuss the Critical Areas Ordinance update. Tonight's presentation will relate to Exhibit 3 and address development flexibility for 1) reduced buffer, 2) physical separated and functionally isolated provisions, and 3) restoration projects. Aaron Booy, ESA, recalled Council concern with development flexibilities that were not entirely consistent with Ecology guidance. The City received a comment review letter from Department of Ecology that expressed some of the same concerns. Exhibit 3 provides rationale and Best Available Science (BAS) associated with each of the development flexibilities. He summarized BAS in the Critical Areas Ordinance (CAO) update: • BAS should be included • Use of "nonscientific information" is allowed, based on: o Local conditions o Economic consideration o Social considerations • Rational and measures to minimize risk for development flexibilities should be documented He explained the flexibility included in the proposed critical area regulations are not really departures from BAS. Ecology highlighted and he agreed the development flexibilities are not fully consistent with the exact language of Ecology guidance but there is good rationale for why they will be important for ongoing protection of critical area within Edmonds. He displayed an aerial of existing Edmonds conditions, identifying Shell Creek and Hindley Creek and a built out residential development pattern where the streams run through residential neighborhoods. There is some minimal amount of riparian vegetation along the streams but homes, yards and other associated structures are built up to the edge of the streams or within 10-15 feet. There are also many examples where streams are culverted for roads and road crossings as well as other areas of historical development. He described physically separated and functionally isolated buffers: • Allowed activity under new Section, ECDC 23.40.220.C.4 • Applicable to sites separated from a critical area by existing, legally established roads, trails and structures 12 feet or more in width • May be determined to be both physically separated and functionally isolated, and not subject to stream and wetland buffer provisions • The director may require a site assessment by a qualified professional to make the determination He provided a photographic example of Shellabarger Creek running between two houses with little functioning riparian corridor, rockeries on both sides of the stream, lawn on one side and gravel on the other. He displayed an aerial view of the same area, highlighting two sample scenarios where the physically separated and functionally isolated provision could be applied: 1. Addition fronting central house — not allowed (driveway less than 12 feet wide) 2. Addition on north house — potentially allowed (central house physically separates this area, functional isolation would need to be documented) Councilmember Johnson asked if this was an actual or theoretical example. Mr. Lien answered the property owner in Example #2 came to the City to inquire about an addition but did not move forward with it. Mr. Booy continued his review of physically separated and functionally isolated buffers: • Relevant BAS Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 8 Packet Page 143 of 391 o Buffer effectiveness influenced by many factors, with existing alterations degrading the functional importance o Where full physical separation / functional isolation occurs, the value of maintaining the adjacent area is negligible or eliminated Rationale for allowance — allowing for future development/ redevelopment within areas where such activity would have no impact on the nearby stream or wetland Potential risks — misinterpretation and over -application Measures to minimize — clear criteria, and provisions to require an evaluation of functional isolation (including new language) Give the identified risk of over -application, Councilmember Petso asked whether documentation of applicability should also be required rather than leaving it to the Development Services Director's discretion. Mr. Booy answered that could be an option. There will be situations where a stream runs along a roadway in a ditch during past historical development and the standard buffer associated with the stream would potentially extend across the roadway to properties on the other side. In that situation, where there is a full width City roadway and a clear functional separation from the areas on the opposite side, it would be fairly cut and dry that no function is provided by the separated buffer area and a determination could be made quickly. Councilmember Petso asked why 12 feet versus another number was selected. Mr. Booy answered 12 feet was selected in discussion with the Planning Board; 12 feet is the minimum standard width for a driveway. Councilmember Buckshnis also questioned the rationale for 12 feet and asked whether the new regulations allow pervious or impervious or does it matter. Mr. Lien agreed the width of 12 feet was selected as it is the required minimum driveway width in Edmonds. The first proposal reviewed by the Planning Board was 8 feet and following discussion, they agreed on 12 feet. The 12 feet is for established roadways, paved trails 12 feet in width or more, or legally established structures or other paved areas. Councilmember Johnson observed in this example the creek has a fairly discernable physical area; in a wetland where much of the hydrologic action occurs underground, she questioned how this BAS information could be relevant. Mr. Booy answered for wetlands it would still only apply to physical separation and functional isolation in the buffer area. In a wetland area where hydrology supports wetland conditions, any modifications would not apply in that area. The criterion in the proposed amendments to the critical area regulations requires verification that there is physical separation and function isolation. In a sloped wetland or buffer where information led planning staff to believe there was a functional connection through the physical separation, they could make the determination that the criteria did not apply. It requires some review and interpretation by planning staff but the criteria and putting the onus on the developer/applicant provides the City the ability to say no when there is a functional connection. Councilmember Johnson said gravel or impervious surface seems to change the character of the hydrology. If historically there was a paved area regardless of the hydrology, she asked whether there would be an opportunity to waive the requirement. Mr. Booy agreed for a paved area with sheet flow running off it directly into a wetland or stream, there would be an important connection between the paved area and the adjacent resource. These provisions are not looking at a paved area but the area beyond it where there is no imperious surface and because of the requirement that it be functionally isolated, presumably there would be no surface water connection between the isolated area and the adjacent resource. With regard to the concern with sheet flow from an impervious surface directly into a wetland or stream, there are other provisions for those situations such as allowances for buffer reduction and development within the previously developed footprint. The focus of this provision is on areas that are on the far side of the impervious surface or structure that provides the physical separation and functional isolation. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 9 Packet Page 144 of 391 Councilmember Johnson asked if the physically separated and functionally isolated language came from DOE. Mr. Booy responded this language is not included in DOE's guidance for small cities. Mr. Lien explained there is a similar provision in the Shoreline Management Plan. Staff developed this as a result of encountering it while implementing the critical area regulations over the past 10 years. He referred to the photograph of a stream that is highly channelized; there is a house adjacent to the stream, but because it is technically within the buffer, an addition would not be allowed. This is a means of providing some flexibility given that the City is highly developed and in example #2, the addition would not have any impact on the stream. If the addition is physically separated and functionally isolated, by definition, it will not have any impact on the critical area. A number of jurisdictions have similar language including Tacoma and eight others. Mr. Booy advised through his work with other communities this is often a practice that is not addressed in the code; the standard buffer requirement is not applied for roadways, legally established structures, etc. Including it in the code removes that ambiguity; other cities have done the same, providing criteria so it can be applied fairly and consistently. Councilmember Nelson agreed he had seen physically separated and functionally isolated provisions in other cities' codes. He asked whether other cities included a specific measurement such as 12 feet. Mr. Booy relayed Redmond has a minimum width but he did not recall the amount; Tacoma does not have a minimum width, their code only addresses physical separation and functional isolation and ensuring review is done to verify the functional isolation exists. Councilmember Nelson asked why Tacoma did not have a minimum width but the proposal was to have a minimum width in Edmonds. Mr. Lien explained one of the reasons for a minimum width is to establish a base standard; at least a 12 foot width is required. There were questions with the interim ordinance regarding the width and minimum separation; including a width establishes a minimum requirement. A minimum width also addresses questions that arise such whether a paved path provides physical separation and functional isolation. Mr. Booy continued his presentation, describing buffer reduction through buffer enhancement: • Development standards — ECDC 20.50.040.G.4 (wetlands) and 23.90.040.D.2 (streams) • Existing allowance • Proposed updates would further limit the existing allowance o Only when averaging is not feasible o Maximum buffer reduction = 25% • New criteria to ensure that functions are increased or retained through plan implementation He provided a photographic example taken from the street where Hindley Creek runs through a forested area in a backyard adjacent to lawn, a driveway, a home and ornamental vegetation. He provided an aerial view of the same property and reviewed: • Residential addition proposed • Opportunity for buffer averaging • Restoration feasible, and provided so that stream functions and values are increased or retained He provided further information regarding buffer reduction through buffer enhancement: • Relevant BAS o No explicit support for buffer reduction standards o BAS does suggest a range of buffer widths — no set width that ensures protection o BAS documents the important of buffer condition, and suggests that alternative strategies (beyond just buffer width requirements) may be useful. • Rational for allowance — maintaining some flexibility for new development/redevelopment on highly constrained parcels, while improving conditions • Potential risks — misinterpretation and over -application • Measures to minimize — updated criteria that provide preference for averaging, limit the allowance to 25% maximum, and that ensure any reduction results in increased/retained functions Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 10 Packet Page 145 of 391 Councilmember Buckshnis asked about the buffer reduction, recalling it previously was 50% and was changed to 25%. Mr. Booy explained the existing code allows a 50% reduction; the proposal is a maximum 25% reduction, requiring 75% of the standard buffer width to be maintained. Mr. Booy reviewed critical areas restoration projects - new section ECDC 23.40.215 • Buffer flexibilities for stream-daylighting and wetland creation/expansion projects 0 25% reduction allowed 0 25% to 50% reduction for constrained properties where reduction is the minimum necessary, and there is a net environmental benefit consistent with CAO intent • Relevant BAS o No explicit support for buffer reduction standards, even for restoration projects o Ecology guidance does support streamlining to facilitate restoration o Removal of fish passage barriers is a high priority for WDFW, suggesting prioritizing these efforts over ensuring standard buffers is warranted • Rational for allowance — modeled after a State SMA provision, intended to avoid placing undue (or prohibitive) restriction on important restoration projects • Potential Risks — future stream segments and wetlands with relatively narrow buffers • Measures to minimize — criteria that buffer is at least 50%, and that widest possible is provided Councilmember Nelson questioned a project that would restore a creek or wetland but also reduce the buffer to enhance the environment. Mr. Booy suggested envisioning a stream in a pipe underground that a passerby would not even be aware of, there is no riparian buffer and there is often pavement on top. For example, Willow Creek as it leaves Edmonds Marsh, passes under the railroad tracks, along a roadway, through the park southwest of the marina; for majority of the distance of the culverted stream there is no riparian vegetation. If the City daylighted that stream, removing it from the culvert and restoring the channel, instead of requiring the full 100-foot standard buffer which would have significant impacts to the roadway, the park, and the adjacent marina, this provision would allow the buffer to be reduced to a minimum of 50% of the standard buffer. It is not applicable to an existing stream channel that is already daylighted or an existing wetland. Councilmember Nelson asked if Mr. Booy was saying a 50-foot buffer was just as good as a 100-foot buffer in that situation. Mr. Booy answered he was not saying a 50-foot buffer was as good as a 100- buffer; a 100-foot buffer would be better but to achieve feasible restoration within an urban situation, applying a standard buffer would be very limiting. He clarified a daylighted stream with a 50-foot buffer would be better than leaving the stream in the culvert. Councilmember Buckshnis agreed with everything in Mr. Booy's memo (Exhibit 3) except for this provision. She pointed out WRIA8 has done a great deal of work to promote salmon recovery. The economic feasibility sometimes cannot be projected because people cannot visualize how wonderful having salmon returning to an estuary would be. She preferred a trigger or amount, not just allowing it to be the director decision, such as requiring Council approval. For example requiring Council approval if the buffer is proposed to be reduced from 100 feet to 50 feet, similar to spending limits that are established for the Mayor. She suggested a mechanism whereby Council was apprised. She recalled providing an example to Mr. Lien that in the end the Council had no say. Mr. Lien said the opportunity for Council input is via this policy. Staff s position is a daylighted creek with a 50-foot buffer is better than a culverted creek; in the end, there is a net benefit from the project. The intent of this provision is not to discourage a project that will provide a net benefit. This would be applicable to restoration projects, not projects where mitigation is required. This was modeled after a SMA provision where the SMA and SMP would not apply in the expanded area when a shoreline project expands the shoreline jurisdiction. Appeals will come to the Council. Councilmember Buckshnis said the Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 11 Packet Page 146 of 391 example she provided was tree cutting in 2005 where the developer paid a fine and the trees were cut again a few years ago The Council had a strong opinion about the situation but the fee was minimal and Council discussed it at length in executive session. Mr. Lien said that is a separate issue. The opportunity for Council input is now and ultimately implementation of development regulation is up to the Development Services Director. City Attorney Jeff Taraday said the development permit types in Title 20 are where Council sets policy direction over who makes decisions on permits and the appeals for each permit type. If the Council wanted to establish a special process for certain types of critical area approvals, Title 20 could be changed so that instead of Director approval, it goes to the Hearing Examiner. Just because a permit is currently a Type II staff decision, does not mean it cannot be changed; it can be revisited by the Council. Councilmember Petso asked whether Ecology's comments were in the Council packet. Mr. Lien advised they are in Exhibit 8; he read a paragraph from the October 29, 2015 letter: "The City has provided additional information through a memorandum prepared by ESA dated October 22, 2015. This memorandum provided a thorough explanation of the rationale for these wetland buffer reductions. In light of this explanation, Ecology offers our support of the critical area ordinance updates being considered for adoption by the City Council." Councilmember Petso asked about Ecology's earlier comments. Mr. Lien advised they are also contained Exhibit 8; he referred to an Ecology letter dated October 26, 2015 that mentioned concerns about the restoration project provision and buffer width reductions. Councilmember Petso relayed she was contacted today regarding the previously developed footprint exception. She pointed out there could be a property where development in the buffer is irregularly shaped and the desire would be to cover essentially the same square footage but not the irregular shape of the existing development. She asked how that situation would be addressed under the code as currently drafted. Mr. Lien answered if a house within a critical area buffer burns down, it can be rebuilt in the exact same footprint. Another provision is development in the previously developed footprint, an irregularly shaped house with a lawn between the house and critical area would not meet the definition of developed footprint; anything new would be required to meet different provisions of the CAO. If the existing house were demolished and rebuilt, whatever is rebuilt must comply with the critical area regulations. There is nothing in the draft CAO that addresses that specific situation. He was familiar with the situation Councilmember Petso referenced. Councilmember Petso inquired about changing the regulations to limit it to like -for -like development. For example compacted gravel, considered existing development, is replaced with a 5-story structure; she felt that would have a different impact on the nearby critical area. She suggested the regulations be tweaked to allow a structure to be replaced with a similar size structure or a parking area replaced with a parking area. Mr. Lien observed the provision Councilmember Petso was referring to was development within the previously developed footprint; the definition is a legally established paved area, structures or other pervious surface areas. He recalled development that this provision applied to when the interim ordinance was in place, the American Brewery silo. In that case there was a paved area behind American Brewery where the owner wanted to add a silo that was technically in the Edmonds Marsh buffer. The silo did not add new impervious surface or have any new impact to the critical area. The proposed provision would allow improvement over existing conditions; allowing the silo to be constructed on the blacktop area in exchange for buffer enhancement of the Edmonds Marsh. American Brewery's proposal was for 1,100 square feet and they provided 1,100 square feet of buffer enhancement. Councilmember Petso asked whether protecting the functions and values of critical area also included habitat, temperatures, etc. or was it only impervious surface. Mr. Lien answered habitat is taken into consideration; the physically separated and functionally isolated provision includes criteria related to hydrological, geological, or biological habitat connection. The science studies address a range of buffers; Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 12 Packet Page 147 of 391 each study focuses on the buffer width for a certain function such as removing phosphorous, a specific creature, etc. so the studies provide a range of buffers. The intent of the proposed regulations is to allow some flexibility in developed areas while getting some enhancement of critical areas. That is the reason for flexible standards for development within developed footprint, buffer averaging, buffer width reduction, etc. Councilmember Petso suggested eliminating physically separated and functionally isolated and the buffer reduction as they are noncompliant with BAS, and tweaking previously developed footprint to better reflect the expected impact on the range of functions and values that a critical area can provide. She felt there was a big difference between a compacted gravel area and a tall structure in terms of the impact on adjacent wildlife. Councilmember Johnson recalled staff indicated a 50% buffer for a restoration project was better than a creek in a pipe. Ecology's comments state reducing buffers to between 50% to 75% of the standard buffer for streams and wetlands is not consist with BAS or their guidance for wetland mitigation in Washington State. She referred to Marina Beach and the daylighting Willow Creek which is estimated to cost $5 million and questioned reducing the buffer for economic reasons or adjacent projects if the goal is to improve salmon habitat in the estuary marsh. She said that seems counterintuitive if the goal is to daylight Willow Creek and improve salmon habitat, why start with a reduced buffer. Mr. Lien answered there are tradeoffs. A daylighted stream is better than a culverted stream; Willow Creek is currently culverted for 1,500 feet; daylighting Willow Creek opens the channel which provides an avenue for salmon to reach the marsh. That is a benefit of daylighting the stream. A 50-foot buffer still provides some functions and values. With regard to tradeoffs, a standard 100-foot buffer would essentially wipe out Marina Beach. Daylighting Willow Creek and providing a 50-foot buffer will provide salmon access to the marsh, and provide an area for citizens to enjoy Puget Sound and the daylighted stream. Ultimately a daylighted Willow Creek is better than a culverted Willow Creek. Councilmember Johnson pointed out the Council has not adopted the Marina Beach Master Plan; perhaps there is a problem with the assumption that the dog park needs to be balanced with activities on both sides of the creek. If the purpose of daylighting Willow Creek is to improve salmon habitat, that should be the goal and not balancing other needs. She summarized it was a question of priorities. Mr. Lien said he was only using Marina Beach as an example; there are other areas with the same tradeoffs. Councilmember Johnson questioned those tradeoffs; this is the Council's opportunity to make a policy decision and she did not want to give away salmon habitat or creek enhancements especially if Ecology did not support it. She summarized the proposed provisions were headed in the wrong direction. Councilmember Bloom agreed with Councilmember Johnson and had similar concerns. She referred to the Development Services Director making decisions regarding critical area waivers, buffer averaging, etc. The definition of director states the City of Edmonds Development Services Director or his/her designee. She objected to allowing those decisions to be made by the director's designee as she felt it was a very serious role, a role of accountability. She asked under what circumstance would a critical area waived need to be done so quickly that the Development Services Director could not be the one that reviewed and made the final decision. Mr. Lien said that relates to how development review is conducted in the City. There are four planners; when a critical area application is submitted, it is assigned to a planner. The planner does a desk review looking at the critical area maps, soils, topography, etc. as well as a site visit to ensure the maps accurately reflect conditions and makes the determination. If the language "director or his/her designee" were changed, the director would need to do all the development review with regard to critical areas in the City. Councilmember Bloom said that was not her suggestion; she understood the director cannot do all the onsite visits, review, etc. She was suggesting the Development Services Director have final authority and accountability for that decision. The planner presents the recommendation to the director but the director Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 13 Packet Page 148 of 391 signs off on it since it is such an important decision. She noticed in the comments that many citizens are concerned with enforcement of critical areas; allowing planners to make those decisions is not doing a service for those citizens. Development Services Director Shane Hope appreciated the interest in having a good process and ensuring any waivers are carefully thought through. She suggested staff return with a proposal that allows a director -only decision on waivers but recognizing it would be based on knowledge from the direct review, site visit, etc. by the planner. She questioned if there is value added for the director to sign off when he/she relies on the planner who does the work. Councilmember Bloom responded she believed there is. The City did not have a Development Services Director for a number of years and planners signed off on things that were not necessarily done properly. She referred to the situation cited by Mr. Blomenkamp, a critical area waiver done by a planner in 1993 related to the Woodway Fields that the Development Services Director never signed off on it even though the code states he/she is supposed to. She summarized errors can arise later related to the way it has been done in the past and there is value added in having the director be accountable and responsible. Ms. Hope said one of the reason for "director or his/her designee" is it is intended to provide some accountability; the director has the oversight, they may not do the actual review themselves because they count on the work done by staff. She acknowledged were things that were problematic in the past. With the language "director or his/her designee," as long as there is a director, there is an accountability system. Councilmember Bloom reiterated she would like to change it to be the responsibility of the director. If there were an extended leave of absence, one specific designee could be identified such as Mr. Lien's position who knows the code well. She was not comfortable with final decisions being signed off on by a planer and wanted anywhere in the critical area regulations that states "director or his/her designee" changed to "Development Services Director" with any designation done on a case -by -case basis if the director was not available to designate the authority. Ms. Hope questioned what value is added if she signs off on something she does not have knowledge of. She relies on the planner, similar to the building official who relies on the plans examiner. She understood certain things could require the director's involvement but to require the director sign off on everything, there was no way she can know everything. Councilmember Bloom asked if Ms. Hope was suggesting the Development Services Director only sign off on waivers and she could not sign off on everything. Ms. Hope offered to return to Council with options. Councilmember Bloom assumed the CAO also applied to the City such as when trees were removed on a steep slope to replace a sewer line. Mr. Lien agreed. Councilmember Bloom cited an example provided by a Tree Board Member and asked about the City's responsibility to plant trees in an area where a sewer or water line was installed. Mr. Lien answered when the utility engineers plan water and sewer main replacements, they identify any critical areas and ask him what will be required. If a City utility project is located in a critical area, staff must provide a critical area report that is submitted review along with the SEPA. Councilmember Bloom asked whether trees the City removed on a steep slope would need to be replaced. Mr. Lien answered it depends on the project; staff does not usually like to plant trees on top of sewer lines. Councilmember Bloom noted there are some trees that can be planted on top of or adjacent to sewer lines. She said this is an issue because a lot of trees are being lost and the City taking responsibility for replacement would help improve the canopy. Public Works Director Phil Williams did not recall any trees were removed in the example Councilmember Bloom cited. A waterline was replaced on a steep slope; vegetation, jute matting and seeds and native grasses were planted. There was a desire by the neighbors for additional plantings for visual enhancement versus holding slope. Staff offered to buy the plants if the neighborhood wanted to have a planting party. Councilmember Bloom said trees were cut and left as crags along the walkway. She inquired about the City's responsibility if trees are removed for the installation of a sewer or water line. Mr. Williams answered the City must comply with the CAO; if that requires replanting, it would be preferable not to plant along the utility alignment. Mr. Lien recalled another project where trees were Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 14 Packet Page 149 of 391 removed, the pump station 2 project on Shell Creek a few years ago. In that instance, a critical area report, a stream study, and a wetland report was done and every tree that was cut down was replaced at a ratio of 2:1 as required by the code. He summarized the City also has to comply with critical area regulations. Councilmember Buckshnis offered to email her question to staff. Council President Fraley-Monillas referred to the City of Sammamish's (population 50,000) wetland development standards that Ms. Stewart provided her which she provided to all Councilmember, City Clerk and Mayor. She suggested Councilmembers review those regulations prior to the Council's next discussion. Councilmember Mesaros asked where removal/replacement of trees was located in the ordinance. He recalled Mr. Hertrich's comments a few weeks ago regarding a 3-inch tree and 4-inch tree. Mr. Lien referred to 23.40.220.C.7, Allowed Activities, where specific species are mentioned that can be removed in a critical area including noxious species, blackberries, English ivy, etc. An additional limitation is added in the draft critical area regulations that allows up to 1,500 square feet of invasive and noxious weeks, English ivy, Himalayan blackberry, Evergreen blackberry, Scot's broom, Hedge and field bindweed to be removed in a critical area within a 3 year period. With regard to a suggestion to allow removal of alders, Mr. Lien referred language added in section, 23.40.220.C.2 that addresses operation, maintenance and repair exemptions, "Operation and maintenance also includes normal maintenance of vegetation performed in accordance with best management practices..." A definition was also added of operation and maintenance and best management practices with regard to vegetation, "Normal maintenance of vegetation" means removal of shrubs/non-woody vegetation and trees (less than 3-inch diameter at breast height) that occurs at least every other year. Maintenance also may include tree topping that has been previously approved by the City in the past 5 years." As drafted, alders in a critical area less than 3-inches in diameter could be removed as normal maintenance of vegetation. If alders were added to the list in C.7, it would be limited to 1500 square feet of alder removal within a 3-year period. Council President Fraley-Monillas suggested the definition of normal maintenance of vegetation should be "chest height" instead of "breast height." Mr. Lien said that was standard terminology. Mayor Earling advised staff will return this to Council for another study session. He declared a brief recess. B. SEPTEMBER 2015 QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORT Finance Director Scott James provided multiple choice questions, the answers to be revealed at the end of his presentation. He displayed and reviewed 3rd Quarter 2015 Revenue Summary — General Fund Types without bond proceeds and General Fund Revenue Budget to Actual. He displayed a comparison of General Fund Revenue Budget to Actual, highlighting taxes: General Fund Resource Category YTD Actual �9/30/2014 9/30/2015 % Change Taxes Property Taxes $7,413,082 $7,779,098 4.9% Sales Tax 4,267,681 4,937,480 15.7% Utility Tax 5,094,356 5,075,412 -0.4% Other Taxes 667,384 699,942 4.9% Total Taxes $17,442,503 $18,491,932 6.0% Licenses & Permits Business Licenses & Misc Permits $ 169,438 $ 163,897 -3.3% Franchise Fees 817,758 851,573 4.1% Development Related Permits 647,556 537,866 -16.9% Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 15 Packet Page 150 of 391 Total Licenses & Permits 1 1,634,752 1 1,553,336 1 -5.0% He reviewed Sales Tax Analysis by Category September 2015 YTD, pointing out retail automotive is the largest single source of sales tax revenue followed by contractors. He displayed a bar graph of Change in Sales Tax Revenue September 2015 compared to September 2014. Contractors have had the largest gain in 2015, $415,754 above 2014. Mr. James reviewed 3rd Quarter 2015 General Fund — Fund Expenditure Comparison, advising General Fund expenditures are 9.2% higher than 2014, primarily due to paying $1.6 million more for Fire District 1 services. He displayed a General Fund Department Expense Summary, advising the year is 75% completed and expenses are at 71% of budget. He displayed the 3rd Quarter 2015 Revenue Funds Summary — Special Revenue Funds, advising Special Revenues Fund revenues are 40.6% higher this year due in large part to grant revenues which are $2.6 million higher in 2015 than in 2014. He reviewed 3rd Quarter 2015 Motor Vehicle Fuel Tax Revenues 2010 — 2015, advising only modest growth is seen, 1.9% over last year. He displayed 3rd Quarter 2015 Hotel/Motel Lodging Tax Revenues 2010 — 2015, advising lodging taxes are approximately 13% higher than 2014. He reviewed the 3rd Quarter 2015 Real Estate Excise Tax Revenues which has experienced phenomenal growth, 42.2% higher than 2014. The 3rd Quarter 2015 Expense Summary - Special Revenue Funds illustrates expenditures are 35.9% higher than last year; the majority of the increase is due to construction outlays with street construction expenses $968,000 higher than 2014 and park construction expenses $733,000 higher than 2014. The 3rd Quarter 2015 Revenue Summary - Utility Funds illustrates utility fund revenues are $1,113,000 higher than 2014 due primarily to increased water, stormwater, and sewer sales. He reviewed the 3rd Quarter 2015 Expense Summary — Utility Funds, advising utility expenses increased $1.2 million over 2014 primarily due to capital expenses for waterline replacements and the expenditures in the water fund for increased demand for water. Mr. James provided answers to the quiz: 1. The Sales Tax rate for the City of Edmonds is comes to Edmonds? a) 0.90% b) 0.85% c) 0.25% d) 0.10% e) 6.50% 9.50% 9.5%. Of this 9.5%, what percent of the sales tax 2. How much money would I have to spend for the City to earn $1.00 of Sales Tax Revenue? a) $109.50 b) $95.00 c) $117.65 d) $85.85 e) $950.00 3. As of September 30, 2015, the City received $4,937,480 in sales tax receipts. How much money had to be spent in order for the City to receive this much sales tax revenue? a) $493,748,100 b) $53,183,600 c) $580,880,000 Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 16 Packet Page 151 of 391 d) $37,757,200 e) None of the above Councilmember Buckshnis commented the investment revenue is looking good, $135,000 more than last year. She recalled the investment policy was revised recently and inquired about Mr. James' discretionary limit. Mr. James explained the policy was amended to allow 75% in the Snohomish County pool. November 3 is the balancing date for the federal budget and bond sales are temporarily suspended. When bond sales are back on the market, he will bring an investment portfolio request to the Mayor. Councilmember Buckshnis asked for the Snohomish County pool prospectus. Councilmember Mesaros referred to Slide 16 which indicates Fund 120 Hotel/Motel Tax is up 100%; his calculations indicate it is actually up 5%. Similarly Slide 17 indicates the Bond Reserve Fund is up 100% but it is actually down. Councilmember Petso expressed appreciation for the note on the statements indicating interfund loans have been made. She asked whether there was a policy that required he advise Council when those loans were made. Mr. James said notification is required; a memo is included in the packet to advise Council of interfund loans. Council President Fraley-Monillas suggested Mr. James review the investment portfolio with the Council after the budget is adopted. Mr. James agreed, asking whether she was interested in something specific. Council President Fraley-Monillas said it would be good for the Council and citizens to know what outstanding bonds the City has, maturity dates, etc. Mr. James said an investment report is included in all the monthly financial reports. C. DEPARTMENTS CONTINUE TO PRESENT THEIR 2016 BUDGET REQUESTS Public Works - Utilities Public Works Director Phil Williams Public Works and Utilities a lot of interfund transfers. Major differences year to year are related to capital program. Operations and maintenance fairly steady. He reviewed: • 2015 Accomplishments Stormwater o Serviced 3,024 of 6,702 catch basins o Serviced 725 of 1,491 manholes o Total structures serviced 3,749 of 8,193 (45.7%) o Completed the Dayton St. Pump Station Feasibility Study o Completed the stormwater capacity analysis for downtown Edmonds o Design completed on 105th /106th AVE SW storm project (Build 2016) o Final Feasibility Study for the Willow Creek Daylight Project completed (by 12/2015) o Began updating the Stormwater Management Code (update to Council early 2016) o Worked with Planning and other Departments on review of Low Impact Development (LID) Code o Obtained two grants from the Department of Ecology: Seaview Park Infiltration Facility ($633,750) and Phase II Permit Compliance ($50,000) Water 0 8,400 ft (1.6 miles) of water main replacement o Replaced 2 PRV's o Installed one new Intertie between Edmonds and Lynnwood 0 800 linear feet of pavement overlay on City Sewer o 2,700 ft of sewer main replacement Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 17 Packet Page 152 of 391 o Installation of 3 new hybrid blowers (Phase 4) $1.1 million 0 300 and 500 building PLC replacements ($800,000) o Installed Mercury carbon modules in incinerator (will save nearly $4M) o Clarifier #3 repair structural Investigation and design Combined o $17.5 Million Water/Sewer/Storm Capital Projects Bond 2016 Utility Budget Issues o Last year of a three-year rate package o WWTP Outfall Pipe upgrade o LS#1 Pump Station Metering and Flow Study o Lake Ballinger Sewer Trunk Main Study 0 2016 Water System Comprehensive Plan 0 2016/2017 Stormwater Comp Plan Update Decision Packages/Changes o DP #17: LIDAR/GIS Data - $3,000 o DP #18: Software support GIS web app - $3,600 o DP #44: Construction Inspector $102,420 o DP #52: Asset Mgmt. mobile field conversion - $50,000 o DP# 59: Water Maintenance Worker - $67,080 o DP #61: Stormwater Maintenance Worker - $60,880 o DP #62: Stormwater Code updated for Phase 11 NPDES $50,000 Expenditures Expenditures 2015 Budget 215 YE16 Discussion Estimate Reco20mended Utilities — Water, $33,655 930 $28,640 440 $35,329,590 Last year of 3-year rate Sewer, Stormwater increase Public Works — Roads (Fund 111 - Operations and Maintenance and 112 — Capital • 2015 Accomplishments o Pavement Preservation — 9.5 lane miles o Construction 228th St/76th Ave Improvements — const. began May 26th- complete by 12/31/2015 o Completed 2015 Comprehensive Transportation Plan o Completed SR104 Study 0 238th St. new sidewalk, rain gardens, storm system, and paving o Design of walkway on 236th St. - construction 2016 o Design of 76th/212th Intersection Improvements and corridor striping - construction 2016 0 Challenges/Opportunities 2016 o Pavement Preservation - $1,030,000 in 2016 — approx. 6.4 lane miles o Need to continue replacing/upgrading signal cabinets $70,000 o Waterfront Access/At-grade crossing study $450,000 (2016) o Go to bid in March & Begin Construction 76th/212th Project in April - $4,974,000 o Construction of 236th St Walkway $593,000 o Discuss new TBD Authorities Decision Packages/Changes o Trackside (Wayside) Warning Horn System $300,000 o City-wide ADA Transition Plan $110,000 o ADA Curb Ramps $25,000 o Minor sidewalk program $50,000 o Traffic Calming $20,000 Expenditures Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 18 Packet Page 153 of 391 Expenditures 2015 Budget 215 YE 16 Discussion Estimate Reco20mended Fund 111/112 $12,844,546 $12,831,430 $10,255,350 Capital Driven Public Works — Administration, Engineering, Facilities, Fleet (AEFF) • 2015 Accomplishments Engineering Reviews (YTD September) 0 330 Engineering permits were issued 0 1,700 Engineering inspections have been performed o $50,000 collected in traffic impact fees o Permits issued, inspections completed for numerous large development projects: Edmonds Post Office, Swedish Hospital, Prestige Skilled Nursing Facility, Brackett Court, Edmonds Memory Care, Starbucks on Edmonds Way, WinCo, Sherwood Elementary, Seabrook Plat (9th & Caspers) and 7 short plats. o Permits were issued for 40 single family residential projects o Permits were issued for approximately 160 additions/remodels & miscellaneous projects AEFF o Unit #47 2015 Freightliner Vactor, replaced Unit #31, 1996 Volvo Vactor $450K o Unit #19 2014 New Holland/Diamond mower, replaced Unit # 91, 2002 New Holland/US mower $132k o Unit #10 2015 Isuzu NPR flatbed, replaced Unit #133, 2003 Isuzu NPR flatbed $50K o Unit #310 2015 Ford SUV Interceptor, replaced Unit #651, 2008 Crown Vic $55K o Unit #42 2015 Ford 3500 Transit van, replaced Unit #26, 2010 Chevrolet 3500 van $38K (includes propane conversion) o Unit #112 2015 Solar Tech Variable message trailer $20K o Unit #113 2015 Solar Tech Variable message trailer $20K o In-house remodel of Finance offices and Green Room construction o ESCO IV for Library HVAC o Fishing Pier Rehab Design and grant acquisition o Meadowdale Clubhouse re -roofing project • Challenges/Opportunities 2016 o Maintain level of service on development reviews and inspections while updating the development and stormwater codes and our engineering standard details. o Completion of the 228th St. /76th Ave. Improvements Project o Construction of 212th/76th Intersection Improvements Project o Increasing maintenance investments in City -owned buildings o Delivering $21.1M in capital improvements • Graph of City Capital Program for Storm, Water, Sewer, Fund 112 and Parks, 2008-2014 actual, 2015 estimate and 2016 budget, advising the total capital program for 2016 is $21,115,800. • Decision Packages/Changes o DP #19: Increase Facilities Capital annual funding from $56,600/yr to $100,000/yr o DP #43: Return the custodial FTE removed in 2011 $57,120/yr o DP #44: Construction Inspector ($144,800 — includes new vehicle) o DP #45: Waterfront Access At -Grade Crossing Study $450,000 o DP #46: SR99 Access Mgmt. Study 220th-224th $10,000 o DP #47: Commute Trip Reduction program costs $1,000 o DP #48: FS20 Generator Replacement $43,000 o DP #49: FS17 Vehicle Bay Ceiling replacement $10,000 o DP #50: City Hall Fire door repairs $6,000 o DP #51: FAC Floor Repairs $10,000 (DP51) Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 19 Packet Page 154 of 391 COUNCIL PRESIDENT FRALEY-MONILLAS MOVED, SECONDED BY COUNCILMEMBER MESAROS, TO EXTEND THE MEETINGN FOR 20 MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Mr. Williams continued his review of Decision Packages/Changes: AEFF: Total $749,000 + $50,000 (police mobile computers) _ $799,000 o Canopy for Propane station $22k (DP63) o Convert (4) work trucks - propane use $30k (DP64) o Nine new mobile Police computers $50k (DP65) o Sidewalk Program $50k o ADA Ramp upgrades $25k o (2) Signal Cabinet replacements $70k 0 17 new vehicles ■ (3) Motorcycles ($75k) ■ (4) Patrol cars ($240k) ■ (2) Police Admin cars ($66k) ■ New Engrg. Car ($30k) ■ Replaced Engrg. Car ($33k) ■ Parks 1-ton flatbeds ($90k) ■ Building Div. Car ($30k) ■ Streets Div. cars (1) pick-up, (1) electric ($65k) ■ Parks backhoe/loader ($120k) • Expenditures 2015 2015 YE Expenditures Modified Estimate m Recommended Discussion Budget Engineering, Facilities, $5483550 $5383010 $6268740 17 new vehicles + 2 new Fleet, Administration ,,,,,, positions Mayor Earling advised questions regarding the budget will begin next week. D. CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA FORMAT Councilmember Bloom requested the Council discuss reordering agenda so that Approval of Agenda occurs after Audience Comments. This is in response to a request to ban crumb rubber when the media was present; it would have been more responsive to inform them that the matter would be scheduled on a future agenda instead of waiting until Council Comments. She did not envision this would happen often but would be a way to be more responsive to the audience. Council President Fraley-Monillas distributed notes related to Council discussion in 2000 regarding the order of the agenda. Prior to 2011 Audience Comments were at the end of the agenda and it was moved to the beginning to allow citizen comment before Council discussed agenda items. Councilmember Buckshnis did not support placing Approval of Agenda after Audience Comments. The Council President pays a great deal of attention to the agenda and she feared the process would deteriorate if things were added to the agenda on the fly. She found the existing format acceptable. With regard to the presence of the media cameras, the Council's responsibility is to be responsive to citizens, not the local or national news. Councilmember Mesaros did not support having Approval of the Agenda after Audience Comments. The Council is thoughtful about its agenda and citizens may be disappointed if they came to the meeting expecting the agenda to be changed and the Council decides not to change it. Approving the agenda after Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 20 Packet Page 155 of 391 Audience Comment could result in changing the agenda for some and not for others if there is no criteria for amending the agenda. The current order of the agenda allows public comment and Councilmembers always have the ability to add items to the agenda. Councilmember Petso asked if Robert Rules allowed an agenda item to be added when the agenda is approved or later via agreement of the body as whole. City Attorney Jeff Taraday answered yes, the issue is permanently amending the agenda order so that Approval of the Agenda occurred after Audience Comment. Councilmember Petso summarized if a majority of the Council wanted to discuss an item raised during Audience Comment, it could be added to the agenda. Mr. Taraday agreed. Council President Fraley-Monillas commented an item can be added to the agenda at any point during the meeting via a majority vote of Council. Mr. Taraday answered as a general rule yes, the Council controls its agenda throughout the meeting. Councilmember Bloom observed there appeared to be no interest by Council in making this change so she would drop the request. 9. MAYOR'S COMMENTS Mayor Earling reminded of the Holiday Market on Saturdays from November 21 through December 19 in the parking lot between City Hall and the Rusty Pelican. Mayor Earling reported the new Sound Transit CEO will be announced later this month. 10. COUNCIL REPORTS ON OUTSIDE BOARDS AND COMMITTEES Councilmember Petso reported the Public Facilities District and Historic Preservation Commission continue to do great work. The Economic Development Commission (EDC) developed a list of items they would like to work on in the upcoming year if the EDC is renewed. Those items will be included in the packet when discussion regarding the EDC is presented to the Council. Councilmember Mesaros reported the New World project is going fairly well with only a few minor glitches. Three Edmonds representatives attended SNOCOM's retreat last month where the future of SNOCOM and issues related to capital costs, locations, etc. were discussed. Councilmember Mesaros reported the Seashore Transportation Forum did not meet last month due to a major transportation conference on the eastside which he was unable to attend. He reported the Port Commission approved the Port's 2016 budget at its last meeting. Councilmember Bloom reported the Tree Board discussed the Arbor Day celebration, turnover of board members, and ideas for the future such as speakers and public education. Board members will bring ideas for the coming year to the next meeting. One Tree Board Member coordinated a project with Public Works to spread mulch and plant trees in an area where sewer and water lines were installed. The Tree Board also participated in an Arbor Day planting event in Yost Park. Councilmember Bloom referred to a debate on My Edmonds News regarding whether a police officer was present in the Council Chambers last week, assuring there was a police officer present last week and there is one tonight. She again requested the police be relieved of their responsibility at Council meetings as she did not believe the Council needed the protection and their services are better used elsewhere. Councilmember Johnson reported tickets are still available for the Heritage Days Dinner on Friday, November 13. She was unable to attend the meetings earlier in October that she is assigned to due to health issues. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 21 Packet Page 156 of 391 Councilmember Buckshnis reported on Lake Ballinger/McAleer Creek Watershed meeting. They are working on the Ballinger Park Master Plan and seeking grant funds from various sources for the estimated $14 million cost. She is researching a 1942 court order that Edmonds put on Lake Ballinger to keep the lake at a certain level. Councilmember Nelson reported on the Snohomish County Emergency Radio Systems Board meeting; a consultant has been hired to study replacing the countywide public safety radio system. During the August 29 windstorm all the radios were fully operational. The volume of traffic during a 12 hour that day was equivalent to 2 weeks of normal radio traffic. He reported the Climate Protection Committee now has three citizen members. Council President Fraley-Monillas reported the EDC issue is coming to Council in 2 weeks on November 17. She reported on a tour she took of Hwy 99 this weekend including visiting Winco after the Seahawks game when it was very busy. She encouraged the public to try the New Taiwanese Boiling Point Restaurant at 220t' & Hwy 99. With regard to having a police officer in Council Chambers, Council President Fraley-Monillas explained police officer was present for many years, it happened to have been the Police Chief. She preferred to be safe than sorry and did not think it was worth sacrificing safety. Because the Council does not know the background of everyone attending Council meetings, she personally felt safer having an officer in the room. She wished everyone running for election good luck. Student Representative Girouard reported her leadership class at Edmonds-Woodway High School is having a Veterans Day Assembly on November 10. She invited veterans to attend the assembly so that they could be honored. Mayor Earling suggested she contact the local media about publishing a story which may increase attendance. 11. CONVENE IN EXECUTIVE SESSION REGARDING PENDING OR POTENTIAL LITIGATION PER RCW 42.30.110(1)(i) This item was not needed. 12. RECONVENE IN OPEN SESSION. POTENTIAL ACTION AS A RESULT OF MEETING IN EXECUTIVE SESSION This item was not needed. 13. ADJOURN With no further business, the Council meeting was adjourned at 10:22 p.m. Edmonds City Council Approved Minutes November 2, 2015 Page 22 Packet Page 157 of 391 AM-8323 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 02/09/2016 Time: 30 Minutes Submitted For: Bertrand Hauss Department: Engineering Type: Information Submitted By: Megan Luttrell Information Subiect Title Update on the Edmonds Waterfront Access Study Recommendation For information only. 6. C. Previous Council Action On October 20, 2015, Council approved the Local Agency Consultant Agreement with Tetra Tech for the Edmonds Waterfront Access Study. Narrative The purpose of the Edmonds Waterfront Access Study is to identify near -term and long-term solutions at the Main St. and Dayton St. railroad crossings to address the following: • Waterfront access issues to provide constant emergency access. • At -grade conflicts between vehicles and trains. • Pedestrian and bicycle access. • Options to the Edmonds Crossing Multimodal Terminal Project, identified as Modified Alternative 2 within the 2004 Final Environmental Impact Statement. Tetra Tech has been analyzing the existing conditions through various discussions with agencies frequently using both crossings (such as Sound Transit, Community Transit, Washington State Ferry, and BNSF). As part of the up -coming Screening 1 process, various concepts will be evaluated based on a set of criteria. A total of 43 concepts have been identified for this screening, as well as a list of criteria. The highest rated concepts will then move on to the Screening 2 process, at which time another evaluation with more specific criteria will be performed. The highest rated alternatives from Screening 2 will then be presented to City Council, at which time a preferred alternative will be recommended. Since October 2015, bimonthly meetings have been held with the Advisory Task Force. Open Houses were held in November 2015 and last month and two more are scheduled for this April and June. The analysis is scheduled to be completed in September 2016. The total funding for this project is $690,000, with participation from the State Legislature, the City of Edmonds, the Port of Edmonds, BNSF, Sound Transit, and Community Transit. Attachments Packet Page 158 of 391 Council Presentation Schedule Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering (Originator) Megan Luttrell 02/04/2016 11:45 AM Public Works Megan Luttrell 02/04/2016 11:45 AM City Clerk Scott Passey 02/04/2016 11:48 AM Mayor Dave Earling 02/04/2016 11:57 AM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 02/04/2016 12:47 PM Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Started On: 02/03/2016 09:43 AM Final Approval Date: 02/04/2016 Packet Page 159 of 391 Edmonds Waterfront Access Study Unreliable access to the entire waterfront area by emergency responders GFerry loading and unloading 0 Access to the waterfront area by people driving, walking or biking oFerry, rail and bus connections 4* gm yr. d- 71 7� 4"apLt ids V [!TIZIE Fi I ]MI I I aIt. I 0SouthCTStop Landing North EdMonds Station Area CP err 1 4 ZOO Ot Z. 4 swill 4 1. A"Afto RK, qufflwA Packet Page 160 of 391 Edmonds Waterfront Access Study WHAT IS THE STUDY PURPOSE? WHY IS THIS NEEDED? Alternatives to street -level rail crossings at 0 Expedite emergency response to waterfront area Main Street &Dayton Street i Reduce congestion and delays Provide access between downtown Edmonds Q Increase efficiency of ferry loading and unloading and Wate rfro nt fo r: • Emergency Responders Walking 0 Improve connections to buses, train, and ferries • Driving • Transit Increase comfort level of people using the waterfront area • Moving Freight • Biking Packet Page 161 of 391 Study Schedule STUDY MILESTON E Understand existing Ide n ki fy concepts conditions TECH N I CAL #DNA LYS I S ST EP • Observe, quantify and document ex1sking conditions at Main Street and Dayton Street crossings _ • Review data from premous studies and community input_ GET INVOLVED Share your experiences with waterfront access and ideas for improving access • Compile potential measures to improve access, including both long-range and nea r- tc rm solutions_ • Develop screening criteria_ • Prepare 1 i st of concepts for screening and erralu at -ion _ Share your thoughts on concepts to consider and scree n i ng crite ri a 4UH Screen concepts (Level 1 review) • Review concepts within initial criteria to determ in e feasib 1I itry_ • Eliminate infeasible concepts _ • Document findings. Provide feedback on scree nod concepts HH Evaluate alternatives (Level 2 review) • Further develop the remaining concepts into potential alternatives _ • Apply more detai led criteria to evaluate a Ite rnative s_ • Document fi nd ings and in itial recom men da kion s _ Provide feedback on evaluated alte rnakives and initial recommendations HE Develop recommendations Develop preferred alternative recommendation s based on analysis_ Present to City Co u nc 11 and Legislature_. Diu men t final recommendations in a report_ Revmw preferred a Iternative recommendations RH 62 of 391 F�,—, ro � �MYIXil71VM ram• •�.-� , ' f � �-. �Y,r � ram•+; Ir ��: a dr . . _ _ rv- t� # . . a r; Owe rpaea Solution Underpass Solution ® On -Site Solution F " Operatlonal Solution Railroad Modification Ferry Facilitlea Modification vIx, .y 4. i �+ t- 14r1}. oV DM o 63 of 391 Initial Concepts Locations K16-1i.- 6 m I - J' Y) I, F I + 11 � � � � I ■1 I"f r Ii��1 11. � 1 I r lic *FL 77 * rd I I � 1 �7 • � �' +-+ti I I L i � OF EDP O� � � d v � WEI 2-Stage Screening /Evaluation Process CONSIDERED SOLUTION CONCERTS ( From public} study team., prior studies) Document HIGHEST -RATED CONCEPTS Document Decisions HIGHEST -RATED ALTERNATIVES PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS OF EDP St. 10" Packet Page 165 of 391 oV DM o� o Level 1 Screening Process �St. s9° SCREEN THE INITIAL SOLUTION CONCEPTS • Eliminate concepts that do not meet purpose and need • Compare remaining concepts using Level 1 screening criteria • Use best available information to rate how each concept meets individual criteria • Advance highest -rated concepts for Level 2 evaluation Details on the results of Level 1 screening and the Level 2 evaluation process will be shared at the 3rd public meeting Concept ratings for criteria used in Level 1 Screening • Most positive 0 Least positive 17 Between Green and Red (in some cases neutral) Packet Page 166 of 391 Level 1 Screening Criteria Does the concept improve reliable emergency response to west side of the railroad? Does the concept reduce delays to ferry loading/ unloading of vehicles? Does the concept reduce delays & conflicts at street/ railroad crossings for people walking, biking or driving? Does the concept provide safe and efficient passenger connectivity between available modes of travel? Is the concept feasible to implement? Does the concept avoid creating social and/or economic impacts? Does the concept avoid negative environmental effects? Packet Page 167 of 391 Screening Criteria Details Does the concept improve reliable emergency response to west side of the railroad? • Provide continuous emergency access? • Reduce emergency response delays? • Improve emergency evacuation? Does the concept reduce delays to ferry loading/unloading of vehicles? Does the concept reduce delays & conflicts at street / railroad crossings for people walking, biking or driving? • Reduce delays for pedestrians? • Reduce pedestrian conflicts with vehicles / trains? • Improve connections to destinations? Packet Page 168 of 391 Screening Criteria Details Does the concept provide safe and efficient passenger connectivity between available modes of travel? • Rail • Ferry • Vehicle • Pedestrian • Bicycle Is the concept feasible to implement? • To construct? • To fund? Does the concept avoid negative environmental effects? • Natural resources • Historic/ cultural/ archaeological resources • Visual aesthetics • Noise levels • Sites containing hazardous materials • Use of park lands • Air quality • Soils and groundwater oV DM o� o �s" s9° Does the concept avoid creating social and/or economic impacts? • Effects on neighborhoods and businesses? • Compatible with positive urban design? • Avoid conflicts with parks/ recreation assets? • Avoid creating safety hazards? • Improve freight mobility? • To permit? Packet Page 169 of 391 Schedule F IMAR- ■R i JAUG- Begin study; Identify Screen Evaluate Recommend understa nd concepts concepts alternat-wes preferred existing alternatives co n dition5 (C) ISO 00) 0 pW)rpc meetirtS 0 Orfm opm house Q Pubic haaing Packet Page 170 of 391 Edmonds Waterfront Access Study Questions? Packet Page 171 of 391 D %/ 9% �% ® ® C` 0 ® C< r; r; ® ® Task Mode ® ® ® ® ® ® E Task Name Duration Outreach Initiation Contract 5 days NTP 1 0 days Outreach Plan 5 days Advisory Task Force 241 days Advisory Task Force 241 days Draft Scope for Review 7 days Contract 5 days Council Approval 6 days NTP 2 2 days Strategic Communications Plan 5 days Public Meeting 0 days Web Site Development 21 days Develop Purpose and Need/ Issues and 15 days Objectives Develop Existing Conditions 15 days Prepare Project Basemap 5 days Identify cultural resources 10 days Identify Haz Mat Sites 15 days Research available Geotechnical 15 days Information Review Existing Documentation (City, WSF, 20 days ST, BNSF) Prepare and Submit Report to Legislature 10 days Develop Evaluation methology (& Criteria 15 days for Level 1 and Level 2) Develop Draft Range of Concepts 30 days Conduct Interviews of City/ WSF/ BNSF and 6 wks ST Workshop/ Charette with City and WSF 1 day Others as defined Refine Range of Concepts 15 days Open House #1 (2nd Public Meeting) 0 days Start Finish Mon 9/28/15 Fri 10/2/15 Sun 10/4/15 Sun 10/4/15 Mon 10/5/15 Fri 10/9/15 Thu 10/8/15 Thu 9/8/16 Thu 9/24/15 Thu 8/25/16 Fri 9/25/15 Mon 10/5/15 Tue 10/6/15 Mon 10/12/1f Tue 10/13/15 Tue 10/20/15 Wed 10/21/1EThu 10/22/15 Mon 10/12/1� Fri 10/16/15 Wed 11/18/1E Wed 11/18/1E Fri 10/23/15 Fri 11/20/15 Fri 10/23/15 Thu 11/12/15 Wed 11/11/1!Tue 12/1/15 Wed 11/11/1ETue 11/17/15 Wed 11/11/1�Tue 11/24/15 Wed 11/11/1ETue 12/1/15 Wed Tue 12/1/15 11/11/15 Fri 10/30/15 Thu 11/26/15 Wed Tue 12/1/15 11/18/15 Fri 11/13/15 Thu 12/3/15 Fri 11/13/15 Thu 12/24/15 Thu 12/3/15 Wed 1/13/16 Thu 2/11/16 Thu 2/11/16 Fri 12/25/15 Thu 1/14/16 Wed 1/27/16 Wed 1/27/16 September 1 8 30 9 13 1 October 1 1 November 1 I C 9 27 1 10 11 10 25 11 8 11 22 1 10/4 1 1 1 ♦ 11/18 1 2 3 4 17 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 January 1, I February 1 I March 1 I April,I I May 1 I June 1 I July 1 I August 1 I September 1, I October 1 Refine/ Hybridize Concepts 10 days Wed 1/27/16 Tue 2/9/16 Project: Edmonds Alterantive A Task Summary ii Inactive Milestone Duration -only MNNNNN Start -only E External Milestone Manual Progress Date: Tue 1/19/16 Split . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Project Summary 9 Inactive Summary Manual Summary Rollup Finish -only 7 Deadline 3 Milestone ♦ Inactive Task Manual Task I I Manual Summary r - - - - - - - - - -i External Tasks Progress Page 1 Packet Page 172 of 391 Task Mode ® ® ® ® ® ■ ® ® ® ® Task Name City Council Briefing Analyze/ Evaluate/ Screen Concepts (Level 1) Finalize Level 1 Screening Prepare Documentation for Level 1 Screening Refine/ Hybridize Remaining Concepts into Alternatives Open House #2 (3rd Public Meeting) City Council Briefing Analyze Alternatives and Document Findings LOS Analysis Cost Estimates Constructability/ Feasibility Analysis Compatibility with Others Plans (City, WSF, BNSF, ST) Environmental Impacts Identified cultural visual Identify Environmental Benefits Draft Evaluation of Alternatives Regulatory Agency Presentation Meeting Open House #3 (4th Public Meeting) Refine Alternatives and Level 2 Screening Document Level 2 Screening City Council Briefing Document Alternatives Process Reviews Finalize Report Project Complete Duration 0 days 15 days 5 days 10 days 20 days 0 days 0 days 30 days 30 days 30 days 30 days 30 days 15 days 10 days 15 days 30 days 10 days 0 days 0 days 15 days 10 days 0 days 15 days 3 wks 2 wks 0 days Start Finish Tue 2/9/16 Tue 2/9/16 Wed 2/10/16 Tue 3/1/16 Wed 3/2/16 Tue 3/8/16 Wed 3/9/16 Tue 3/22/16 Wed 3/9/16 Tue 4/5/16 Tue 4/5/16 Tue 4/5/16 Tue 4/19/16 Tue 4/19/16 Wed 4/6/16 Tue 5/17/16 Wed 4/6/16 Tue 5/17/16 Wed 4/6/16 Tue 5/17/16 Wed 4/6/16 Tue 5/17/16 Wed 4/6/16 Tue 5/17/16 Wed 4/6/16 Tue 4/26/16 Wed 4/6/16 Tue 4/19/16 Wed 4/6/16 Tue 4/26/16 Wed 4/6/16 Tue 5/17/16 Wed 5/18/16 Tue 5/31/16 Tue 5/24/16 Tue 5/24/16 Wed 6/15/16 Wed 6/15/16 Thu 6/16/16 Wed 7/6/16 Thu 7/7/16 Wed 7/20/16 Tue 7/5/16 Tue 7/5/16 Thu 7/21/16 Wed 8/10/16 Thu 8/11/16 Wed 8/31/16 Thu 9/1/16 Wed 9/14/16 Wed 9/14/16 Wed 9/14/16 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 1 , I October 1 1, I 1 I March April,I I May 1 4/5 4/19 June 1 6/15 July 1 7/5 Project: Edmonds Alterantive A Task Summary _1 Inactive Milestone Duration -only Start -only E External Milestone Manual Progress Date: Tue 1/19/16 Split . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Project Summary 9 Inactive Summary Manual Summary Rollup Finish -only 7 Deadline 3 Milestone ♦ Inactive Task Manual Task I I Manual Summary External Tasks Progress Page 2 August 1 I September 1, I October 1 9/14 Packet Page 173 of 391 AM-8316 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 02/09/2016 Time: 30 Minutes Submitted For: Ed Sibrel Department: Engineering Type: Information Submitted By: Megan Luttrell Information Subiect Title Presentation of the Sunset Avenue Walkway Project Survey Results Recommendation For information only. 6. D. Previous Council Action On December 20, 2011, an amendment to the Capital Facilities Plan, which includes the Sunset Ave Walkway was passed. On April 17, 2012, a Resolution of the Council in support of pursuing a RCO grant for the design of City Park and the Sunset Overlook projects was passed. On June 4, 2013, a Resolution of the City Council in strong support of a 2013 Transportation Investment Package, including the Sunset Avenue Walkway was passed. On December 3, 2013, there was public Comment and discussion of the Sunset Avenue Walkway Project. On March 4, 2014, discussion and potential action regarding modifying or terminating the Sunset Walkway Project. On March 25, 2014, public comment and continued discussion of the Sunset Avenue Project. On April 1, 2014, a continuation of discussion concerning the project. On June 24, 2014, the City's Transportation Improvement Plan, including the Sunset Avenue Walkway Project passes. On July 16, 2014, a motion to amend the Transportation Improvement Plan to remove the Sunset Avenue Walkway Project was defeated. On August 19, 2014, a proposal to restripe Sunset Avenue to emulate what the project may look like as a proof -of -concept was approved. On May 5, 2015, an update to the status of the proof -of -concept was presented. Packet Page 174 of 391 On August 25, 2015, a presentation of traffic and pedestrian data was presented. On December 8, 2015, a motion to remove the term `multiuse' and replace it with the term `walkway' in describing the project was approved. Narrative The restripe of Sunset Avenue to include the walkway was completed and fully opened for public use on September 18, 2014. Several field adjustments were made to the walkway application as it was installed, and subsequent, targeted adjustments to particular areas have also been made as needed when issues have been identified. A public survey was conducted from October through December 2015 to gauge how the striping was received, elicit suggestions for improvements, and to request comments. A total of 764 responses were received (677 were identified as unique users), and 1,546 individual comments were recorded concerning the project. The purpose of this presentation is to provide an overview of the survey results, as well as some current issues brought up by the survey that should be addressed during the course of the project, should the project be allowed to go forward. Staff will make a presentation regarding these issues and will answer questions. Attachments Presentatinn Sunset Walkway Survey Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Engineering (Originator) Robert English 02/04/2016 08:02 AM Public Works City Clerk Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Final Approval Date: 02/04/2016 Megan Luttrell 02/04/2016 10:54 AM Scott Passey 02/04/2016 10:56 AM Dave Earling 02/04/2016 11:13 AM Scott Passey 02/04/2016 12:47 PM Started On: 02/02/2016 08:02 AM Packet Page 175 of 391 .0. „�+► Apw. -400p- 66 ,� ,. •ti is ��fr�. �, � - _ � — .. PUBLIC SURVEY OVERVIEW February 9, 2016 f��� ���� �1,: ►,. Il .,�, ...Ill � 1 �� � Dates of Survey: October 19, 2015 — December 31, 2015 Response — 764 total (677 of which were unique) Comments —1546 individual comments were recorded during the survey. Responses over time: Responses Volume 912112G15 - 1211412G15 EGG 400 30G zoo 1 GO G,. Packet Page 177 of 391 Survey Integrity • Survey was set up to deny repeat responses* • Survey questions were randomized • Response trends were reviewed to identify potential irregularities • Survey conducted so that all could be heard *This feature can be circumvented by various means by sufficiently motivated individuals. The survey software employed records the Internet Protocol (IP) address of every respondent. When those repeat responses were identified and excluded from the survey, the overall results did not change. Packet Page 178 of 391 Description of Survey Questions: • Residency • Making Pathway Permanent • Pathway Use Type • Usage Frequency • Parking Availability • How Best to Keep Informed • Angled Parking • Describing any Usage Changes • Bicycles on Shared Pathway • Respondent Contact Info • Additional Amenities • Additional Comments Packet Page 179 of 391 Selected Responses Packet Page 180 of 391 RKING Q3 The availability of parking on Sunset Avenue is Answered:134 Skipped:30 More than what 9 81% is needed Adequate M 42.10% Somewhat 21.93% Inadequate Completely 16.62% Inadequate Parking should M 9.54% be removed 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% H". 1 °4 Packet Page 181 of 391 ANGLED PARKING Q4 The angled parking on Sunset Avenue Answered:722 Skipped:42 Is not that difficult to... ¢¢'800 Is difficult 10.80% to navigate Should be moved farthe... Should he removed 11.77% 32.83% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70 8096 90% 100% Packet Page 182 of 391 41 X - -�Aw+- W i 1. Olt BICYCLE USE Regarding bicycle use on the shared pathway: Answered:733 Skipped:31 Safe bicycle 23.60% use should b... There are not 29.33% enough bikes... A separate 14.07% bike path... Bikes should 32 20% not be allow... 0% 1 0°k 20% 3096 4096 5096 GO% 70% 80% 90% 1 C C,% Packet Page 183 of 391 MAKE CURRENT CONFIGURATION PERMANENT Q7 I would like to see the current temporary pathway improved and made permanent Answered:769 Skipped:5 Strongly Agree Somewhat 73.78% Agree Neither Agree 5.14% nor disagree Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree 43.35°% 32.15°% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Packet Page 184 of 391 11 11 11 11 ADDITIONAL SURVEY QUESTIONS Residency: 91.9% of respondents identified as Edmonds residents. Primary Use of Sunset: 83.2% of respondents identified as pedestrians, 47.2% as motorists, 8.0% as bicyclists, and 5.6% as adjacent residents. Walkway usage: 76% of respondents would use the walkway at least several times per month. 280 respondents left contact information for further updates. Packet Page 185 of 391 Before / After Comparison of Results when Repeat Responders were Deleted from Survey Before After The availability of parking on Sunset Avenue is Answered: 734 Skipped: 30 More than what 9 81% is needed Adequate 42.10% Somewhat 21.93% Inadequate Completely 16.62°% Inadequate Parking should E 9.54°% he removed 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Q3: Parking Availability, General 4- � More than what is needed o a) � N *' .N Adequate nn a1 C `—° o c a Somewhat Inadequate M to a, ML < Completely Inadequate S CO l_ CL Parking should be removed ■ Seriesl 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 The availability of parking on Sunset Avenue is Parking Completely Somewhat should be Inadequate Inadequate Adequate removed 65 106 149 269 I More than what is needed 64 Packet Page 186 of 391 Before / After Comparison of Results when Repeat Responders were Deleted from Survey Before The angled parking on Sunset Avenue Answered: 722 Skipped: 42 Q4: Angled Parking After � Is not that difficult to navigate Is not that C: diFlFcuttto... 44.60% - ; Q Q Is difficult to navigate Is difficult °�° Should be moved farther west,... to navigate 10.80% a Should be removed Should he 11 77% 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 moved farthe... The angled parking on Sunset Avenue Should be moved Should he 3z.ss% Should be farther west, Is difficult to Is not that removed difficult to removed toward the water, navigate navigate 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% if possible ■ Seriesl 205 76 70 286 Packet Page 187 of 391 Before / After Comparison of Results when Repeat Responders were Deleted from Survey Before Q5 Regarding bicycle use on the shared pathway: Answered: 733 Skipped: 31 Safe bicycle09 23.50% use should b... There are not enough hikes... A separate hike path... Bikes should not he allow... 29.33% 32.20% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% After Q5: Bicycle Use I Safe bicycle use should be encouraged There are not enough bikes to be a problem A separate bike path should be considered Bikes should not be allowed on the path 0 50 100 150 200 250 Regarding bicycle use on the shared pathway: Bikes should not A separate bike There are not Safe bicycle use be allowed on the path should be enough bikes to be should be path considered a problem encouraged riesl 208 99 188 155 I Packet Page 188 of 391 I would like to see the current temporary pathway improved and made permanent Answered: 759 Skipped:5 Strongly Agree I Somewhat 13.18% Agree Neither Agree 5.14% nor Disagree Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree d3.35% 32.15% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Q7: Permanence of Walkway Strongly Agr Somewhat Agr Neither Agree nor Disagr Somewhat Disagr Strongly Disagr 2e 2e e ee E!e 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 would like to see the current temporary pathway improved and made permanent Strongly Somewhat I Neither Agree Somewhat Disagree Disagree nor Disagree Agree Strongly Agree 214 44 38 93 283 Packet Page 189 of 391 QUESTIONS Packet Page 190 of 391 Sunset Avenue Walkway - Public '''C. 1 0V I Survey The City of Edmonds has conducted a survey to evaluate public attitudes concerning the temporary walkway installed on Sunset Avenue, so that the City may evaluate future options. The Sunset Avenue Walkway is being developed to provide an all- weather, ADA accessible, and multi -modal (bicycle & pedestrian) route from Bell Street north through Caspers Street with connection to 3rd Avenue North. The goal of the project is to improve the quality and safety of public access and the enjoyment of Olympic Mountain and Puget Sound views. This can be accomplished by extending the City's existing waterfront trail another 2,500 feet north where it will link to the City's existing sidewalk system. Packet Page 191 of 391 This page intentionally left blank Packet Page 192 of 391 1 /28/2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS SurveyLevel of Response...............................................................................................................................................3 SurveyIntegrity.................................................................................................................................................................5 SurveyQuestions..............................................................................................................................................................7 SurveyResults, Charts....................................................................................................................................................11 Question 1— Residency ...12 Question 3 — Parking Availability ...14 Question 5 — Bicycles on Shared Pathway ... 16 Question 7 — Making Pathway Permanent ... 18 Question 9 — Ways to Keep Me Informed ... 20 Question 2 — Pathway Use Type ...13 Question 4 —Angled Parking ... 15 Question 6 — Additional Amenities .... 17 Question 8 —Usage Frequency ... 19 RepeatResponders........................................................................................................................................................21 Duplicate Responses Identified ... 22 Chart Results with Repeat Responders Removed ... 24 Survey Responses, Trends over Time...........................................................................................................................29 Overall Responses... 30 Question 2 — Pathway Use Type ... 32 Question 4 —Angled Parking ... 34 Question 6 — Additional Amenities ...36 Question 8 — Usage Frequency ... 38 Question 1— Residency ...31 Question 3 — Parking Availability ... 33 Question 5 — Bicycles on Shared Pathway ... 35 Question 7 — Making Pathway Permanent ... 37 Question 9 — Ways to Keep Me Informed ... 39 SurveyResults, Comments............................................................................................................................................41 Question 1— Residency ...42 Question 2 — Pathway Use Type ... 45 Question 3 — Parking Availability ... 49 Question 4 —Angled Parking... 61 Question 5 — Bicycle Use on Shared Pathway ... 73 Question 9 — Ways to Keep Me Informed ... 81 Question 10 — Describing Usage Change with the Temporary Pathway ... 85 Question 11— Respondent Contact Info ... 129 Question 12 —Additional Comments ...135 1 Packet Page 193 of 391 1 /28/2016 This page intentionally left blank Packet Page 194 of 391 1 /28/2016 Sunset Walkway Survey - Level of Response Dates of Survey: Responses volume 400 400 aco 200 100 764 Total Responses 19546 Written Comments October 19, 2015 — December 31. 2015 &2112015 - 1221412015 3 Packet Page 195 of 391 1 /28/2016 This page intentionally left blank Packet Page 196 of 391 1 /28/2016 Survey Integrity Measures Taken to Optimize Survey Integrity 1. Survey set up to deny repeat responses. --Survey Monkey has the ability to restrict multiple responses from the same IP (Internet Protocol) address, but this ability can be circumvented by various methods. IP addresses were, however recorded for every response during the survey, and, approximately 10% of the survey responses were from addresses identified as already having taken the survey. When those repeat responses were deleted from the totals, and results re -charted, the results did not change significantly. A copy of the survey charts generated from solely unique IP addresses is included in this report, as well as a visual representation of the extent and distribution of the repeats. 2. Randomization of questions. --Questions within the survey itself were placed in a random order for each survey submitted. For any that might it advantageous to repeat taking the survey, it would require a re -reading of every question in order to make their responses count. Otherwise, the repeat responses would add a measure of 'noise' to the data, but the underlying responses would be unaffected. 3. Trend Analysis. --Assuming that overall, the relative ratios of the responses would remain relatively constant throughout the survey given a large enough sample, trend analyses can identify when either repeat responses from the same IPs are identified, or that there is evidence of an organizational push to affect a survey outcome. No such trends were identified that affected the overall results. 4. All are heard. --The initial survey was scheduled for October 21, 2015 through November 20, 2015, but in order for the maximum number of people to be heard, the survey was extended to December 31, 2015. The last survey response was received December 15, 2015. Packet Page 197 of 391 1 /28/2016 This page intentionally left blank Packet Page 198 of 391 1 /28/2016 1: 6JUAf `' PUBLIC SURVEY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Sunset Walkway SunsetAvenue Walkway Community Survey This questionnaire is designed to evaluate public attitudes concerning the temporary walkway installed on Sunset Avenue. Your feedback will assist the City in evaluating future options. We have also included space for you to share additional thoughts you might have. Please fill out just one survey. 1. 1 would describe myself as OAn Edmonds resident ONot a resident, but a frequent visitor ONot a resident, but an occasional visitor Other (please specify) 2. My primary use of Sunset Avenue between Main Street and Caspers Street is as a (check all that apply) 1-1 Pedestrian ❑ Bicyclist Motorist 1-1 Adjacent Resident Other (please specify) 7 Packet Page 199 of 391 1 /28/2016 3. The availability of parking on Sunset Avenue is OMore than what is needed OAdequate OSomewhat Inadequate OCompletely Inadequate OParking should be removed Other (please specify) 4. The angled parking on Sunset Avenue O Is not that difficult to navigate O Is difficult to navigate OShould be moved farther west, toward the water, if possible OShould be removed Other (please specify) 5. Regarding bicycle use on the shared pathway: OSafe bicycle use should be encouraged OThere are not enough bikes to be a problem OA separate bike path should be considered OBikes should not be allowed on the path Other (please specify) 8 Packet Page 200 of 391 1 /28/2016 6. 1 would like to see Sunset Avenue have additional amenities added (park benches, picnic tables, artwork, etc) OStrongly Agree OSomewhat Agree ONeither Agree nor Disagree OSomewhat Disagree OStrongly Disagree 7. 1 would like to see the current temporary pathway improved and made permanent O Strongly Agree OSomewhat Agree ONeither Agree nor Disagree OSomewhat Disagree OStrongly Disagree 8. 1 would use this walkway... O Daily OSeveral times a week OSeveral times a month OAfew times a year OAlmost never ONever 9 Packet Page 201 of 391 1 /28/2016 9. 1 prefer to receive information regarding City projects via (Check all that apply) The City's website 1-1 The City's Facebook page E-mail updates My Edmonds News Edmonds Beacon Public Meetings and Council Meetings (please specify whether in person, on TV, or via computer below) Other (please specify). 10. The temporary walkway on Sunset was installed September of 2014. Please describe your usage of Sunset Ave before and after the installation. 11. If you would like updates regarding the Sunset Avenue Walkway Project, please enter your contact information, or contact the Project Manager directly at ed.sibrel@edmondswa.gov Name Email Address 12. Please enter any additional comments here: 10 Packet Page 202 of 391 1 /28/2016 Survey Results,, Charts 11 Packet Page 203 of 391 1 /28/2016 Q1: I would describe myself as Answered- 757 Skipped- 7 An Edmonds 91.94% resident Not a resident, bu... 7.27% Not a 0.79% resident, bu... 0 10 20 00 40 50 00 70 00 00 100 Answer Choices Responses An Edmonds residers 91.941k Not a resident, W a frequent vdor 7.271/° Not a resident, W an occasional vdor 0.791/° Total 757 12 Packet Page 204 of 391 Q2: My primary use of Sunset Avenue betW66n Main Street and Caspers Street is as a (check all that apply) Answered:754 Skipped:10 Pedestrian Bicyclist � 8.()g% Motorist Adjacent E 5.57% Resident a47.21 % 83.16% 0 10 20 30 40 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Answer Choices Responses Pedestrian 83.16% 627 Bicyclist 8.09% 61 Motorist 47.21% 356 Adjacent Resident 5.57% 42 Total Respondents: 764 13 Packet Page 205 of 391 1 /28/2016 Q3: The availability of parking on Sunset Avenue is Answered- 734 Skipped- 30 More than what is needed aL Adegriate Somewhat Inadequate Completely Inadequate 9.81 % z 1.Vj 16.62% 42.10% Parking shotdd 9.54% he removed in 0% 107E 20 30 40 80 60 Answer Choices More than what is needed Adequate Somewhat Inadequate Completely h7adequste Parking should be removed Total 70 80 90% 100% Responses 9.81 % 72 42.10% 309 21.93% 161 16.62% 122 9.54% 70 734 14 Packet Page 206 of 391 1 /28/2016 Q4: The angled parking on Sunset Avenue Answered:722 Skipped:42 Is not that difficult to... Is difficult to navigate Should be moved farthe... Should be removed 10.80% 11.77% 32.83% 44.60% 0 10 20 30 40 80 60 70 80 90 100 Answer Choices Responses Is not that difficult to navigate 4 60% - Is difficult to navigate 10.80 % 7 Should be moved faither west, to -,yard the water, if possible 11.77 6 H Should be removed 32.83% `3I Total 722 15 Packet Page 207 of 391 1 /28/2016 Q5: Regarding bicycle use on the shared pathway: Answered- 733 Skipped: 31 Safe bicycle 23.60% Use should b... There are not 29.33% enough bikes... A separate 14.87% bike path... Bikes should 32.20% not be allow... 0 10 20 8000 60 7 0 80 90 100 Answer Choices Responses Safe bicycle use should be encouraged 23.601/o 173 There are not enough bikes to be a problem 29.33% 215 A separate bike path should be considered 10% 109 Bikes should not be allowed on the path 32.20% 236 Total 733 16 Packet Page 208 of 391 Q6: I would like to see Sunset Avenue havd'/2016 additional amenities added (park benches, picnic tables, artwork, etc) Answered- 759 Skipped- 5 Strongly Agree 25.30% Somewhat 26.88% Agree Neither Agree 17.65% nor Disagree somewhat 11.73% Disagree Strongly 10.45% Disagree 0 10 20 30 40 80 130 ; 0 80 {10% 100 Answer Choices Respo es Strongly Agree 25,30% 1 tip_ Somewhat Agree 28.88% _0 4 Neither Agree nor Disagree 17.85¢{¢ 134 aLi Somewhat Disagree Strongly Disagree 18.45% 14 Total 759 17 Packet Page 209 of 391 1 /28/2016 Q7: I would like to see the current temporary pathway improved and made permanent Answered- 759 Skipped: 5 Strongly Agree Somewhat Agree Neither Agree 5.14% nor Disagree Somewhat 6.19% Disagree Strongly Disagree 13.18% 32.15% 43.35% 0 10 20 30 40 80 130 70 80 90 100% Answer Choices Responses Sirongly Agree ,35¢/¢ 329 Somewhat Agree 13.181/0 100 Ndier Agree nor Disagree 6'14% 39 Some -NU Disagree 6'19% 47 Strongly Disagree 32.15 6 244 Total 759 18 Packet Page 210 of 391 1 /28/2016 Q8: I would use this walkway... Answered- 754 Skipped- 10 Daily 11.80% Several times a week Several times a mouth A few times a 12.73% year Almost never 5.70% Never 5.44% 07i 10�f. Answer Choices Daily Several times a week Several times a month A few times a year Almost never Never Total 32.89% 31.43% 130 70 80 00 100 Responses 11.80°/¢ 8c1 32.89% 248 31.43% 237 754 19 Packet Page 211 of 391 1 /28/2016 Q9: I prefer to receive information regarding City projects via (Check all that apply) Answered:735 Skipped:29 The CKVs 33.20% vwebsite The CKYs 18.37 o Facebook page E-mail updates 33.33% My Edmonds News Edmonds Beacon 49.25% 67.62% Public h 4.01 % Meetings and... 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 80% 60 70 80 90% 100 Answer Choices Responses 33.20°/4 The City's website 244 The City's Facebook page E-mail updates My Edmonds News Edmonds Beacon Public Meetings and Council Meetings (please specify whether in person, on TV, or via computer below) Total Respondents: 736 18.37°/4 13E 33.33% 245 67.62% 497 49.25% 362 103 20 Packet Page 212 of 391 1 /28/2016 Charts with Repeat Responders Removed 21 Packet Page 213 of 391 1 /28/2016 DUPLICATE RESPONSES IDENTIFIED PG 1 of 2 22 Packet Page 214 of 391 1 /28/2016 DUPLICATE RESPONSES IDENTIFIED PG 2 of 2 23 Packet Page 215 of 391 1 /28/2016 3 Q1: Residency An Edmonds resident Not a resident, but a frequent visitor Not a resident, but an occasional visitor 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 I would describe myself as Not a resident, but an Not a resident, but a An Edmonds resident occasional visitor frequent visitor ■ Seriesl 5 48 618 Q2: Use of Sunset 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 v v Pedestrian V) V) ° Bicyclist T `6 Motorist E o o a, `— T Q 2 Adjacent Resident N My primary ■ Seriesl se of Sunset Avenue between Main Street and Caspers Street is as a (check Adjacent Resident Motorist Bicyclist Pedestrian 32 313 55 555 It 24 Packet Page 216 of 391 1 /28/2016 Q3: Parking Availability, General More than what is needed o a� a Adequate N a Somewhat Inadequate Completely Inadequate ~ Q" Parking should be removed 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 The availability of parking on Sunset Avenue is Response Parking should Completely Somewhat More than be removed Inadequate Inadequate Adequate what is needed ■Seriesl 65 106 149 269 64 Q4: Angled Parking a Is not that difficult to navigate o N ago toQ' Is difficult to navigate v v Should be moved farther west,... E ~ n V) Should be removed — - 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 _ The angled parking on Sunset Avenue Should be Is not that Should be moved farther Is difficult to difficult removed west, toward the navigate water, if possible navigate ■ Seriesl 205 76 70 286 25 Packet Page 217 of 391 1 /28/2016 Q5: Bicycle Use v Safe bicycle use should be encouraged c o . There are not enough bikes to be a v EL U M problem T Q A separate bike path should be considered Bikes should not be allowed on the path 0 50 100 150 200 250 Regarding bicycle use on the shared pathway: Bikes should not A separate bike There are not Safe bicycle use be allowed on the path should be enough bikes to be should be path considered a problem encouraged ■ Seriesl 208 99 188 155 Q6: Amenities Strongly Agre, (p U L = a) � aa L Somewhat Agre, a) 3 c t v'i ; Neither Agree nor Disagre, L a) v a, Y � o +� a, E 'C Somewhat Disagree � _ 75 o o } 3 Strongly Disagree nz 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 1 would like to see Sunset Avenue have additional amenities added (park benches, picnic tables, artwork, etc) Strongly Disagree Somewhat Disagree Neither Agree norSomewhat Agree Strongly Agree Disagree 0 Seriesl 123 80 118 187 165 26 Packet Page 218 of 391 1 /28/2016 Q7: Permanence of Walkway 3 Strongly Agree _ a, v v Q E Somewhat Agree a, a Neither Agree nor Disagree E Q aSomewhat Disagree 3 v E Strongly Disagree Seriesl 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 I would like to see the current temporary pathway improved and made permanent Strongly Somewhat Neither Agree Somewhat Strongly Agree Disagree Disagree nor Disagree Agree 214 44 38 93 283 Q8: Walkway Usage Level 0 50 100 150 200 250 Dai 76 Several times a weE LE Several times a moni a) A few times a ye; 0 Nevi Never ■ Seriesl 1 36 I would use this walkway... A few times a Several times a Several times a Daily year month week 87 222 213 73 27 Packet Page 219 of 391 1 /28/2016 a Preferences for Updates The City's website ;, The City's Facebook page a '> C E-mail updates •° a t My Edmonds News co o " a Edmonds Beacon o T Public Meetings and Council Meetings... •� u g g ... 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 I prefer to receive information regarding City projects via (Check all that apply) Public Meetings and Council Meetings (please specify Edmonds My Edmonds The City's The City's whether in Beacon News E-mail updates Facebook page website person, on TV, or via computer below) 0 Seriesl 84 318 441 215 126 213 28 Packet Page 220 of 391 1 /28/2016 Survey Responses, Trends over Time 29 Packet Page 221 of 391 1 /28/2016 500 400 NO 200 100 Overall Responses Over Time First: 4012liKI5 Zoom;-KV2045 to'f ZNf2015 E-3 Kto �► ePN 30 Packet Page 222 of 391 1 /28/2016 50D 404) 300 200 100 Question 1 I would describe myself as Ariswere-d; 757 Wpped;'T Frst:t0i2V20t5 Zoom, W2V2,045to47%ZM5 0 N Il NN kn Edmonds... . Nat a resi... Not a resi... 31 Packet Page 223 of 391 1 /28/2016 Question 2 My primary use of Sunset Avenue between Main Street and Gaspers Street is as a (check all that apply) Answered:754 Skipped:44 First:4t}±2V2U'N5 Zoom:912412015t0 4 211412015 700 6110 500 400 soo 200 100 �\ h �h �N43 h h h �h �413 4D �h �h �h �h 13 Pedestrian M Bicyclist MGtarist M Adjacent R... 32 Packet Page 224 of 391 1 /28/2016 Question 3 The availability of parking on Sunset Avenue is Answered; T34 Skipped; 3#1 Ftrst, 1412112015 Zoom- R12V2615 to QJ1412tx15 500 4M 200 20C 100 0 In n� n� N N 413 rlorethan ... a Adequate SomewhatI... 0 Completely... 0 Parkingsh... 33 Packet Page 225 of 391 1 /28/2016 450 3l-0 2E'O 150 EO Question 4 The angled parking on Sunset Avenue Answere-d: 722 Skippe-i.42 FCrst.4012417045 Zoom:912112045to 'E21't 2015 Is not tha... W Is difficu... Should be ... M Should be ... 34 Packet Page 226 of 391 1 /28/2016 Question 5 Regarding bicycle use on the shared pathway: Answered; 733 Skipped; 31 First: 10=2V2Q15 Zoom; W2112Q15to 12JI412M 5 500 40) 300 200 100 U ^11;� Nt N %t N 11 Cb Safe bicyc... a There are ... A separate... a Bikes shou... 35 Packet Page 227 of 391 1 /28/2016 54 444 Mo 200 100 Question 6 I would like to see Sunset Avenue have additional amenities aided (park benches, picnic tables, artwork, etc) Answered; 759 Skipped; 5 First; 44±211'2415 Zoom. INP n"k re Strongly A... Somewhat Neither Ag... Somewhat Strongly, D... A... D... 36 Packet Page 228 of 391 1 /28/2016 5ff9 401) 3M 2DG 1 GO Question 7 would like to see the current temporary pathway} improved and made permanent Answerec:759 Skipaed; 5 First; 4412V2,M Zoorn:912V15toI211422M5 Strongly A... Somewhat NeitherAg... Somewhat Strongty,C... A... D... 37 Packet Page 229 of 391 1 /28/2016 506 444 34Q 200 14U Question 8 1 would use this walkway... Ansvwer-ed: 754 Skippedr t0' Fkrst: 102211 15 Zoom:-9124Y2045 t-G ti 0 -p �O' �R �� -�,\ 'IV W Daily Several ti... Several ti... A few time... Almost nev... L Never 38 Packet Page 230 of 391 1 /28/2016 104113 8I4 600 400 200 Question 9 prefer to receive information regarding City projects via (Check all that apply) Answered; 735 Skiipped; 29 First 1&21i2,015 Zoorn:9i7112015to 12IM2015 The City's... The City's... E-mail up-d... My Edmon-ds... M Edmonds Be... Public flee... 39 Packet Page 231 of 391 1 /28/2016 This page intentionally left blank 40 Packet Page 232 of 391 1 /28/2016 Survey Results, Comments 41 Packet Page 233 of 391 1 /28/2016 Sunset Walkway Q1: I would describe myself as Answer Options Response Response Percent Count An Edmonds resident 91.9% 696 Not a resident, but a frequent visitor 7.3% 55 Not a resident, but an occasional visitor 0.8% 6 Other (please specify) 34 answered question 757 skipped question 7 Comments 1 live in Esperance 2 2nd Ave North Resident 3 2nd generation... been here since 1980 4 31+ years resident 5 Actually Cherry Hill area (not that anybody notices that we're part of Edmonds also). 6 An angry resident and a registered voter... 7 Born and raised here and now raising my daughter here. 8 Born and raised in Edmonds, but currently live just outside city limits. 9 Current address is Shoreline... But born, raised, graduated from, and still work in Edmonds. So, I consider myself a resident. 10 Daily walker of Sunset Ave 11 Daughter lives on Sunset Avenue and we visit frequently. Don't live in walking distance so drive to waterfront and park on 12 side and back streets to avoid angled dense parking on Sunset. Prefer that approach and would suggest it be the norm. 13 1 grew up in Edmonds. My parents still do so I'm there alot. 14 1 have lived in Edmonds my whole life (46 years). I have owned a business in Edmonds for 25 years and walk the 15 waterfront frequently. I actually live in the Picnic Point area with an Edmonds address. 42 Packet Page 234 of 391 1 /28/2016 16 1 live at 342 Sunset Ave. North, Edmonds 17 1 live on Sunset Ave. 18 1 live on Sunset Ave. 19 1 use the walkway to push my wife on a smooth path that is scenic. She cannot walk that far because of COPD. 20 1 was an Edmonds resident for many years and now live close by in Lynnwood 21 1 work in Edmonds but live in Seattle. 22 I'm a native. Lived here my entire life! 23 Live in Esperance 24 Live in Richmond Beach 25 live within 3.5 miles of city center 26 lived 45 1/2 years of my 45 1/2 years in Edmonds. 27 Lived in Edmonds for last 10 year but currently live in Shoreline My husband and I have been Edmonds Residents for 19 years. We always take our houseguests down to Sunset ave. for a walk 28 or run. It has always been a much appreciated part of everyone's visit, until this summer when one of our guests exclaimed, "My gosh, what happened? They should not allow any parking if they are going to do this!" Honestly, it was embarrassing. 29 Realtor at Coldwell Banker Bain 30 Recent resident for many years, Now in assisted living outside of Edmonds. Handicapped. Resident of Mountlake Terrace for 5 years frequently in Edmonds 31 for shopping/dining/volunteering. Have been coming to Edmonds on a weekly basis for 10+ years. 43 Packet Page 235 of 391 1 /28/2016 We used to live in Edmonds until we, seniors who are disabled were forced out, perhaps so the 'but of town managing agent" could demand more money at the expense of the City. We would 32 NOT give up our rights under the ADA as the NEW contract demanded. Some managing agents seem to employ questionable tactics in order to maximize the "almighty dollar" in their pockets. 33 --who lives on Sunset Ave for 30 years. Who thinks that the current walkway is much safer than the 34 previous mash up of sidewalk, driveways and street crossings. Its much safer and accessible for ADA, elderly and families with young children 44 Packet Page 236 of 391 1 /28/2016 Sunset Walkway Q2: My primary use of Sunset Avenue between Main Street and Caspers Street is as a (check all that apply) Answer Options Response Response Pedestrian 83.2% 627 Bicyclist 8.1 % 61 Motorist 47.2% 356 Adjacent Resident 5.6% 42 Other (please specify) 50 answered question 754 skipped question 10 1 2 times a week our walk aroua uses this walkwav 2 About the only place I go to for relaxation. 3 All of the above 4 Also photography As an aside, I'm a commuter to 94th & 220th. I will walk it 5 sometimes to the new light to cross by Edwards Point/City Park and climb the hill. Otherwise, I walk it from the train up Dayton to go home. other times I'm just visiting. 6 bird watcher 7 Both a pedestrian & cyclist equally. Dog walker;and weekly attend a Bible study at 400 Sunset 8 where there is no parking available for the small group that gather at 6:30 p.m. 9 dog walking 10 Equally as a pedestrian and as a motorist. 11 Frequent visitor to a friends on a weekly basis. 12 Frequent visitor to Edmonds and customer at a number of downtown consumer and professional businesses. I also drive on Sunset occasionally to get from Edmonds 13 Way (HWY 104) to Caspers Street, I do not park for viewing, if I want to view, I walk. 14 I also work one block off Sunset, at Bell and 3rd, two days and evenings a week. 15 I drive there and then get out and walk! 45 Packet Page 237 of 391 1 /28/2016 16 I have friends who live on Sunset. I live on Sunset and walk my dog daily. It is also a route to 17 3rd Ave & 196 for me. The bicyclists are a danger to both walkers and motorists due to their speed and weaving in and out from street to "walkway." 18 I live on Sunset Ave. I no longer use Sunset Avenue. It is too congested. The 19 lane is too narrow. It is a shame Edmonds will continue with this project regardless of this survey. I park my car there and walk once in a while. The area is a 20 bit unsightly right now and I feel for those living in the homes along the avenue. 21 I run Sunset 3 to 4 x's per week... 22 I used to walk my dog everyday, but now I can't because of the congestion and no space. 23 I used to walk Sunset everyday and sometimes twice a day and I don't walk it any longer. I usually park in one of the handicap spots, if available, set 24 up a spotting scope, and monitor the seabirds for 30-60 minutes 3 times a week, year around. If a larger sidewalk is required, then widen the existing 25 sidewalk on the east side of Sunset. Restore the vehicle lane to original width. 26 Infrequently I may cycle south to north along Sunset. 27 It is the only way I can drive to my house. I've been in Edmonds since 1975 - both my children were raised here. We used to go have ice cream & park on 28 Sunset or sit on the grass - eat our cones, and enjoy the view. Trying to navigate Sunset now is like driving thru a circus in progress - and we avoid Sunset unless necessary. 29 Motorist who parks to enjoy the view and to take an occasional walk. 46 Packet Page 238 of 391 1 /28/2016 30 My in laws live on sunset so frequently at their house 31 occasionally drive there, but find the parking very difficult to back out of. Parallel parking would be much better. 32 Railroad Enthusiast 33 Relatives live on Sunset 34 Relaxing view and place to reflect. 35 Resident 36 Sometimes I park and enjoy the view 37 Sometimes I ride, sometimes I walk, sometimes I drive, sometimes I park and watch the waves. 38 Stationary. I drive to Sunset to watch birds on Puget Sound with my spotting scope. 39 Sunset (and sometimes sunrise) watcher. 40 This street is the only way I can access my house, which is the main reason for having streets. This was always a beloved place to come and park -- especially on rainy days. I have so many fond memories of 41 coming the Sunset Avenue and being able to park at the North end of the street. I am sad that is gone now. I do not even come to Sunset Avenue anymore because of the changes. It has been a great loss. 42 to park & take in the view 43 viewer 44 Walk or drive Sunset at least four days each week Walk the new path daily. A great improvement over the 45 original layout. Much safer for solution for runners, walkers, bikers, etc. 46 walker with dog 47 Packet Page 239 of 391 1 /28/2016 We have parked there to enjoy the view of the Sound but more people should be encouraged to, as pedestrians, 47 recognize the quietness and peacefulness of God's Creation. This would, I believe, maximize the drawing point to visitors to Edmonds. 48 we often walk and drive sunset We only drive Sunset to slowly enjoy the view and then move on. Mainly use it as part of the route for walking the 49 length of the waterfront. Would hope some day to see the waterfront walkway extended along the front of the Senior Center and adjacent buildings. 50 Wildlife viewing 48 Packet Page 240 of 391 1 /28/2016 Sunset Walkway Q 3:The availability of parking on Sunset Avenue is Answer Options Response Response Percent Count More than what is needed 9.8% 72 Adequate 42.1 % 309 Somewhat Inadequate 21.9% 161 Completely Inadequate 16.6% 122 Parking should be removed 9.5% 70 Other (please specify) 157 answered question 734 skipped question 30 All parking north of the angled parking should be removed. Once one car parks over the tiny, tiny "no parking" words, the entire street fills up. In addition, a couple of spaces were marked incorrectly to begin with in September 2014 and, although corrected, the lines are still 1 visible in the dark and rain so folks continue to use the spaces blocking driveways. As there is virtually no parking enforcement, it impedes traffic and makes driveway access difficult. The road is not wide enough for parking and driveway access once you get north of about house number 340. 2 Angle in parking is very difficult to back out of. You can not see oncoming cars or bikes. It is also ugly! Angled parking is too dangerous, drivers can't see when they pull 3 out, almost hit several times. The old parking was better. Put it back the way it was, or, remove it totally! Angled parking on Sunset makes it very dangerous when driving. Cars pulling out of their space have very little room to negotiate and 4 stop. Additional parallel parking needs to be added to the north end of Sunset. Angled parking should be change to parallel and more spaces set 5 aside north of the current parallel spaces 6 Appropriate for those that are mobile impaired or designated handicap. Side street parking is adequate. As a resident in the area it is nice to have the parking consolidated to 7 one area to cut down on the congestion of parked cars. If people want to enjoy the area they can park in the designated spots and once full can park elsewhere and walk in. 49 Packet Page 241 of 391 1 /28/2016 As a resident, parking prior to this test pilot was perfect. Right now if 8 we have guests or a party there is not enough parking and it is not right that our family and guests have to park a block or more away! As they should have parking to end of Sunset or none at all. So hard 9 to back out of drive way. 10 Backing out of angled spaces not the easiest thing to do. but totally screwed up. Too much at south end looks like parking lot - 11 not enough at south end. But really who cares people park where they want and no one tickets them. But why concentrate on cars? I would prefer to concentrate on 12 pedestrians and bikes and concentrate parking needs for the non - able bodied. Cars backing out are a hazard to oncoming cars (I almost got hit while driving ... a horn honk and a quick "stomp" saved the day. It's 13 also difficult for backer-outers to see oncoming traffic. I believe this is a MAJOR FLAW in the plan. Completely isn't the correct word, but it is very inadequate most times people are present. Extending the angle parking north and adding back some of the parallel parking at the north end of the street would be helpful and would increase the number of times we 14 would go to dinner in Edmonds and then Sunset instead of to dinner near Lake Ballinger, Richmond Beach, or St Edward. Would love to see the sidewalk east of the street and the striped path west of the street combined in some way to allow a path, parking, and a single traffic lane along the entire street. confusing having it one way on part of the street and another way 15 further up the street 16 Don't add amenities without more parking. Make all parking 30 minutes or add parking meters. 17 Don't know Edmonds has other "park and watch" opportunities, such as Brackett's Landing North and South, Stamm Overlook, Marina Beach, 18 and Edmonds Marsh, but none that interfere with fair pedestrian access so much as Sunset Avenue. Edmonds should have a street -car service to help people get around, 19 including Sunset Ave. 50 Packet Page 242 of 391 1 /28/2016 20 Enforcement of the 3 hour limit would mat it "Adequate" Expand parking opportunities for those visiting the area. Plenty of room to expand & add parking. Sunset Ave isn't just for those who 21 have homes there. It's for the whole city to use and enjoy. Alki Beach provides better designed parking opportunities. The ability to park is too limited & to restricted. For the most part it is adequate. An 85 degree day will always bring 22 out a crowd but 95% of the time it is adequate. 23 Getting out of the car and walking a block is what most Americans need, they don't need more excuses to play the handicap card. 24 Head -in parking allows more cars to use the area. 25 however the angled parking feels really dangerous i almost got into an accident one of the first times i used it 26 I believe they have achieved the best fit and balance. 27 I do not park on Sunset. 28 I don't know because I don't park there. I don't mind the slanted parking but the two spaces that appear out of nowhere further down sunset are super awkward when driving. 29 You literally have to drive into the bike path to get around them and they are a danger to those driving and viewing the scenery. Those should be removed. 30 I don't park there, but I have not seen any issues with parking. 31 I don't park; only cycle I dont think you would want much more parking on the road and 32 sometimes it's nice just to drive down Sunset and be able to see the water and view. More parking may block that. I don't typically park there, but I think there should be parking 33 available. I found the previous parking designations to be adequate, well used and not overly crowded. i never observed cars circling the streets in 34 anticipation of a spot opening up. I think we had it just right. I loved watching people sitting in their cars, having coffee, reading the paper and enjoying the view. 51 Packet Page 243 of 391 1 /28/2016 I frequently see people parking in any open space available north of 35 the angled parking area. I have noticed some vehicles parked daily for long periods of time. I 36 think there should be a time limit. I strongly feel that there should be a no idling sign!!! Cars are always 37 running there air conditioning or radio or heater, polluting homeowners accross the street and all of us on foot. I think it would be OK to add more parallel parking north of the 38 current spaces. And yes - the angled parking should be converted into parallel. I think the original parking arrangement was much more attractive 39 for everyone. I think the parking is necessary. I like the way it used to be. Now it is 40 messy and I'm surprised there aren't more accidents as it is difficult to see other cars and pedestrians when you back up 41 I think the parking should go back to how it used to be. I think we were on the right track to make Sunset more of a focal point of our community. Art and extended pathways and bicycle 42 access, etc, all a plus. Seems like parking for access to it doesn't need to be ON Sunset- all of the parked cars are a negative for the beauty of which we are trying to encourage the enjoyment! 43 I use the side streets when I want to walk I walk to the area so don't know. Some of the parallel parking spots 44 look oddly out of place I would like to see a few open spaces put in between some of the angled parking spaces at the beginning of the 1-way street going 45 north. It seems that there are just too many grouped together there. Break up the large group into a few smaller groups by omitting a few spaces. It would then be nice to see a few more parallel spaces added down at the North end where the people can picnic.. If you are asking about 'now' that's one thing; another for parking 46 before your 'project'. If now then it's too much parking causing congestion. Please remove the angular parking now. 52 Packet Page 244 of 391 1 /28/2016 47 If you build it, they will come. Inadequate, dangerous and poorly designed. Need parallel parking 48 all along Sunset Intermittent parallel parking doesn't make sense. Restructure the walk to be less wide to accommodate angled parking most of its 49 length. Then bikes could be in their proper space on the east side of the street. It is now very congested with the added angle parking. Very dangerous for pedestrians and children. Definitely not the magestic 50 "edmonds kind of day" feel on sunset anymore with all the cars and parking. It now looks like a disgusting parking lot. The view is now gone for 51 motorists, and more importantly, for the homeowners on Sunset Ave, who paid prime money for that location and pay the highest taxes in Edmonds, for what once was a luxury, and now is a nuisance location. 52 It should be balanced north to south. It should be parallel It was better the previous way. There is NO need to have another 53 walkway when there are sidewalks already. 54 It was fine before the angle parking. Now it looks awful and does not appear to work well; it certaily is not an improvement! It works as is. Having fewer cars than before has allowed more 55 walkers to partake in the view. Street parking has always been available and promotes business on the main street. It would be more than adequate if parking extended all the way 56 down roadway - - current large gaps in parking (towards north end) make no sense. 57 it's a total mess. It's also placed in a ridiculous manner. It's almost a slalom to get 58 down Sunset in a car. 53 Packet Page 245 of 391 1 /28/2016 It's not that you don't have enough parking, it's that it is jammed up like a Wal-Mart parking lot as you enter Sunset Ave. It's horrible. It's unsightly. I've witness lots of near misses and some hits when people 59 try to back out. Parallel parking should be distributed all along Sunset. Why are you even designating spots? Let people park along the street where they desire. Why do some homes are NO parking in front, and others a sea of parking? 60 Just depends on time of day 61 Keep this Edmonds landmark area "Edmonds." 62 Leave exceptions for residents with permit or their visitors or handicapped. make it ALL angled parking - to allow more parking! also - parking 63 permitted in front of some houses and not others - really sets up a - class - differential among home owners - some have their view blocked, others are - above that... block ALL views, or none! Many cars park there for the ferry, etc rather than walkway or view. 64 There doesn't seem to be enforcement of time limits. more parallel parking further north, like it was before the walkway 65 was striped. More parallel parking spaces should replace the angled spaces and 66 some of the non -parking spaces further along Sunset should be allowed. More than what's needed to be courteous to the home owners on 67 Sunset. 68 n/a Nearly every time I run down there or drive by, numerous cars are 69 parked in no parking areas, cars are idling, and drivers often are smoking - clean air is nice when running 70 no opinion as I never need to park there 71 No opinion, as I never drive or park on Sunset Ave N. 72 Not sure why the parking is VERY limited if any on the north end of the street 54 Packet Page 246 of 391 1 /28/2016 Often have to park on the street above or in a non -parking area, esp if I'm having to carry several packages/bags into my friends' home. 73 Here driveway doesn't avail any parking when both their vehicles are there. 74 once construction ends parking issues should improve 75 Or every house should have parking on front of it, at least be fair 76 parallel parking only Parallel parking only should be just on the EAST (right) side of Sunset 77 (except in front of driveways). The angle parking should be removed, and no parking should be allowed on the west side of the street. 78 Parallel parking reduces the number of cars along the street and reduces the amount of backing out into traffic. 79 Parked cars are a safety hazard. 80 Parking in Edmonds is inadequate. Parking is a mess.. Pedestrians walk on a path that is actually the road.. and the Parking ..what a joke.. one end if crammed with Parking then there are sporadic parallel parking spots in Random 81 locations ... it appears that they are parking in the middle of nowhere..and then other people park where there is NO parking right behind or in front of the parallel parking spots in the 'Middle of Nowhere' and no parking on the North End.. I can understand 50-75 feet from the curve of the road.. but wow... 82 Parking is available one block away. Parking is sometimes in short supply on afternoons and evenings when the weather is nice and a good sunset is looming. Consider 83 doing a vehicle occupancy study. Anecdotally I've seen 75% of the vehicles parked along Sunset occupied with people simply enjoying the view. 84 parking needs to be all the way down sunset 85 Parking pre -"walkway" was adequate. Angle parking is dangerous and an eyesore. 86 Parking seems full on nice days and week -ends. 55 Packet Page 247 of 391 1 /28/2016 87 Parking should be all parallel parking distributed down the block. Parking should be at the north end as well so I can picnic if needed. 88 It is a mess. Parking should be available at the north end so that all can access 89 that end of the walkway Parking should be parallel only, preferably on the east side, and 90 should extend to Casper. Parking should be removed except for evenly distributed Handicap 91 Parking for officially designated vehicles. 92 People love to park on Sunset but I don't see how it can accommodate more and not ruin the ambience. People still park along side the path during sunset where they are not 93 suppose to and there is no enforcement. Been there during a time like this and had a patrol car drive right by. 94 Please leave parking! It provides enjoyment of the area even in inclement weather (rain, wind, etc). Please put up signage (like they have at the Peach Arch, for example) which prohibits drivers from sitting in the parking spots with their 95 cars idling. It is amazing how many people do this - sit with their cars running for the entire time they take a lunch break, for example. This creates noise and air pollution. 96 please restore and make it equitable along entire avenue Provide a few handicapped parking spots on the west side of Sunset 97 Avenue, but close to Main Street. This will keep the most scenic part of Sunset Ave free of sight obstructions 98 Provide what is needed for disabled parking. Limit the other parking. 99 Put it back the way it was. 100 Put it back the way it was. People can and should walk on the sidewalks. 101 Put more parking on north end 102 Really amazed by all the illegal parking that I see on a regular basis. Do they ever give out tickets? It doesn't seem so. 56 Packet Page 248 of 391 1 /28/2016 103 Really, do you think the City should be proud of this configuation. 104 Ridiculous as configured in the "trial". Please return it to the pre-trial configuration. Seems like many people park and sit in their cars for extended periods rather than using the walkway or walking at all. Would like 105 reduced parking and let people be creative in dispersing throughout the downtown area as before. Seems worse thruway it is now, much better how it used to be before 106 the temporary changes 107 Should be reverted to parallel parking 108 Should continue all the way to the north end of sunset! Terrible design with little visibility and safety problems. As well as not 109 fair to the residents. A simple joke of a process created by someone pocketing money. 110 The new system for parking cars works really well! The angle parking is not safe. The area is not wide enough for 111 emergency vehicles. Parallel parking should be present the entire length of Sunset not just in the very few oddly located spots. The angled parking is poorly planned - if a large pickup truck with a 112 large trailer hitch parks there on a rainy and dark night, it is very difficult to transverse the vehicle as it sticks out into the driving lane 113 The angled parking makes it dangerous for the single lane of traffic. Change it to parallel parking for vehicle safety. The current angle parking is dangerous when people back out and 114 they often do not pull forward all the way The current parking arrangement is dangerous. It's hard to see when 115 cars are backing out to a too -narrow roadway. Go back to the old way. 57 Packet Page 249 of 391 1 /28/2016 i Fie aiagvnai parking is Uan9ervu5. vnvers FJdLK vui wiznvuz ivvKing, large pick-up trucks leave very little room behind them for passing cars. People do not pull forward far enough. Most people seem to park illegally and since no one even challenges them or writes them a 116 ticket it appears parking is wherever they leave their car. I cannot drive out (back out) of my driveway without asking if they would please move their cars. Multiple times they are parking on the walk- way. The diagonal pkg & having the bike lane & walkeing path on the sime side of the street is blocking the view for many, to crowded at times - and because of the combined spaces - people have taken 117 unbelievable liberties ie: using the pkg space, bike path & grass area to actually set up a PICNIC table - complete with chairs & their patio umbrella!! I have seen this during the summerHIt's like they made their own private patio - complete with a view!..& making it difficult for other people to pass. 118 The entire length should be used in some format for parking 119 The former 14 spaces allowing railroad photography have become 3 plus one handicap space The head -in parking is dangerous. People backing out cannot see on- 120 coming cars. Limit parking to parallel parking may be the only unfortunate solution to keep the great walking path. The lack of parking on the north end is a problem. The street looks and feels very congested on the south end, the previous 121 configuration made for a more even spread of parking spaces along the street, and still included spaces where there was no parking, allowing for good views of the sound etc. The new angle parking is unsafe. Parking should be returned to 122 parallel parking the entire length of Sunset. 123 The parallel parking that is basically in the middle of the street is an accident waiting to happen. The parking arrangement with the new configuration creates unnecessary congestion and confusion. I no longer take a slow drive 124 up Sunset to catch the view when leaving downtown Edmonds. The City has taken a tranquil park & neighborhood that served as a respite for many and turned it into a cluttered mess. The parking from Edmonds Street north should be removed as it is 125 unsightly, dangerous, and makes the street too narrow. 58 Packet Page 250 of 391 1 /28/2016 The parking places that made Sunset Avenue a special place in 126 Edmonds are now gone. It is a great loss for those of us who valued the way it use to be. The parking situation is confusing and dangerous, in my opinion. I 127 would have handicapped only parking and none other, to make Sunset mostly pedestrian. The people who live there pay a lot in taxes for the spectacular view. 128 They should be able to not have cars with their exhaust parking by their homes! The beach is still free to the public! The temporary arrangement is unsafe and should be eliminated immediately. There is not enough room behind the cars, and the 129 drivers of parked cars can't back out safely. I have witnessed many close calls. There is ample parking along side streets. Parked cars on Sunset 130 itself is an eyesore, and not entirely safe for bicyclists and pedestrians. There is no rhyme or reason to the parking on Sunset, some is angled, 131 other areas there is not parking. It doesn't make any sense and it looks terrible. 132 There should be no angled parking on Sunset and the parallel parking should be limited, not continuous from Edmonds St. to 342 Sunset There should be parallel parking along sunset on the north end of the 133 road, as before. The angle -in parking should be removed and replaced with parallel parking. 134 This project is for a WALK way. It should not be to encourage people to drive to Sunset and park there, sometimes all day! Too many parking spots too close together. Bad sight issue. Takes away from the ambience of walking Sunset on either side of the 135 street. Feel sorry for the residents who live there - what a terrible thing to have done to their view! Glad to know this is temporary - I don't know anyone that thinks it looks good. I saw the original drawing and it was beautiful, but the cars wrecked it! Too many vehicles disregard marked parking locations and parking 136 enforcement/assistance is non-existent. 59 Packet Page 251 of 391 1 /28/2016 137 Very limited for disabled parking. It appears that about one half of the potential parking has been eliminated. 138 Way too many cars now crowding the view. we find it very congested and a "tight squeeze" when parking and 139 backing out. But we do not use it on a daily basis -- so don't know how strong our issue is. We have problems accessing our driveway because cars are blocking it due to the narrowed driving area. This is due to the fact that they 140 park up and down the street even in designated "no parking" zones. Even when there are no cars parked, we still have trouble turning into our driveway because people pass us on the right - while we are making a right hand turn, this is a major safety issue. 141 We need more parking at the north end of sunset. We think it is inadequate when it comes to holidays or special events when residents living on Sunset are expecting numerous guests. I 142 understand that the residents are allowed only 2 guest parking passes on such occasions. 143 Whenever, my husband and I have gone done to park, we have had no problems getting a space. 144 While parking is adequate on the southern end, parking on the northern end is completely inadequate. While walking my dog toward the north end of Sunset I avoided 145 being struck by a car that pulled in to park on the current marked walkway. Very close call! 146 Why did it stop just where it does? Why did the folks at the very end not have it in front of their homes? 147 YES!! Except for a few handicapped spots, this should be accessible only by non -motorized means. 148 You completely screwed over the motorists. You should have left it alone. 149 You need to allow more parking toward the north end of Sunset. 60 Packet Page 252 of 391 1 /28/2016 Sunset Walkway Q 4: The angled parking on Sunset Avenue Answer Options Response Response Percent Count Is not that difficult to navigate 44.6% 322 Is difficult to navigate 10.8% 78 Should be moved farther west, toward the water, if possible 11.8% 85 Should be removed 32.8% 237 Other (please specify) 176 answered question 722 skipped question 42 Comments Angled parking is completely unsafe because of narrow street not behind cars. There is no space do avoid collisions. Awareness of extreme danger is keeping speeds low and heightening need to be extraordinarily careful. Thus few, if any, accidents. People know it's a stupid, dangerous situation so they are very, very careful. Bring back the old, safe street set-up and ignore the vocal few sponsoring this boondoggle. 2 Angled parking is okay. The parallel parking is difficult to navigate with its stop and go spaces and the jog to the right. 3 Angled parking is unsafe (sudden backouts) and really blocks the views. Arrangement of walking path and parking seem cramped. Maybe only one 4 sidewalk west of road is needed instead of two. Too many pedestrians to look out for as you pull out of parking spot front and back. As a biker I have found that I am less likely to be seen by drivers. As a walker, the extra space is great but could be developed into something 5 more visually appealing such as the sidewalks on the waterfront near the ferry. As stated above, I think there should be handicapped parking only on 6 Sunset Ave N. Remove the other parking, and add a bike lane. Backing out of the parking spot is very dangerous because the driver 7 cannot see if a vehicle is approaching until the driver's view clears the vehicle parked to it's left. Better lane lines would make it much clearer where to drive. The former 8 bike lane line, though scraped off, still tricks the brain in to seeing a lane there. 9 Cars come into the block far too fast, slowing only after 200 feet or so. 10 Cars do not pull all the way up. When backing out drivers cannot see. 61 Packet Page 253 of 391 1 /28/2016 %.ars usuauy gu mere iv watcn acuviry on zne water anu ur zarce pUczures Of the sunset or trains as they go by. However, the majority of cars DO NOT have persons in them, nor around them, and seem to be parked there for 11 most of the day. Whether the owners parked there and walked on the ferry is questionable. Many times people will back out of the angled parking like they own the street and many times we have had to come to a screeching halt or get hit. consider moving it to the east side of the street, and backing in while the 12 view would be interrupted by passing vehicles, it definitely would be safer/easier to pull out 13 Current configuration presents a hazard and has no room for any motorist error ..... to tight at the south end where angled parking begins. 14 Dangerous uiagonai parking unsare Tor ine person oacKing out IT iney can t see the traffic because the vehicle(s) next to him/her is blocking their view. Also dangerous for person(s) driving down Sunset if ttey can't see a car backing 15 out because it is obstructed by the vehicle parked next to it and that applys to those even driving the speed limit. What a surprise to the parties in both vehicles when they both nearly clash. 16 Don't care. I never drive there. Go back to the original parking, that way all houses on sunset's view is 17 obstructed instead of how a select few don't have parking in front of their house. Oh boy I wonder how that happened, weird. 18 Have not parked here but looks hard to get out of since you can't see. I just drive by real slow and look for back up lights. 19 Haven't parked along Sunset 20 I am not even sure that a fire truck could get through that narrow section if there was a fire north. 21 I don't know because I don't park there I drove Sunset one more time today before weighing in on this important issue for our community. What I found was that while driving past the angled parking, not only was the view obstructed, it would have been 22 dangerous for me to even take my eyes of the road. I needed to be vigilant incase a car backed up suddenly, a passenger elected to exit the car and cross the street to get to one of the houses or an animal dashed out. This is definitely not a place for a leisurely drive along a peaceful waterfront. 62 Packet Page 254 of 391 1 /28/2016 I teel that this should go back to parallel parking - nose to stern - as it is further along. Less parking, but less dense. The parking should go all the 23 way along Sunset to the end in a parallel fashion. It really appears that some residents got shafted, and some did very, very well in the current set up. I hate everything about the new/ non -parallel parking additions. It looks cluttered to me and, when I am a motorist, it is ABSOLUTELY a negative to 24 traffic safety. You CANNOT see the reverse lights of the cars coming out of the parking spots until you are literally at the line where that parking spot starts and it is too late by then. If non -parallel spots will be included in final design they HAVE to be more angled than the temporary ones are. I have not used it, but often drive northbound on Sunset an d am concerned about people pulling out. I would not say that for the driver 25 driving north it is "difficult to navigate" but I probably am sure to go slower than usual by the angled parking. 26 I have seen cars swerve to avoid those backing out of angled parking. Swerving cars are dangers to pedestrians on the east side walkway. 27 I haven't parked there myself but it seems confusing to have some angle, some parallel. 28 I keep my hand hovering over the horn as I drive past - there is not enough visibility with the current setup - for either parked or moving cars. 29 I love it 30 I love it! 31 I never park there I never used the angled parking, even before the changes. As a motorist 32 that utilized Sunset Avenue, I enjoyed the parking at the North end of the street. i think it is very confusing to have both parallel and angle parking. I am 33 not a fan of the angle parking. I don't understand why all the parking is on the south end and none in front of the north end houses. I understand the current change, and have enjoyed the access. I feel that 34 it has worked very well. 35 I wanted to check both move west and difficult to navigate. It is difficult because there isn't enough space for large vehicles to back out. 36 I will not park on the diagonals. Backing out is risky. 63 Packet Page 255 of 391 1 /28/2016 37 I'd hate it if I owned property in Sunset! If I am not mistaken I think we have gained in the number of spaces for 38 parking; however, I have sometimes found it difficult to back out. Do we have the area to move the spaces farther west and still keep the path? 39 I'm assuming, if the walkway is improved and moved toward the water, it may provide more parking. 40 Is difficult to drive behind. Very blind. Have witnessed several near misses 41 Is very difficult -- accident waiting to happen 42 It feels very unsafe to me and blocks the view to motorists who are driving by. Takes away the zen feel of the avenue and makes it feel congested. 43 It has turned a beautiful street into a parking lot. It is so unimaginable horrible! 44 It is a mess anyone that has corned to visit even says "what was the City thinking". 45 It is dangerous for pedestrians to walk behind parked cars that may be backing out. It is dangerous to back out, you can't see if cars are coming. It also feels 46 cramped driving down Sunset as the angled spots encroach on the roadway. 47 It is no harder to navigate than an average day in the Alderwood Mall parking lot. It is often challenging to be able to see on -coming cars as you back out of 48 spaces. That's really the only problem because otherwise I like being able to look out the windshield toward the ocean. It is too congested and anyone that knows anything about transportation 49 should realize what a failure this configuration is ... too much in too little space. 50 It is very difficult for people to see traffic coming down Sunset as they back out of the spaces. Parallel parking would eliminate this problem. 51 It seems a little tight. 52 It seems to confuse some drivers to have angle parking and parallel parking on the same street. 64 Packet Page 256 of 391 1 /28/2016 It should definitely be removed from in front of the one guys driveway. I 53 think he has a motor home, which I think would be awfully hard to pull out of his driveway if cars were parked in the angled parking. 54 It should go back to parallel parking It was way better before this moditication. The bike lane and sidewalk Celt spacious and safe while pushing the stroller. Now it is cramped walking 55 on the new pathway and it is very narrow driving through. It is much harder to see when backing out and I am always afraid of backing into someone or someone backing into me. 56 It would be nice if the southernmost spaces were moved to the North near Caspers in order to eliminate the congestion at the start of the street. It's horrible. It makes Sunset feel like a jammed up parking lot as soon as you enter. Why the need for such intense parking? Everybody managed 57 fine before and parked on side streets when necessary. The whole design is terrible. Also, how do you justify putting a solid wall of cars in front of the homes at the south end and virtually nothing in the middle or north end? It's not difficult at all. BUT why isn't it located on the other side of the 58 street? That would keep cars well away from the pedestrian walkway. Just a suggestion but I would've thought it was obvious... 59 It's simply NOT DIFFIUCLT, it's absolutely fine and I'm tired of the old town cranks trying to make an issue of it Liked it how it used to be - seens like it's harder to park now. Or less spots 60 further North. When I visit my friends there ... no place to park. 61 Looks ugly and I am sure residents on the street find it a problem, especially the 4 hour parking and car drivers leaving their engines running 62 Love the angled parking. Makes a ton of sense and helps keep traffic speeds down. 63 Make all parking on Sunset parallel 64 Make it all parallel parking. Cars backing into narrow roadway is a hazard. 65 make it parallel like the south end 66 More parallel parking should be made available towards north end 67 most people driving on Sunset are observing the view so are already driving slowly 65 Packet Page 257 of 391 1 /28/2016 68 move it back to where it was 69 N/A 70 Need to be spread out a little, it is very crowded needs to be removed so those with walking issues i.e. wheelchair, walker, cane, and those with vision issues, and those totally blind can walk non 71 ubstructted along a beautiful part of our great city. those who live along sunset just need to bite the bullet and live with the change for the good, just like those who live what is now the hospital district area and deal with all the medical / commercial structors and parking 72 No changes are needed. 73 no opinion 74 No opinion 75 No opinion, as I never drive or park on Sunset Ave N. No parking spaces on Sunset other than two per Sunset resident on the east side, residents issued stickers, others ticketed. Add speed bumps to 76 discourage all non -local traffic. Paint a dedicated bike lane but have a bike speed limit of 25 mph. 77 No trucks/RVs allowed to park; cars only! 78 Not a problem. Seems to workout just fine. 79 Only if that doesn't compromise the walkway. If it does then we should keep it and I don't think parking should be moved further west. 80 Parallel parking only 81 parallel parking only 82 Parking layout is crowded Parking should be metered to reduce with two hour maximum per licence 83 plate per day. Unless a permitted resident on street parking should be reoriented and continued all the way along sunset with 84 no angled parking. parking should extend the whole length of sunset, and the current 85 walkway should be moved. it is a terrible design for biking, walking, and driving 86 Parking was better before. It is now way too congested. 66 Packet Page 258 of 391 1 /28/2016 People cannot figure out to pull up to curd blocks. Next car to north backs 87 out and can't see traffic. People walk out behing cars not pulled in and almost get hit by passing cars 88 People do not pull in far enough plus it seems to blind area when cars pull out. Too many close calls when cars pull out. People should be able to get in and out of their driveway. The way it is now, people don't pull all the way forward and it is difficult to navigate. 89 People just start backing up out of their spot and several times I have had to stop to avoid an accident. Please return it to the way it was before. The limited lane for traffic is much more hazardous. Home owners can't get out of their driveways. 90 Some people don't pull all the way to the bumpers. There's no parking at the north end of the street. It's much worse. 91 Possibly more parallel parking further north on sunset. 92 Provide limited parking. Angled is not necessary. 93 Put back to original 94 Put back to the original angle of parking. Now it is highly dangerous. 95 put in speed bumps to keep things real slow put it back the way it was with additional parking up to the north end. put 96 the path back to the east side of street. 97 Put it back where it was. 98 Reduce speed to 15 mph Paint 15 mph speed limit on the driving pavement Nobody looks at the signs 99 Remove the parallel parking in the middle of the roadway. Make more Angeles parking there. 100 REMOVED OR CLOSER TO WATER 101 Removing a wheel chair, walker, stroller or anything out of the back of any vehicle puts you into the traffic lane. 102 restored to original before last change 103 Return the street plan to the original. SEE ABOVE COMMENTS 104 Return to previous condition. 67 Packet Page 259 of 391 1 /28/2016 Kignt now ine angiea parking narrows ine roaa, ana maKes it very aiTTicurc to see cars when backing out. The angled parking should be removed, and returned to the parallel parking as before. There is plenty of space along 105 the avenue to add more parallel parking - especially towards the North end. In fact the distribution of parking along the avenue is peculiarly uneven. 106 see above comment 107 See my comment on #4. If you have a back-up camera in your car it does help. Some people need to back up more carefully... thinking of safety. 108 Seems awkward, not sure what the best answer to this one is... 109 Several times I have almost been hit by a car that is backing out. Also, cars are not pulling all the way up and are sticking out in the traffic lane. 110 Should also be spaced apart, like it used to be. Should be moved farther west, toward the water, if possible and more 111 parallel parking provided. Should be not only moved closer to the water, up against the curb, but also extended ALL the way north - the residents along the north are no 112 more entitled to their current unobstructed views than the residents on the south end of Sunset. Plus putting pedestrians of all ages at risk by having the walkway on the west side of sunset in ftont of vehicles parking, idling etc is just plain negligent on the part of the city! Should be reduced in amount or removed. Seems very dense and dangerous for backing out, etc. Often see tall vehicles that block the views 113 of smaller vehicles trying to back out safely. Have observed moving traffic, bikers and pedestrians having conflict with backing cars. Never use the angled parking ourselves. 114 Should be returned to what it was before the "trial" 115 Should be spread out evenly along the street, not confined to only one end. 116 Should continue all the way down Sunset 117 Shouldn't have angle or parrell parking at all unless its all the way to the west. Some cars don't pull up far enough and stick out, which is a bit unsafe to 118 get by. 68 Packet Page 260 of 391 1 /28/2016 119 Some drivers back out without looking to see if other vehicles are driving north on Sunset. My car has almost been hit by these inattentive drivers. Some folks I've spoken with find it is too tight on the south end. I've driven by in my car a few times, very slowly, with no problem, but I can 120 see that it is very tight for home owners to back out a vehicle from their driveway, especially if they have a large van/truck. 121 Some vehicles park with rear end hanging out into street. Street is narrow already This just makes it worse. 122 Spaces are narrow 123 takes up precious walking and running space as well as potential bike space. Very dangerous backing in a congested area The angle parking is dangerous for cars and walkers. It Is difficult to navigate. Visibility is poor when backing out. Some vehicles extend too 124 far into the narrow street. I do not park there! I now park on other streets. 125 The angled parking is a disaster waiting to happen, if it hasn't already, in my opinion. Long vehicles stick out making safe passing problematic. 126 The angled parking is a safety hazard. i ne angiea parking is great Tor my eiaeny motner wno wants to watcn the sunset but walking or standing is difficult. Most evenings and many afternoons parking on sunset itself is difficult or impossible so the park 127 south of the marina is our poor substitute. The parallel parking farther north on the street is very unclear and confusingly striped/marked, not to mention inadequate in quantity. i ne angiea parking is necessary Tor tnis parK. tsecause many usea the angled parking to sit in their cars to eat, read, etc. and just take a short break while taking in the view. But the configuration, with the angled 128 parking packed toward the south while having no parking toward the north is cumbersome. What a mess! Per the question, how exactly can the parking be moved "west" toward the water? i ne angiea parking is not the promem, it is ine waiKway in rront or ine parking that is the issue. There is a perfectly good sidewalk for walkers to use and still enjoy any view. The way the parking is now, I feel like I am 129 parked in the middle of the street always looking back as cars go by to make sure they have enough room to get by. Not very enjoyable!! Please change it back! The angled pkg is scary - because when someone back out - their vision is not clear as to oncoming traffic. I have came close to being backed into 130 several times when I visit friends in the area & need to use Sunset to get there. 69 Packet Page 261 of 391 1 /28/2016 The appeal for me has been being able to drive slowly and enjoy the 131 panorama view. I find that the additional cars and reduced space for vehicles to drive makes it more dangerous. The complaints about angled parking are unjustified and over emphasized. 132 Angled parking is used in many other areas & no complaints arise. For example --at Sth Ave & City Hall, most parking lots, etc. 133 The current configuration is not only unsafe, it is ugly and amateurish in appearance. 134 The current configuration should be removed as well as the pedestrian walkway. The previous angled parking should be reinstated. 135 The current parking spaces make us feel like the rear end of our car is hanging out into the street. And backing out of the spaces is very tight. 136 The major problem is backing out from the spots.Vision is limited and there is not enough room for passing cars to move around outcoming cars. The parallel parking before was better, and the parallel parking that was 137 removed on the north end of sunset should be reinstated. The parallel parking we had for so many years was sufficient. Now, even in my small Honda Civic, I can barely get through Sunset Ave, and cannot 138 even glance over for a single second to take a peek at the view, without risking hitting someone's car that jets way out. 1 INC'JQIRI 119 QJ IL IIVVV CJ IJLD 110J lance Q VIJUOIIY OPFCQI I119 JUCCL QI RA turned into a conjested mess. Return to parallel parking spaces and space them out. But most important what ever is decided get the signs up and enforce them people should not be allowed to park all day or simply move 139 a space to avoid the parking times and tickets. We are discusing the creation of a walkway and a viewing area not a park Edmonds has manny parks that have the required Amenities such as restrooms for all citizens to enjoy. The parking available before this renovation was enough, certainly no 140 more is called for. The parking has always been mixed. Using angled parking allows for more 141 spaces, than parallel parking. angled parking is safer for edmonds residents. 142 The parking north of the angled section does not make sense 143 The possibility of difficulty may be for older seniors. 70 Packet Page 262 of 391 1 /28/2016 144 The previous parking served the community better. The angled parking is difficult to navigate and crowded. The problem is that Edmonds Street intersects with Sunset Avenue just 145 south of the angled parking, this causes safety issues because people who are backing don't see the oncoming traffic headed north on Sunset. The temporary arrangement is unsafe and should be eliminated 146 immediately. There is not enough room behind the cars, and the drivers of parked cars can't back out safely. I have witnessed many close calls. there is an existing sidewalk already....... why have another one on the 147 water side .... just move the parking spaces further forward toward the water a little 111WIC 1J IIVL CIIUU9111WNI1 I�LCIMY VII JUIl1 Q JIIVIL IVQY. rQLNIJ J11WUI A YC VII one side only and parking needs to be consistent. If this road is to be used for cars, safety needs to be more important than sneezing in a few more parking spots. Let's encourage people to walk a few feet.... There is 148 parking on side streets and people need more exercise. Take away the parking spots and add a few benches where people can sit and watch the sunset if that is why people are wanting to park there (to watch the sunset). There is simply not enough room to allow vehicles safe passage behind the 149 vehicles nor enough visibility for drivers to see behind them as they exit the anfgled parking spots. They need to be removed entirely i nere snouia oe Tewer parking spaces. vvniie waiKing pass so many cars, there seems to be more folks sitting there smoking, listening to loud music (audible from a short distance), and other nuisance behaviors. I 150 know folks engage in this type of behavior at our waterfront parks, but it should be minimized on residential street. It doesn't seem fair to the homeowners, or even to the walkers. These are unsightly and dangerous. Drivers backing out of these spaces 151 cannot see who is coming and the road is dangerously narrow behind these spots. 152 Too close to each other and caused sight issues and too many cars takes away, actually has ruined the look of Sunset! 153 Too dangerous, drivers can't see when they pull out. Almost hit on several occasions. Take out parking or put it back the way it was before! Scary! Too many parked cars. People sit in the cars, it does not increase business 154 downtown. The parking vs walkway confuses many drivers. I see cars parked in the walkway every week. Go back to limited parallel parking. 71 Packet Page 263 of 391 1 /28/2016 155 Unattractive, makes the road difficult to use, looks like a parking lot. 156 Unsafe to navigate, and restored to parallel parking. 157 used to be ok before the path was paved 158 Very dangerous. Make all parallel + there are a couple parallel parking spots in the middle of the street. 159 Very difficult to back out of without out any visibility of oncoming traffic. 160 Was fine the way it was before. 161 We don't use the parking on Sunset Avenue, but know it is a little difficult to navigate the angled parking when driving through the area. We need parking but with the new path in the street it makes the driving 162 lane too narrow and dangerous. Thank goodness there has not been a house fire where access is a problem or other emergency. When backing out it is hard to see oncoming northbound traffic. But do 163 not move it farther west. Which the temporary walkway west of the angle parking it makes parking 164 very tight in these angled spaces. Cars today are too large to negotiate the space available. Why are there two walkways. Either move all walking to the east side of 165 the street and widen the walk. Or eliminate the east sidewalk. That would allow for more angled parking and more comfortable driving space. 166 Works great! 167 Would love to see both the walking path and parking moved west 168 YES!!!! 72 Packet Page 264 of 391 1 /28/2016 Sunset Walkway Q 5: Regarding bicycle use on the shared pathway: Answer Options Safe bicycle use should be encouraged There are not enough bikes to be a problem A separate bike path should be considered Bikes should not be allowed on the path Other (please specify) Comments Response Response Percent Count 23.6% 173 29.3% 215 14.9% 109 32.2% 236 130 answered question 733 skipped question 31 As a bike commuter I found no reason to use the prior bike lane on sunset as it is easier to ride in the traffic lane with the speed limit. The transition crossing at the north end of sunset for south bound bike riders is too dangerous and riding down third avenue was much better. Third avenue would be best and safest location for bike lane(s). It is safer to have a consistent vehicle/bike strategy thru the city. As a cyclist I have found that it is currently safe to ride with the flow of cars. 2 Walkers, often going in two directions, are not aware enough to be safe around cyclists, especially when with children and dogs. There would need to be a solution separating pedestrians and cyclists and/or a direction of travel. As an aside, sate bike use trom main to Edwards Point would torce drivers to slow down. Often, about twice per month, many cars take a free right as I'm entering 3 the crosswalk, they take a left in front of me or just zoom onward when I'm in the crosswalk. It's a recurring thing to see by Sunset Avenue between Main and Edwards Point. As an avid cyclist who rides > 3000 miles a year, I strongly believe bicycles belong 4 on the road. But not walkways! There is no place for cyclists in the current configuration. The walkway is inappropriate and the road is too congested. The current configuration forced us to redirect our children to ride on second avenue. 5 Barely enough room for vehicles and bikes to share as it is now. Also a safety hazard for those trying to back out of their driveways and parking spaces. 6 Because the bikelane marker is still very visible, even though it was painted over, it is confusing. People are still riding their bikes and walking in the same bike 'lane. 7 Bicycles and pedestrians should be separated to avoid accidents. 8 Bicycles can share the road. 9 Bicycles can share the roadway safely with cars but should be kept off both the sidewalk and the path. 10 Bicyclist need to be on the road, and follow traffic rules. The traffic there is so light I feel it is a safe road to bike on. 73 Packet Page 265 of 391 1 /28/2016 11 bicyclists can safely use the roadway to ride. 12 Bike can share the road since traffic is going so slow on Sunset Ave already. 13 Bikers have disregarded the one way designation of Sunset and pose a safety hazard. 14 Bikers may use the street. Bikers should have a bike lane in the street that is large enough for two way biking or restricted to northbound only. The walkway is not sufficient to share due to the 15 number of pedestrians, dogs and limited room to step out of the way if bikers were also involved. 16 Bikers should use the road. 17 Bikes and pedestrians are a dangerous combination. 18 Bikers are an inefficient and less used form of transportation. We should tailor to cars and pedestrians Bikes are fine wherever. I both walk and ride a bike on occassion and find it 19 adequate. I find bike use to be safe and adequate. 20 Bikes can safely use the roads along with vehicles. Sunset has a slow rate of speed for vehicles. 21 Bikes on the street and remove the angled parking for wider access for everyone. Bikes should always be on a separate path. Sharing this narrow pathway with pedestrians, with walkers, strollers, etc and with bike is not safe. There is not 22 enough room for all of these on the west side. Put the bike path back on the east side of the street, before someone gets hurt. 23 Bikes should be accommodated in some fashion, either on a shared multi -use path or separated facility. Bikes should be allowed to go northbound only in the sharrow or previous bike 24 path. Per State Law, the rider of a bicycle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian on a sidewalk or crosswalk. If bikes are allowed in walkway - who will enforce yielding and where are the bicyclists to go when they need to yield? 25 Bikes should follow regular road rules including northbound only direction. 26 Bikes should follow the usual "rules of the road" for bicycles. 27 Bikes should go northbound only, and only on the street. The speed limit is low enough that no bike lane is needed. 28 Bikes should use the one way travel lane and speed limit should be reduced to 15 between Edmonds st and Caspers st to keep everyone safe 29 Bikes should use the roadway. 74 Packet Page 266 of 391 1 /28/2016 30 Bikes should use the roadway. Access to Sunset is so bad now trying to add more paths would make it so the entire road would be closed to vehicle traffic. 31 Bikes should use the street along with cars. 32 Bikes should use the street and obey the traffic rules and direction of travel. 33 Bikes should use the street as they have to use streets to get there 34 bikes use regular car lanes, driving rules, safety rules 35 Bikes use the road and use road rules. no special lane. 36 Bikes, pets, strollers, and walkers do not mix. Accident waiting to happen. Combining bike use (and other wheeled uses) is what has caused ALL the controversy. It unnecessarily increased the required width which complicated the required turning radius for emergency vehicles on the north end (thereby eliminating north parking) and packed the parking too close to the east side creating unnecessary congestion and potential safety issues. This whole project experienced significant project creep based solely on a grant. What started out as a noble, non -controversial proposal to improve access to the west side became 37 distorted by the grant to combine bikes with pedestrians. Why would bicyclists even want to navigate among pedestrians on a 200 yard (?) stretch? As an analogy, I have no problems using coupons to get a discount. But I only use coupons on items I ordinarily buy. In this case, the City used the prospect of a grant to reshape a project that is now controversial and ill conceived. And matching City funds are required for the grant, diminishing the cost benefit. There are too many less controversial projects for the City to spend limited funds and time. What a mess! 38 Cyclists can ride on the street as usual. For them to ride on a path is just waiting for an accident to happen. Don't encourage more bicycle riders by creating "Seattle" lanes --it does not need 39 to be separately designated. Walkers are more prominent and the "town" feel is appealing!! 40 don't mix pedestrian and mobile ... look at Greenlake... also, it was working well before change - I almost got hit twice last summer Edmond's is not a particularly "bike friendly" town because of its bowl like 41 geography. Maybe I'm unobservant but I haven't noticed a heavy bike population in Edmonds. 42 Eliminate the angled parking and re -stripe the old bike path on the east side of sunset. 43 Even a narrow bike path could be considered 75 Packet Page 267 of 391 1 /28/2016 44 Except for smaller kids riding along side their parents, I would like to see bikers go with the traffic on the one-way part of the street only ... not on the path. 45 existing pathway is barely narrow enough for walkers and pets, bikes going downhill may be going a bit fast without even trying... 46 High-speed bikers should use the road; slow -speed (kids, families) should have to use the path so as not to impede traffic. 47 I am pro bicycling but many times the number of pedestrians on the path makes mixing in bike traffic seem a little dangerous. 48 I believe bikes should use the roadway. They should not be on the sidewalk or any pedestrian walkway. 49 I bike there and haven't had a problem 50 I bike to work everyday, so I'm pro -bike. But I think the cyclists should bike in the road and only one way. 51 I checked this as sometimes as a walker (and not always too steady), bikers can create difficulty when on the same path as a walker. I do not believe cycling issues present a problem for this project because most 52 people, if riding a bicycle north, would ride with traffic and, if riding south, either take some other route or ride courteously on the sidewalk. I don't mind bikes driven by children or persons on bikes coming to sunset as a 53 destination. The bike path should not be used to commute or practice for the France de Tour. I feel bicycles could safely use the street before the diagonal parking was added. If 54 a bike path is added I feel it should be on the east side of the street along the cub just as with any other city street. 55 I have been endangered by a bicyclist. 56 I have never seen bicyclist riding along sunset. 57 I have noticed where the bicyclists tend to use the center of the street and if used in the path they are going around walkers, etc. there is not enough room for all. I just do not believe there is space here for a dedicated bike lane and that bikes 58 need to share the road with cars - and that cars need to drive slowly - which should cause less of a problem sharing the road with bikes. 76 Packet Page 268 of 391 1 /28/2016 I like bikes & ride myself, but I do not believe they should be on the pathway. Bikes should use the street. Bikes present 2 problems on the pathway: 1)safety-- bikes are moving too fast to mix with pedestrians and any collision is going to result in significant injury. Walkers on the pathway should be free to enjoy the 59 view of the water & mountains and other walkers without needing to maintain constant alertness and awareness of where bikes are moving ahead and behind. 2) many bike riders ride from south to north & then turnaround and ride in the opposite direction. The sight of a bike coming toward you ruins the peaceful atmosphere of walking the pathway. I ride every other day down there on my 15 mile route. You guys initially forgot 60 about us in your city planning. I see it in your designated bike routes and street markings. I suspect there are not a large number of bikes on the pathway normally since it is SO narrow, and when it is busy (nice weather) with lots of pedestrians, dog 61 walkers, stroller pushers, elderly with walkers, etc, I personally just ride my bike on the street, as I always had done in the past. It feels better to me to be on the street, than the pathway when it is busy, and I've never had any issues with cars trying to run me off the street or honking at me while I cycle on -street. I walk and drive on Sunset at least 5 days a week, at a variety of times of day. I 62 very rarely see bikers, but there is currently plenty of room on the path for bikers and walkers to share the space safely. I walk my dog daily on the Sunset Pathway and at the present time there are not 63 enough bikes to be a problem, however as use increases in the future, a separate path should be a consideration. I walk the path north and south. I don't feel the traffic speed is dangerously high 64 where the bicycles can't share the road with the cars and obey normal traffic laws, similar to all other roads in the city. 65 I would exempt young children on bikes who are going at the same pace as their walking parents, or grandparents. I would ride my bike more often along Sunset if there were more room to o so. 66 Ideally, a bike path would be the solution. Pedestrians may end up using though. Maybe it can be marked like the path around Greenlake in Seattle. I would worry about allowing bikes on a walking path, but there should be a way 67 for bikers to use Sunset; many go North to South, which I think, currently, is unclear 68 If bikers use walkway, they should walk their bikes, otherwise ride on the roadway. 69 If parking were changed to parallel, it would be safer for bicycles and pedestrians if bikes used the roadway instead of the pathway. 70 If the number greatly increases then bikes should not be allowed. It's too short a distance for much of a bike ride anyway. 77 Packet Page 269 of 391 1 /28/2016 If there were more bike traffic, a wider path or a separate bike path might be 71 necessary. But in the many, many times we've walked along the temporary parkway, we have seen very few cyclists and have never seen any "near misses". In my experience there aren't enough bikes presently using the path to cause an 72 issue but if the path becomes permanent, as I hope it will, increased bike traffic along with pedestrians (esp. with dogs or strollers) could become a safety hazard because the cyclists I have encountered are traveling at a pretty good clip. 73 It feels dangerous to be walking with bikes using the path as well. 74 It is congested. It is short. Bikes should be walked. 75 It is too narrow for bikes, people, dogs, kids and strollers. 76 It was much safer before with the previous bike path. 77 It's a 10 mph limit street anyway, right? If that's the case, why would bikes need to share the walk lane at all? It should be one way for bikes as well as cars. 78 It's a one way, bikes can use the road. 79 It's working fine the way it is --we all share and people are considerate. 80 Keep Sunset the way it was to begin with 81 I-Ittle kids on bikes with their parents would be acceptable to me. 82 Millions of people have grown up riding bikes with traffic especially at a slow speed. Bike lanes are a boondogle. 83 My family rides on this path and are yelled at by pedestrians that they should not be riding there. They are not riding fast. 84 Pathway is not wide enough for both pedestrians and bikes. 85 Pedestrians who are hard of hearing, listening to music, or engrossed in conversation or thought cannot hear approaching bicycles. 86 people with walkers and wheelchairs will not go on pathway with bikes 87 People, dogs,children, strollers along with bicycles should not be all on one path. 88 Personal preference is that bicyclists should use motor way as vehicles. That's how I was trained to ride. 89 Prominent signs should tell bicyclists the rules of sharing the path with pedestrians. 90 Put a bike speed limit in since they use the same path as pedestrians 78 Packet Page 270 of 391 1 /28/2016 91 Put bike path on opposite side 92 put the bike lane back where it was 93 Remove the angle parking and let them use the street; keep the speed limit down to 20 mpr. 94 Revert to bike path next to sidewalk on the east side of Sunset. How did the layout go so wrong? 95 Seems like the bikes could ride in the street. 96 Segways should not be allowed as well. They go to fast and are silent so walkers do not hear them coming. Bicyclists also ride to fast to avoid pedestrian traffic. Sharrows have been painted on the road for the cyclists. I see no need for adults on 97 bikes to ride the path. Small children should be allowed to use it or the sidewalk for biking. 98 Signs could be posted to encourage pedestrians and cyclist share the road and be courteous and safe. .3o rar even on oust' oays oiKe/peoesuian inieracuon seems goon, inougn i nave noticed increasing numbers of bikes in fall and more people walking on the sidewalk east of the street (which is difficult with construction). Suggest the city 99 decide if this is a walking path or a sport path and sign it appropriately. In a city with Edmonds median age a walking/strolling path makes sense and that is what I see it being used as. Sporty people on bikes tend to mix with the cars going north and ride the wrong way going south. 100 Speeding cyclists should be discouraged. The pathway is too narrow for a bike to safely pass 2 pedestrians walking side by 101 side or I pedestrian walking a dog especially when parked motorists open their door without checking for bicycles. This is even more dangerous when small children are riding their bikes. See below for addl comments 102 The previous bike path next to the east curb should be used. 103 The previous setup for bikes was better! The temporary walkway eliminated a safe thoroughfare for cyclists. With pedestrians and bikes sharing and cars pulling in close, it is not safe for my kids to 104 bike down Sunset anymore. It is difficult to dodge around pedestrians that don't realize it is for both bicycles and walkers. 105 The traffic is slow on this stretch of road. They can share with cars or walking lane if there is room. No need for a car, walk, and bike lane. 106 The Walkway is not wide enough to allow safe bicycle use. 79 Packet Page 271 of 391 1 /28/2016 There is plenty of room on the road for bikes. The speed limit is only 20mph. 107 Much safer for bikes on the road here than on Olympic View Drive where bikes use the road, not the walking path. 108 there just isn't enough room with people walking both ways and not needed since it is such a short stretch There's no reason bikes can't ride in the street along with the cars . The pedestrian 109 path can't accommodate a bike racing through when it's full of people. It's a stupid and dangerous design 110 They are dangerous. They speed (more than 10mph) They should be on the street as the walking area is too narrow for bicyclists and pedestrians, including the handicapped to co -exist safely. If you want to see how a 111 City accommodates bicycles, go to Eugene,Or. It has a well thought out solution there, not an after thought or benevolent idea. 112 They should share the road with other vehicles & follow the traffic laws. 113 They should travel in the car lanes. 114 They still continue to ride in the middle of the street. This was the situation betore the city changed the configuration of the street. There was a separate bike path, as well as a sidewalk for pedestrians, as well as a 115 rough path along the west side. Improvements to the condition of the sidewalk and rough path would have addressed all the issues without requiring a complete re -design. 116 Though hard core bikers can also just use the road. 117 Too many bikes are being ridden on the path by very young children who are not able to control the bikes. It is very dangerous for.walkers. 118 Too small, walk your bike area. Two days ago I observed bike riders going the opposite way in the car lane. Are 119 they confused? I think the whole car lane should be one way to the north after bell street -clearly marked for bikes and cars to only go north on sunset avenue While bicycle safety is always important, pedestrian safety in this area is more important. Edmonds residents are predominately older and walk with their dogs, 120 families need to be taken care of by having a safe walkway apart from a bicycle lane. 121 With the limited space and increased amount of walkers I feel very intimidated when bikes are speeding by. With the present configuration the pathway is not wide enough for bikers, pedestrians and their pets. I think there is some potential liability concerns for the 122 city. I think the old configuration served home owners along Sunset, bicyclist and pedestrians much better and safer! 80 Packet Page 272 of 391 1 /28/2016 Sunset Walkway Q 9: 1 prefer to receive information regarding City projects via (Check all that apply) Answer Options Response Percent Response Count The City's website 33.2% 244 The City's 18.4% 135 E-mail updates 33.3% 245 My Edmonds 67.6% 497 Edmonds Beacon 49.3% 362 Public Meetings 14.0% 103 Other (please specify). 31 answered question 735 skipped question 29 Comments 1 *in person or computer 2 6. What walkway? I can use the sidewalk. A public meeting for citizens would be very useful to get an understanding of what most people want. However my belief is that the city doesn't care what the citizens want. I sort of get the feeling 3 "the city" doesn't want the "interference" from "the people" for many things. More simple surveys like this would be good. More public meetings to hear input from citizens? Hearing directly from the public about things? (Yes I have been at City Council meetings and also watched them on TV.) 4 All 5 All 3 - in person, on TV and/or computer 6 all of above --in person, on tv or via computer Create an E-subscription links which lets citizens click on topics or 7 projects they want to follow. 8 Email notifications please for public meetings and council meetings (Council meetings I do watch after the fact on the TV. 9 Have been to a few council meetings & sometimes watch them on TV. I prefer My Edmonds News because its news is click -able and more 10 versatile and you can go back to "old" editions of news articles. Nowadays paper is for bird cages! 11 In Person 12 In person 81 Packet Page 273 of 391 1 /28/2016 13 in person 14 In person 15 In person and TV 16 In Person as then I don't get a skewed or biased report. 17 In person, on TV 18 mostly via computer and the government access channel on TV My Edmonds News is merely a blog, it is not a newspaper of record, and should not be used as such. Many do not have access to the internet, and the ones who do are being given more opportunities to 19 comment than those who don't, me included and this survey is an example of the wrong, and very unscientific meaningless polling being done. This is not a poll that should be used for anything at all, certainly not this kind of issue. It is statistically insignificant. Note: The temporary pathway is nice. It depends upon the nature of 20 the improvements before I can support it. 21 Post large reader boards at both ends of the street and update often. 22 Public meetings in person and on TV 23 Surveys sent to me. The City should not rely on Internet sources to get information to people. It unfairly limits who can participate ( just as this survey is self 24 selecting and includes only folks who have Internet access and know there is a survey to take.). My Edmonds News is a blog not a newspaper, by the way. 25 The Herald There is a large population of elderly Edmonds residents who don't 26 use or have access to computers. Unfortunately they have no way to complete this survey, which is very discriminatory! 27 tv 28 TV or computer 82 Packet Page 274 of 391 1 /28/2016 29 via TV 30 Webcast council meetings. You need to have the following question on this survey: I would like 31 to see Sunset Avenue restored to its previous configuration. (All of your questions are leading to a permanent installation.) 83 Packet Page 275 of 391 1 /28/2016 This page intentionally left blank 84 Packet Page 276 of 391 1 /28/2016 Sunset Walkway Q10:The temporary walkway on Sunset was installed September of 2014. Please describe your usage of Sunset Ave before and after the installation. Answer Options Response Count 658 answered question 658 skipped question 106 Number Response Date Response Text I a firm believer that all the waterfront should be all public and accessible to the public. The natural experience of walking along the waterfront is extended safely with the walkway place along the west side of sunset. Pedestrians can walk the entire waterfront route with 1 Dec 15, 2015 9:11 PM minimal crossings of driveways and streets. The best long term planning strategy for the City of Edmond's has been it's providing public space at the waterfront. The waterfront is our premier amenity that should be enhanced to it's fullest potential for all the residents and visitors. 2 Dec 9, 2015 7:04 PM I live there - no dogs and no bushes We enjoy the new path and see many more people, including handicapped, seniors and young families coming out to walk on the path than before the 'experimental walk' was made ...in my opinion! We have talked to visitors to Edmonds who live in the area, and who are now using the path, and also checking out the shops and eateries 3 Dec 1, 2015 11:35 PM more. We use to walk in the street quite often to get closer to the view, feeling unsafe walking on the uneven grass path on the west side. I feel strongly that that street should be made to be enjoyed by more people than just the folks that live on Sunset ave.... we have talked to several of the owners that live on that street who do not mind the path ... and feel fine about 'sharing' that priceless view, etc. To share is an Edmonds Kind of Attitude! Let's go forward now and improve the path adding benches, art etc. What a wonderful addition to our city..... 4 Dec 1, 2015 11:14 PM Previously I tended to walk in the street to feel closer. Do not park as often after walkway installed. Used to enjoy having 5 Dec 1, 2015 4:55 PM quick "car picnics" but now it feels crowded, lack of personal space compared to before Sept 2014. 6 Dec 1, 2015 3:58 PM none Mainly walking and parking on Sunset prior to the installation of the 7 Nov 29, 2015 6:11 PM temporary walkway. Have added bicycling since the installation. Few bicycles actually use the walkway. Before it was a more of a walk for us both. But now ... it's a sorry site for 8 Nov 27, 2015 2:06 AM this demonstration. Please stop the demo and put things back as they were. 9 Nov 26, 2015 3:40 AM Same 10 Nov 26, 2015 2:49 AM About the same 85 Packet Page 277 of 391 1 /28/2016 11 Nov 25, 2015 7:46 PM walked 4-5 time a week 12 Nov 25, 2015 6:03 PM About the same. I walk it 3-4 times a week. I have travelled it by car daily. I travel it much it much less now. It is 13 Nov 25, 2015 4:25 PM no longer appealing to me at all. It has become an ugly mess which is not what Sunset used to be and it is no longer enjoyable to spend time there 14 Nov 25, 2015 3:58 PM Had to park farther away and walk on a crowded city path. Now, it's much easier to park and the path is much more enjoyable. 15 Nov 25, 2015 11:19 AM same Although the frequency of my walks (2-5 times a week) along Sunset 16 Nov 25, 2015 5:49 AM has not changed, my enjoyment of this segment of my walk has increased. I enjoy walking closer to the water and being further away from the private residences. 17 Nov 25, 2015 5:16 AM Same 18 Nov 25, 2015 5:11 AM I enjoy using the walkway, It is much better than the dirt path. Before, I walked five days a week with a walking partner. Since 19 Nov 24, 2015 1:21 AM installation, I have taken a few walking trips to see the differences, a few car trips to see how the parking works. 20 Nov 22, 2015 9:40 PM About the same I live around the corner and walk along Sunset frequently. I walked 21 Nov 22, 2015 5:19 AM either west on the grass (water side) or on the sidewalk next to the homes. 22 Nov 21, 2015 4:22 PM Live there, drive and walk every day on Sunset We walk the waterfront up through Edmonds and back along Sunset at 23 Nov 21, 2015 4:40 AM least 5 out of 7 days a week. We have done this for 30 years. The walkway has mad it safer for us to walk Sunset and enjoy the water views. As a resident for over 30 years this project is a joke! Too much $$ has been spent on this project. As residents there has been more litter and 24 Nov 21, 2015 2:04 AM people driving by slowing looking into homes. With all the construction going on cars are having to go into the path lane (West side) just not enough room for the construction equipment no less room for emergency vehicles. 25 Nov 20, 2015 5:46 AM I rarely traveled along Sunset before the walkway was completed. Weather depending, I've used it on a weekly or monthly basis. 26 Nov 20, 2015 4:25 AM More after walkway installation 27 Nov 19, 2015 10:47 PM I started using the walkway regulerlly since there is a disagnatted walk area 86 Packet Page 278 of 391 1 /28/2016 a few times. It's for the folks who live there. It's out of my way and 1 28 Nov 19, 2015 7:25 PM don't usually go there. There's too little access and I wish we had complete access for at least two to three miles going north from Main for a walk/bike trail. It feels like it's private and cut off from us. 29 Nov 19, 2015 7:12 PM Before if I was alone, I could walk on the west side, but with friends or family had to walk on east side. Now, either side is great. 30 Nov 19, 2015 6:41 PM My usage has remained the same on sunset for the past 6 years. 31 Nov 19, 2015 6:38 AM Walk and drive there a few times a year. Prior to the changes it was part of my walk, apx 4 times per week. 32 Nov 18, 2015 5:58 PM After the installation I avoid it, the peacefulness isn't there for me anymore. 33 Nov 17, 2015 7:21 PM Resident 34 Nov 17, 2015 7:01 PM I work in downtown and walk the route when weather permits in winter and 3-4 times a week in the summer. 35 Nov 17, 2015 1:57 PM Less - the special feel and atmosphere along Sunset has been negatively impacted - especially in the vicinity of the angled parking. 36 Nov 17, 2015 4:46 AM Used it more before the pathway because we could find parking then. 37 Nov 17, 2015 1:38 AM About the same: I ride my bike or walk there once a week in the summer months, once a month or more during the rest of the year. 38 Nov 16, 2015 11:01 PM My amount of usage has not changed, but it is very nice to not have to dodge as many people and dogs. It makes the walk more enjoyable. I walk along Sunset Ave. almost daily and have found the temporary walkway to be a great addition to the area. My usage of this street has 39 Nov 16, 2015 10:27 PM not changed following the installation of the temporary walkway. I also bicycle along Sunset occasionally and have not had any problems with the project. 40 Nov 16, 2015 8:22 PM Bikes and walkers on same walkway are not compatible in my opinion. walked frequently on old pathway. Do not chose to walk on temporary 41 Nov 16, 2015 6:59 PM pathway- its a hard surface and you can't see the water as well and the whole street looks like a parking lot now. 42 Nov 16, 2015 4:03 PM Several times a month both before and after. 43 Nov 16, 2015 12:39 AM before - occassionaly drove by but did not walk after - love to walk the path I didn't use the walkway much before the changes. I have found myself 44 Nov 15, 2015 12:55 AM using it more now that I have a baby. I feel safe taking walks with the stroller alone in that area. 87 Packet Page 279 of 391 1 /28/2016 45 Nov 14, 2015 11:16 PM Find the walking more enjoyable after renovation - smooth pathway vs walking in the street with friends. It's much easier for my family to walk 2 people abreast now. Before it was single file on either side, with unsteady/unsafe steps off the sidewalk and into the road or yards. It's now easier to walk, talk and 46 Nov 14, 2015 7:47 AM look at the view instead of trying to dodge other folks coming the other direction. 0 0 We now walk it much more often with the improvements; we love the continuation of the sidewalk path on the water side to Main Street!! No more crossing the street where the sidewalk ends! Thank you! I used to drive Sunset every chance I got to see the view on my way 47 Nov 14, 2015 4:29 AM home whether it was good or bad weather. Now, I rarely drive it, I can't enjoy the view for fear of running into a parked car. 48 Nov 14, 2015 4:04 AM I routinely drive down & park for the view. On the occasion that I want to walk I use the established sidewalk on the east side of the street. The new pathway narrows the street & is unnecessary in my opinion. I use the walkway much more frequently now. There was no 49 Nov 14, 2015 3:53 AM continuous walkway before; the very narrow trail dried up most of the time, making it impossible to stay off the street on the west side of the street. Walking on the sidewalk was too far from the water, too narrow, and too intrusive for the residents on the east side of the street. I walk it with friends usually on the east (house) side, pull into a spot to 50 Nov 14, 2015 12:41 AM look at the view with husband when out and about many times a year, used to drive home that way if in the area to enjoy the view, but not any more - it just makes me sick to see how it looks now - seriously! 51 Nov 13, 2015 9:36 PM No change. I use the walkway because of all of the closures on the street for new construction but would prefer to walk on the eastern sidewalk because if the angled parking is eliminated it would be so much safer. Nowhere 52 Nov 13, 2015 9:28 PM is Burlington Northern mentioned. They still own the land with the picnic table and benches on it. And when they put in their third rail how much land will they want to use? The federal grant for $159,000 was wasted and the grand total project cost of $1,876.354 is a mystery. Was a grant ever secured. 53 Nov 13, 2015 9:08 PM Same. I live nearby and like to walk there. The pathway is now easier to walk on. 54 Nov 13, 2015 9:03 PM We walk the east side. 55 Nov 13, 2015 9:00 PM I continue to walk on Sunset - rarely use the walkway since it can be crowded at times 56 Nov 13, 2015 8:59 PM Every day a couple times -- before & after it is a mess now -- very dangerous / unprofessional! 88 Packet Page 280 of 391 1 /28/2016 I have lived on Sunset Ave since 1967. Personally I thought the existing sidewalk and the bike lane were fine. the current configuration 57 Nov 13, 2015 8:58 PM is not satisfactory for us residents as it impacts our ability daily to get in/out of our driveways. Cars idle at the angle parking at the south end and it is very unfortunate for those homeowners opposite the angle parkign. Therer needs to be "no idling" signs. I have walked my dog daily on Sunset. The pre -"walkway" path was 58 Nov 13, 2015 8:58 PM fine. The present walkway has brought many more strollers and bicyclists -- but it is okay. 59 Nov 13, 2015 8:37 PM I run on Sunset Ave and sometimes walk with my wife and once awhile I come and park. This has not changed. 60 Nov 13, 2015 7:27 PM not much change 61 Nov 13, 2015 4:34 PM My usage hasn't changed much in the last several years. I don't walk on Sunset very often; maybe just a few times per year. 62 Nov 13, 2015 4:29 PM Same 63 Nov 13, 2015 2:20 PM Make it a permanent walkway 64 Nov 13, 2015 8:12 AM Casual walking at least 3x a week I frequently drove on Sunset to see the beautiful view. I am disabled 65 Nov 13, 2015 7:35 AM and cannot walk very far, so being able to drive on Sunset is good for me. But the current configuration is dangerous! 66 Nov 13, 2015 7:06 AM Used it multiple times a month before and afterwards. I prefer the old was better. My usage of the walkway hasn't really changed in terms of frequency, 67 Nov 13, 2015 6:34 AM but I do like the new set-up a lot more and hope that it will continue in a substantially similar form. 68 Nov 13, 2015 6:01 AM less - stupid design with cars sticking out and bikes/people/dogs fighting for space. 69 Nov 13, 2015 5:39 AM Occasional walks My usage has not changed. I park 3 to 5 times a week to drink my 70 Nov 13, 2015 5:36 AM morning coffee in the car while taking in the view, often adding a stroll afterwards. I use it more after the installation. I like to use it for dog walks. 1 71 Nov 13, 2015 5:32 AM generally park several blocks away. I have never had a need to park on Sunset Ave. 72 Nov 13, 2015 5:06 AM Mostly in the warm weather... maybe two dozen times annually. 73 Nov 13, 2015 4:58 AM Current use feels awkward and not intuitive compared to previous vehicle/pedestrian zones. 74 Nov 13, 2015 4:49 AM Daily walks of my dog. 89 Packet Page 281 of 391 1 /28/2016 75 Nov 13, 2015 4:47 AM Several times a week now. We purchased a new home in town, so prior was several times a month when we lived up the hill. I would drive down the street, but I wouldn't walk it very often because 76 Nov 13, 2015 4:21 AM there wasn't room to push a stroller. Now, I include it as part of my waterfront walking path. I'd love to see a walking path extended! Or a path in a loop! 77 Nov 13, 2015 4:04 AM Used it all the time before the test. HATE it now. Have you ever tried to go 20 mph past the angle parked cars now. Scary! 78 Nov 13, 2015 4:03 AM I went down to sunset about 4 nights of the week to enjoy the view and walk. I hate what the new walkway looks like me and the way it pushes traffic into the homes on Sunset. Takes the charm away from the area. 79 Nov 13, 2015 4:00 AM About the same, but much prefer walking on the water side of the street. 80 Nov 13, 2015 3:23 AM none I liked to stroll along in the previous format. Now it is congested and 81 Nov 13, 2015 3:10 AM inconsistent. The old format was more appealing and less of a problem. I use to use the side walk on the other side which was both bike and 82 Nov 13, 2015 3:07 AM pedestrian, which was more congested. Had to be cautious not to run into people. Bikers like the view there that's why we need a safe route on that street. I still walk on the sidewalk as I did before (when it's not all torn up by construction. I hate the feel of the cars parking in the middle of the 83 Nov 13, 2015 2:44 AM street ... it has taken a broad, spacious -feeling street and made it seemed narrow and crowded. Why can't you put the cars back where they were, the bike lane where it was and let people walk on the sidewalk or some on the far side as they were doing before? What was wrong with that? I was there a lot and it seemed to work fine. My usage is the same before and after. I walk there occasionally from 84 Nov 13, 2015 2:37 AM my home or from my car parked in downtown edmonds. Beautiful spot to walk. Before installation Sunset Avenue was amazing. These revisions have 85 Nov 13, 2015 2:32 AM been horrible and dangerous to people on the sidewalks. I walk along Sunset Ave daily and these revisions have made me fear for my safety and make the street a congested mess. 86 Nov 13, 2015 1:28 AM Walking is much safer now. Before peds had to step on and off the sidewalk to pass large groups or accommodate pets etc. 87 Nov 13, 2015 1:26 AM Same 88 Nov 13, 2015 1:21 AM Whenever I go for a walk to down town Edmonds I walk along sunset avenue on the walking pathway 89 Nov 13, 2015 1:12 AM less often because of parkinng 90 Packet Page 282 of 391 1 /28/2016 90 Nov 13, 2015 12:58 AM Same usage pre and post 91 Nov 13, 2015 12:55 AM I walk several times a week along Sunset. I did this before and after the installation. 92 Nov 12, 2015 11:48 PM About the same as before 93 Nov 12, 2015 11:47 PM same 94 Nov 12, 2015 11:47 PM Us it more now than ever. It's much safer. 95 Nov 12, 2015 11:43 PM I use the walkway more frequently now (2+ times a week) with the walkway since it is more pedestrian friendly and safe. 96 Nov 12, 2015 11:32 PM I used Sunset for walking much more before the walkway was installed. 97 Nov 12, 2015 11:26 PM Usage remains about the same Used it several times a week but the angled parking plus confusing 98 Nov 12, 2015 11:23 PM and accidents waiting to occur) with the combo parallel parking has discouraged me from walking in the area. 99 Nov 12, 2015 11:19 PM The cars are making road way too narrow 100 Nov 12, 2015 11:14 PM I am a frequent walker. I still use the old sidewalk because I'm not up against cars. 101 Nov 12, 2015 10:09 PM I rarely walk there, feeling odd with the eyes of all the people in parked cars. 102 Nov 12, 2015 10:06 PM I use it about the same amount of times. Before the 'temporary' changes it was an easy mix of pedestrians, cyclists and drivers. But the changes have created a 'choke -point' at the south entrance - auto traffic is squeezed into a narrow lane, parked cars back out blindly not being able to see oncoming traffic and too many spaces have been created, making the south end a jumbled mess!!! Additionally, the two short spaces at the north end are absurd. Is the city trying to placate those homeowners by not allowing parking 103 Nov 12, 2015 9:58 PM there? Bad planning! Bikes should be restricted to the auto lanes... driving speed limits could be reduced to 15mph for Sunset. Also, the max parking time along Sunset should be two hours, not four -the longer pArking time turns Sunset into an auxilliary parking lot, not a scenic walkway. And the pedestrian path should be up on the grassy area where the city has conveniently planted rose bushes. All in all, it's a poorly conceived plan which will make access to Sunset for all less appealing. Revise it! Do not proceed with the current plan. It's ridiculous. And. As a citizen, I'd be happy to work on a planning committee going forward to help make this better access. 104 Nov 12, 2015 9:34 PM Primarily for walking 105 Nov 12, 2015 9:33 PM Mainly for parking or driving by and enjoying the view. Sometimes walking in which case the sidewalk is perfectly fine. 91 Packet Page 283 of 391 1 /28/2016 I'd walk the sidewalk before and the walkway after. I do like having 106 Nov 12, 2015 9:33 PM benches along the way but, by all means, keep it sweet, simple, and uncluttered ....... that's the beauty of it. And do keep the people living along the avenue in mind. 107 Nov 12, 2015 9:24 PM I think the current installation is an improvement but it could still be improved. 108 Nov 12, 2015 9:12 PM Use several times a week, both before and after installation 109 Nov 12, 2015 9:10 PM similar use, i.e., typically walk dogs on west side behind curb 110 Nov 12, 2015 8:54 PM We walk along sunset much more now than when the walk was uneven and dirt. It seems fine just the way it is. What additional benefits will be added by spending the money to make it permanent? 111 Nov 12, 2015 8:54 PM I've only been there to walk, take in the view, or park and walk to the beach. 112 Nov 12, 2015 8:51 PM Moved to Edmonds in June of 2014. Love going there. Like the parking before the changes. The same. I walk there and ride my bike on Sunset, and drive on the 113 Nov 12, 2015 8:09 PM street. It has not changed from before and after the installation, although I don't like to drive on it as much. 114 Nov 12, 2015 8:07 PM Parking several times a week both before and after. 115 Nov 12, 2015 8:04 PM Park and walk for purpose of birdwatching 116 Nov 12, 2015 7:50 PM I am a bicyclist and find this pathway to narrow to safely navigate. Our living room looks down on Sunset Ave and it is really nice to see less cars and traffic in the area. I am a daily runner and before we had the walkway I found the side walk often congested with pedestrian 117 Nov 12, 2015 7:46 PM traffic. I would run along the grassy area near the train but it was not ideal. Since putting the temporary walkway in I used it almost daily and love it! I love to run along the water and it reminds me of any other waterfront walkway that utilizes the view. I would like to see this become a permanent walkway. 118 Nov 12, 2015 7:43 PM Against temporary walkway The Sunset area is on 6 mile daily run route. I am honored to have been co-chair for the Edmonds Economic Committee when upon inception. Sunset has always been on the agenda. Completing the 119 Nov 12, 2015 7:35 PM construction via a grant is needed asap. Even more important is to explain the process to the Edmonds residents. Most do not understand the grant process and are concerned with the City spending money they do not have. walked there often..... since the change........ seldom. It is a mishmash, 120 Nov 12, 2015 7:23 PM and convoluted with all the changes and additions ....... it ruined the serenity it always had! 121 Nov 12, 2015 7:10 PM about the same 92 Packet Page 284 of 391 1 /28/2016 122 Nov 12, 2015 7:10 PM 2 to 3 times a month We haven't been down as often due to our schedule. As for above #9 -- 123 Nov 12, 2015 7:08 PM our concern is stability of ground -- add'I park benches would be nice, but how stable is the area. 124 Nov 12, 2015 6:57 PM no change 125 Nov 12, 2015 6:56 PM Walking is easier and free of obstacles. I have walked on the path as well as driven down the street. Though the path is closer to the water's edge, I don't think it is any more beneficial than the way it was before. Additionally, I absolutely hate driving down the road anymore. It is often crowded and difficult to 126 Nov 12, 2015 6:43 PM travel down from one end to the other (especially in summer) and having to share the road with a bicycle is just not the best idea. At times, there are so many cars parked at an angle, you can't see the water and the card trying to back out can't see oncoming cars and also stop the traffic from flowing nicely. Before the improvement I rarely walked there be it didn't give sufficient 127 Nov 12, 2015 6:41 PM room for all of the moving vehicles and pedestrians. Now I use it multiple times a week! It's great!! Before we rode our bikes along Sunset and the waterfront nearly every 128 Nov 12, 2015 6:40 PM dry day. After, we avoid the Sunset area because it is unsafe for cyclists. The area is practically unusable for bicycling. 129 Nov 12, 2015 6:36 PM We walked the road before with our dogs but it is so much nicer now to be able to walk on the water side of the road. Our whole family loves it. I take a daily walk and often walk the length of Sunset. It was difficult 130 Nov 12, 2015 6:24 PM to walk the dirt path before the walkway was installed. I much prefer the waterside to the residential side. Multiple walks a week with my young family before and after change. It 131 Nov 12, 2015 6:22 PM was more peaceful and inviting before. Walkway would be nice but need to get rid of too many parking stalls. This is for Edmonds residents not outsiders coming in to park. 132 Nov 12, 2015 6:20 PM I use it about the same for walking, but current parking has made it more problematic to park. I don't use the walkway often, however we drive down Sunset 133 Nov 12, 2015 6:16 PM frequently. The frequency of that did not change with the new walkway. 93 Packet Page 285 of 391 1 /28/2016 134 Nov 12, 2015 6:16 PM Walking for exercise and as a scenic drive route out of downtown My husband and I love walking the Edmonds Waterfront and frequenting the shops and have done so for well over a decade. We were always disappointed that the narrow sidewalk on the east side of Sunset did not allow for more comfortable walking and were thrilled when the temporary wide path on the west side was installed. Our usage of Sunset Ave. for our walks has increased at least two -fold and 135 Nov 12, 2015 6:13 PM has become a wonderful alternative for when the lower waterfront is blocked by train traffic. The views are spectacular and we don't need to step into the street to pass someone or feel like we are intruding on the homeowners' space like we did with the east side sidewalk. We certainly hope the west pathway becomes permanent, although we don't see the need to "clutter" it up with more amenities (picnic tables, artwork). The view is the attraction and there seem to be adequate benches already from which to enjoy it. Walked on East site before and now can walk on the West side. 136 Nov 12, 2015 6:12 PM Actually we loop by walking on the west site going North and then walk on the east side going south. 137 Nov 12, 2015 6:08 PM Parking to enjoy the view, walking occasionally and spouse bicycling about 5 times a week 138 Nov 12, 2015 6:03 PM about the same 139 Nov 12, 2015 6:00 PM same 140 Nov 12, 2015 5:52 PM No change in usage. We still walk the pathway, and sometimes just drive through on our way elsewhere as we did before. 141 Nov 12, 2015 5:51 PM Before the walkway, I walked on the sidewalk. After the walkway, I walked on the sidewalk. 142 Nov 12, 2015 5:48 PM I used Sunset Ave prior to and after the installation and at first found it a bit confusing, but am now used to it. I find that the it is hard to drive past a large vehicle parked in the angled parking space. 143 Nov 12, 2015 5:48 PM Have used less because the parking is more difficult to navigate now - too much of a hassle to go there 144 Nov 12, 2015 5:46 PM Walking for recreation and exercise. 145 Nov 12, 2015 5:46 PM I was improved 146 Nov 12, 2015 5:45 PM Greatly improved and user-friendly 147 Nov 12, 2015 5:43 PM I frequently walk sunset. It is easier and less dangerous since the walkway 148 Nov 12, 2015 5:42 PM Drive and park there. Been doing for 40 years and no problem 149 Nov 12, 2015 5:41 PM Has not changed. Use it a couple times a year. 94 Packet Page 286 of 391 1 /28/2016 Frequency has remain unchanged. But now I get to enjoy the water 150 Nov 12, 2015 5:41 PM side of life instead of just staring at the backs of cars from the east side. 151 Nov 12, 2015 5:35 PM primarily for walking, before and after. 152 Nov 12, 2015 5:33 PM more since walkway on water side of road 153 Nov 12, 2015 1:37 PM I walk in the morning about once a week - before and after. Prior to the walkway installation, I typically walked partially on the sidewalk on the E side of Sunset and crossed the street to walk in the 154 Nov 11, 2015 10:22 PM grass in the wider grass areas. I now feel safer staying on the path the entire length of Sunset and the walk is more inviting and enjoyable on the water side of the street. Walking options are better, but often cars parking at an angle do not 155 Nov 11, 2015 5:18 AM pull forward and some p/u trucks are too long for the spaces which makes it nerve racking to drive behind them. The same. Walk occasionally. I use the sidewalk on the east side. 156 Nov 10, 2015 7:30 PM The west side has gotten too congested with people, bikes, strollers and dogs. I don't want to fall. I previously used the Sunset walkway during dog walks when I was downtown 4-6 times a week.0 157 Nov 10, 2015 4:18 PM 0 1 no longer use the Sunset walkway. Too congested and unrelaxing what a mess! As part of a walking group, we have used this stretch of walkway before and after the installation. I find it somewhat more pleasant now, as I have a place to walk that is closer to the water and I don't have to 158 Nov 9, 2015 7:35 PM worry about getting hit by a car as I walk there. I think everyone should have the option of parking there, too, as it is now, because it makes Edmonds' waterfront accessible to other residents in a friendly way. I am all for making the walkway accessible and open to everyone, and safe. the walkway eliminated nearly all of the parking on the North half of Sunset There are 15 homes on the North half, one of which is a tri-plex and their is only 3 regular parking spots and 1 handicap ????Yet their are so many on the south end, 0 159 Nov 9, 2015 5:20 AM many that are sometimes difficult to get by when people park full size trucks in compact spaces or regular cars driven by older people don't pull all the way in0 It was so much easier to negotiate Sunset when we had all parallel parking over the whole length of the street . 160 Nov 9, 2015 3:56 AM Was daily now I avoid, liked how it was before. The angle parking is dangerous. 161 Nov 8, 2015 11:39 PM no parking to walk , so I don't use it anymore 162 Nov 8, 2015 10:44 PM photography 163 Nov 8, 2015 10:19 PM Some time spent every day relaxing and doing photography as well as taking lunch breaks 95 Packet Page 287 of 391 1 /28/2016 Before the street was available for everyone now the north end is 164 Nov 8, 2015 10:06 PM reserved for the elite. The angle parking makes the street way too narrow. I don't go as often and usually have to park illegally. I don't walk far due to my knees and I don't ride a bike. 165 Nov 8, 2015 9:32 PM Walked on the sidewalk on the east side of the road before. Now use the pathway. It is a nice addition. I walk and drive long Sunset several times a week. Ithe feels very 166 Nov 8, 2015 1:15 AM cramped driving along the street when all of the diagonal parking slots are filled. 167 Nov 7, 2015 9:58 PM We continue to use it but feel it is inefficient use of the space. Parking is difficult and the driving lane feels too narrow i attend a bible study on Sunset and find it scary to have to park at 168 Nov 7, 2015 5:15 PM least a 1/2 mile away and walk in the dark at night -I strongly dislike the installation 169 Nov 7, 2015 8:13 AM Seldom use the walkway, perhaps once or twice a year. 170 Nov 7, 2015 2:16 AM Like walking as before on the grass or on the opposite side of the street on the sidewalk. 171 Nov 6, 2015 5:47 AM We used it everyday before, now it's too dangerous. We use it maybe once a week. 172 Nov 6, 2015 5:16 AM Didnt live there before 173 Nov 6, 2015 4:45 AM I used to go to Sunset every day. Since the change it's only a few time a week. It's hazardous and inconvenient. 174 Nov 5, 2015 8:41 PM Before -- Several times a week.0 After -- About 3 times a month. 175 Nov 5, 2015 7:09 PM I walk on the regular sidewalk, not the walkway about twice a month. 96 Packet Page 288 of 391 1 /28/2016 My husband and I often use Sunset Ave as a way to walk to and from town (we live —1 mi. N of dock) avoiding busy roads as much as possible for both aesthetic & safety reasons. Walking on pavement is hard on joints so "Before installation" I appreciated being able to walk on the grass/dirt pathway and areas as much as possible. If rain made that too wet/slippery or I was walking with a friend who didn't want to walk there, the sidewalk on East side of street was a paved alternative which still allowed being able to look over to the Sound & mountains. "After installation" there is really only paved area to walk on and 176 Nov 5, 2015 2:45 AM although we use the new pathway the same way/amount (I'm not going to stop going to/from town because of undesirable design changes in the route), the ambience is very changed and not, in my personal opinion, for the better. I would rather have seen a permeable, "slightly giving" walkway. I'd rather not feel like walking along the edge of a parking lot. And in answering question #5 above, number of times would use the pathway, the choices jumping from several times a week to several times a month doesn't cut it for someone who uses it about once a week -- several in my experience meaning about 3 (definition means more than 2 but not many). I would use it more than that, but probably not several times a week. There's no in between amount given to choose. Our usage is the same. As before sometimes I would walk on the path, 177 Nov 3, 2015 9:35 PM other times the sidewalk. I feel, we should go back to the original way it was, but gravel that area. Before the changes, we walked on the dirt rut & the bit of west side sidewalk often and wished for a better walkway, and I cycled on the 178 Nov 3, 2015 8:45 PM street often so I could enjoy the views. After the changes, we walk on it even more frequently, and love the pathway. I still cycle along Sunset, but almost always still on the street, not on the pathway. Nothing has changed I still just use the sidewalk that's been there for 179 Nov 3, 2015 8:03 PM years what a waste of money and time sidewalks are for walkers and bikes should share the road with cars 180 Nov 3, 2015 7:42 PM I walk daily on the sidewalk. The other side scares me. 181 Nov 3, 2015 7:25 PM Walking to downtown. 182 Nov 3, 2015 7:15 AM My usage has remained consistently high. 183 Nov 3, 2015 5:28 AM More but hate it with parking as it is. We should be back on sidewalk I do not walk along Sunset as much as I used to. I think the 184 Nov 3, 2015 12:55 AM new/temporary walkway is very dangerous to pedestrians and automobiles alike. There is not enough room to drive or walk. Please put it back the way it used to be. I have stopped using Sunset as much - it is less desirable and more 185 Nov 3, 2015 12:46 AM dangerous for all involved as temporarily configured. It is particularly dangerous to drive through, especially after dark. 97 Packet Page 289 of 391 1 /28/2016 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 Before the installation I walked on the east side on the street, enjoying both the view of the water and also the lovely landscaping in front of the homes. I also enjoyed taking a slow drive down Sunset Ave. when coming home at the end of a long day. Now the view can only be seen by pedestrians on the west side of the street, not from the east side, and driving down Sunset Ave. is a joke. 0 Nov 2, 2015 8:58 PM 0 I'm curious - now that the home owners who pay such high taxes to live on Sunset Ave have lost value in their homes, how will they be compensated? Their resale value has been drastically affected. Also, now that their resale value is less and their view drastically reduced/affected, will their taxes go down? How would you feel if someone destroyed your home's value and didn't compensate you for it? Before - everyday 0 Nov 2, 2015 6:33 PM After - no longer using space as my dog can't handle the closeness of the parking, cars, people, etc. Nov 2, 2015 3:09 AM i walk on sunset every day with my beautiful golden retriever Used Sunset more after the temporary walkway was installed. I walk Nov 1, 2015 8:45 PM mainly at the Marina, but enjoy Sunset as a change. Parking set up is bad news. it hasn't changed0 0 Nov 1, 2015 5:36 AM an escape from city life, in the city0 0 sometimes just walk along the walkway, other times sit in the car and enjoy being there Oct 31, 2015 9:08 PM I live on 2nd ave and use it more than several times a day - both before and after installation. Oct 31, 2015 8:58 PM The Same. We walk on Sunset much more frequently since Sept. 2014. It is now much safer and more enjoyable for pedestrians. The existing eastern Oct 31, 2015 4:44 PM edge 4 ft. wide sidewalk is much too narrow to accommodate the growing volume of pedestrians, baby strollers, and dog walkers during much of the week. We were constantly forced to walk in the street to allow older people, strollers and dog walkers to remain on the sidewalk before the temporary walkway was installed. We used to walk in the street before the temporary walkway was Oct 31, 2015 3:16 PM installed. Obviously, the best views are on the water side of the street. Please improve it. Before I used it more often. I used to walk on the sidewalk, but with cars pushed out by the temporary walkway, it now feels cramped. 195 Oct 31, 2015 1:17 PM Sunset is a residential street with limited capacity, it cannot accommodate a sidewalk (for residents), a pathway (for visitors) and separate parking for residents and visitors! Something's gotta give and I'd vote to eliminate parking except to accommodate residents. 98 Packet Page 290 of 391 1 /28/2016 196 Oct 31, 2015 3:55 AM I liked the old way 197 Oct 31, 2015 2:10 AM I walk on the sidewalk on the east side of the street 198 Oct 31, 2015 12:26 AM I avoid it because it is unsafe and ugly. Should have been left as originally configured. I would bike the waterfront 3 times a week in addition to walking but 199 Oct 30, 2015 6:33 PM now avoid biking do to increased danger. As a walker, I still use it 3 times a week and love the extra space. 200 Oct 30, 2015 6:29 PM We had always used the sidewalk on the East side of the street, but now that the walkway was striped, we are there much more often. 201 Oct 30, 2015 6:22 PM Walking and driving frequently during the week before and after only less desirable after. 202 Oct 30, 2015 5:28 PM No change. It is much nicer after the improvement. It is perfect and needs NO improvement. 203 Oct 30, 2015 4:01 PM The same but I have the feeling an accident could happen easily. 204 Oct 30, 2015 2:39 PM Same but now less desireable 205 Oct 29, 2015 10:15 PM Walk the same amount, but often had to walk out into the street due to inadequate sidewalk before had the walkway. 206 Oct 29, 2015 8:27 PM When I walk on Sunset, I walk on the sidewalk! 207 Oct 29, 2015 7:57 PM I walk the circuit several times a week around sunset time, often with my daughter's dog Walk on both the pathway and sidewalk. Usually south on the sidewalk 208 Oct 29, 2015 6:01 PM and north on the pathway - feel uncomfortable walking toward the cars with people staring at the walkers. Before installation, we often had to walk in the street because the sidewalks weren't wide enough for more than two people. I tripped and 209 Oct 29, 2015 12:31 AM fell once because of uneven pavement, as did my sister-in-law, even though we are both in good physical 0 condition. With the new walkway, we can walk next to the Sound, and sharing the walkway with many people (and dogs) is no problem. 210 Oct 28, 2015 7:39 PM Evening walks 3-4 times a week and drive/park about one time a week- -both before and after installation. 211 Oct 28, 2015 7:05 PM I try to walk there at least once a week, before and after and I love it the way it is now, much safer! 212 Oct 28, 2015 6:54 PM Now we walk on west side of street. 213 Oct 28, 2015 6:21 PM much more since the installation 99 Packet Page 291 of 391 1 /28/2016 I have walked Sunset for 40+ years (average 2-5 times per week), walking on the sidewalk. (more level, feel safer.)0 214 Oct 28, 2015 5:10 PM I do not use the "temporary" designed walkway.0 I do not use the angle parking.0 Before it had some issues, but was enjoyable. Now I do not like it. It is 215 Oct 28, 2015 4:48 AM cramped and aesthetically unpleasing. Parking should be removed, with the exception of a few handicap spots remaining. We don't go to Sunset as much as we use to because we don't like 216 Oct 28, 2015 1:45 AM parking in the middle of the street and we don't feel safe walking in front of all the parked cars. Why is the North end wide open with no parking? Change Sunset back to what it was please. 217 Oct 28, 2015 1:14 AM I no longer use Sunset, but I used to. 218 Oct 27, 2015 10:42 PM Didn't change my habits. 219 Oct 27, 2015 10:18 PM frequent before seldom after We walked on the sidewalks and the outer lane to avoid dogs/crowds. 220 Oct 27, 2015 10:00 PM Now with the walkway, we tend to walk in the walkway over the sidewalks only during the day. At night we walk the sidewalks.0 221 Oct 27, 2015 8:57 PM Walk several times weekly before and after My usage is the same however it is more difficult because of the angled parking. Especially when there is a large vehicle parked there. 222 Oct 27, 2015 7:23 PM I don't think 20mph is safe. I go 10-15mph max. I also worry that a kid will suddenly shoot out into the traffic lane from between parked vehicles.0 223 Oct 27, 2015 7:11 PM HATE they it is now. It was never broken why do you people mess with things that work. 224 Oct 27, 2015 6:32 PM I love the new walkway and it should be made permenant. It is much more practical than the way it used to be. 225 Oct 27, 2015 6:27 PM Used daily before walkway was painted. Avoid Sunset completely since then. We drive in sunset weekly and my husband runs on it regularly. Same 226 Oct 27, 2015 6:20 PM usage before and after. I just don't enjoy the drive time ere now because I am busy navigating the road. 227 Oct 27, 2015 5:56 PM Same as before. Before - walked by a few times, felt uncomfortable, drove through. 228 Oct 27, 2015 5:50 PM After - walk regularly, bike through sometimes, occasionally park, take friends there, very enjoyable to meet people & watch sunsets, stroll along wondering how I'm so blessed to live in an awesome place. 229 Oct 27, 2015 4:38 PM I am a runner and use it a few times/week 100 Packet Page 292 of 391 1 /28/2016 230 Oct 27, 2015 4:24 PM same, but safer and more enjoyable now! 231 Oct 27, 2015 4:02 PM I still walk on the other side of the street. With the ridiculous parking system and high cost, this project was never necessary. I find now I enjoy the views and can walk without having to watch the sidewalk to avoid driveways and other hazards. I also enjoy the view 232 Oct 27, 2015 1:37 PM more. Before I tended to look in the houses and gardens when I walked on the sidewalk. There is also enough room to easily pass other pedestrians without having to stop to let them pass. 233 Oct 27, 2015 4:05 AM About the same usage, usually as a pedestrian. The muddy embankment and the almost private sidewalk prior to the 234 Oct 27, 2015 4:01 AM improvements made Sunset inaccessible. More improvements means greater accessibility for everyone. 235 Oct 27, 2015 2:52 AM I walk by myself and I also walk our 10 lb dog. Nothing has changed except one must be more careful with your animal and vehicle. 236 Oct 27, 2015 1:29 AM Use the side walk. After use the path and park the car 237 Oct 27, 2015 12:14 AM About the same but it's safer now 238 Oct 27, 2015 12:04 AM We walk our dog there daily, before and after the temporeary walkway addition/ 239 Oct 26, 2015 11:36 PM The same usage, but now it looks "cluttered" and not the natural way it was. Too much parking, cars are too much of a focus on the street We walk our dog several times a week along this route, and have done 240 Oct 26, 2015 11:21 PM so before and after the temporary walkway installation. It is a much nicer experience for pedestrians since the walkway went in. My usage is about the same. It is part of my daily walk. I usually walk 241 Oct 26, 2015 11:10 PM on the sidewalk as I enjoy the lovely gardens I pass as well as the view, when I can see past the cars. I occasionally walk on the westside, newly marked path, but find it unpleasant, crowded and ugly. 242 Oct 26, 2015 9:42 PM MUCH more use after installation... plus I have noticed much more use by others with canes, walkers, baby strollers, and in general. safer, more enjoyable walks with pavement for footing on the west side 243 Oct 26, 2015 9:04 PM of the street. It enjoys more usage and extends the beach walking path the full length of the public beach area Walk area frequently. Love being on the water side. Angled parking is 244 Oct 26, 2015 8:36 PM awkward with no separation with pedestrians, but not a problem when driving. Drive area frequently. It is never really super busy with cars or bicycles. 245 Oct 26, 2015 8:32 PM I used to go several times/week but find it difficult to use now. 101 Packet Page 293 of 391 1 /28/2016 Prior to the installation I walked our dog on Sunset perhaps two or three times a week. Walking on the west side in the dirt/grass was not feasible during the winter and traffic seemed to move faster than it 246 Oct 26, 2015 8:27 PM should have for a residential street. The sidewalk was the only choice and with the continuous construction of homes along the street, many times the sidewalk was blocked. After the Pathway was installed I now walk Sunset daily, rain or shine. Traffic has slowed, there are no obstructions for pedestrians, and with the great view of our waterfront it is a really pleasant walk, no matter what the weather. I used to frequently park on Sunset and occasionally walk along the trail. Now it is so dangerous to back out of sight -limited angled parking that I have only visited sunset twice. Very dangerous! I back out VERRRY SLOOOWLY thinking any accidents can be avoided because 247 Oct 26, 2015 8:22 PM there is no longer a wide street to maneuver around cars backing out at the last minute. Pity now if it's a bicycle instead of a passing car. No longer pleasant to sit and eat food or ice cream purchased in Edmonds and watch the ferries and the water view because I think about having to back out. Businesses should note it has stopped my purchases in Edmonds stores catering to visitors! We have walked the new walkway numerous times since it was built. It 248 Oct 26, 2015 8:14 PM is a pleasure to see so many people in walkers, canes, toddlers and children in strollers utilize this walkway, which is significantly safer than the sidewalk, which requires crossing blind driveways and streets 249 Oct 26, 2015 6:10 PM Walking route I used to park frequently on Sunset, but after the remodel, parking is inadequate and limited. It is also difficult to park with a longer vehicle 250 Oct 26, 2015 4:22 PM (pickup truck) like mine. Don't like the new set up at all. I do walk the walking portion at times but because of parking, don't really use that facility much anymore...... which is a shame. 251 Oct 26, 2015 1:49 PM Sometimes use the new path. Still use the sidewalk on the east side of Sunset 252 Oct 26, 2015 1:49 PM It seems like I see more walkers and others using this space!! Love to see lots of residents and visitors out enjoying the space and scenery. Love this walkway. Use a walker and the path that was there before 253 Oct 26, 2015 6:56 AM was very difficult to navigate. Now I am able to enjoy this scenic walk as often as I like. So nice! Before: I stumbled along the uneven path, hoping to not fall. Now: I'm thrilled with the width and quality of the path -- as long as there are NO 254 Oct 26, 2015 1:23 AM bicycles right ON the path. (Earlier in my life I was hit and knocked down by a bicyclist;( That type of accident can cause extensive damage to an older person!) 255 Oct 26, 2015 12:49 AM I used it more before the improvement. I rarely use it now. 102 Packet Page 294 of 391 1 /28/2016 I usually use the sidewalk, but have occasionally tried out the walkway. 256 Oct 26, 2015 12:25 AM When driving I've wanted to stop and use the parallel parking spaces, but they were all in use. I won't use the angled spaces anymore. They are too dangerous! 257 Oct 25, 2015 11:27 PM It was very easy to walk, bike, drive with the original plan. The new plan looks like some parking is in the middle of the street. Before the installation our walking group walked on the sidewalk on the 258 Oct 25, 2015 11:22 PM opposite side as the temporary walkway. Since it's installation, we walk on the walkway, not the sidewalk. 259 Oct 25, 2015 10:42 PM I use the walkway several times each week both before and after the new configuration. 260 Oct 25, 2015 9:10 PM It is more comfortable walking as the old path was a bit hazardous. 261 Oct 25, 2015 8:01 PM Use less often use to drive along Sunset -avoid now because of narrow roadway- 262 Oct 25, 2015 7:48 PM unsafe with cars backing out who cannot see you -can't enjoy water at all -to busy making sure someone doesn't back up into you! Much prefer our former Sunset!! 263 Oct 25, 2015 4:05 PM Since there is more room to walk, several of us walk it together more often than before the changes. Seldom used "path" due to unsafe walking paths... sidewalk walking limited space and feel of a water view stroll. Now we enjoy coming down to the walkway ... to stroll at a leisurely pace and not worrying 264 Oct 25, 2015 4:02 PM about twisting a knee or ankle. A fun place to meet and greet other walkers. Love the added parking too .... as it provides a wonderful view of the Salish Sea even in during inclement weather. Prior parking was limited... I rarely used sunset before as it was very hard to navigate with a stroller. It is know my FAVORITE place to go for a walk in edmonds 265 Oct 25, 2015 2:34 PM and I use it regularly. I am always recommending to others, especially visitors because of the fabulous view. Please keep or expand this wonderful ammenity!! Visiting relatives we would park on the west side of the street. (Before walkway installed) 0 266 Oct 25, 2015 5:19 AM Now we either park in our relatives driveway, and if another family member should come we jostle the cars around on their property as usually the parking spots allocated are taken up. I like the temporary walkway and use it several times a month for casual walk. I used the prior walkway with same frequency, but it was 267 Oct 25, 2015 4:54 AM on edge of grass and curb and was tough on ankles, and made it hard to enjoy the view (since you had to constantly look down). New walkway is wide enough to allow dogs on leash with no problems (old path was tough). 268 Oct 25, 2015 4:32 AM I walk my dog regularly and run on Sunset and have for many years. I have very mixed feelings regarding the changes to Sunset. 103 Packet Page 295 of 391 1 /28/2016 I actually parked or walked there more often before the change than 269 Oct 25, 2015 4:22 AM after. But that may have more to do with my busy schedule than anything else. 270 Oct 25, 2015 4:14 AM Parking and walking both before and after. Daily/weekly walking and cycling along Sunset and the Edmonds 271 Oct 25, 2015 3:29 AM waterfront before and after the Sunset improvements -- enjoying the improvements now and look forward to more. Love to walk Sunset and this is where the community meets. Everyone 272 Oct 25, 2015 3:25 AM should enjoy the view... This is an attractive place for visitors. Keep improving it please! 273 Oct 25, 2015 2:10 AM Walking and running, both before and after. Much easier and safer after. 274 Oct 25, 2015 1:19 AM usage once/month still the same 275 Oct 25, 2015 12:28 AM I use it regularly, 3-4 times a week for early morning walks or runs. I use it on the weekend for walks in the neighborhood. I live there. Walked on east sidewalk nearly daily. Now I use the west 276 Oct 24, 2015 10:49 PM walkway. Sidewalk is uneven and not wide enough. New path much safer! We drive it about 2-3 times a month, but have not walked on the new 277 Oct 24, 2015 10:07 PM walkway. The sidewalk has been fine for us and our dog, which we've used about 7-8 times since 9/14 My usage has not changed but my pleasure using my street certainly has. I am shocked when I turn right and travel north on Sunset Avenue 278 Oct 24, 2015 9:47 PM to find cars parked in the middle of the street! I feel like my rights have been violated because of the changes that were made in my neighborhood and on the street. There was no issue that had to be resolved, the street was enjoyable for the residents and visitors for decades before these unwanted changes took place. Previously I was waking on the sidewalk and cycling in the street. Now 279 Oct 24, 2015 9:23 PM I am walking on the new walkway and cycling in the street, cautiously because of the cars backing out of the diagonal spaces. Walking for pleasure. We often include that area when we walk 280 Oct 24, 2015 8:56 PM through town with friends, after eating at one of the restaurants, or just when we're out and about. 281 Oct 24, 2015 8:52 PM Two to three times a week. I walk sometimes 2-3 times daily along Sunset since I live on 2nd Avenue North. The new angled parking is a mess. I am surprised there are not more accidents .... I see many close calls. What was once a 282 Oct 24, 2015 8:38 PM peaceful, beautiful walk has now been destroyed. A friend told me of a Snohomish County employee who said that Sunset Avenue used to be the best street in all the county until this "temporary" pathway came in. So true!! 104 Packet Page 296 of 391 1 /28/2016 283 Oct 24, 2015 8:21 PM I use it more now than I ever have because there is the great path to walk. 284 Oct 24, 2015 7:14 PM Don't like it. Put it back to the way it was .... no need to spend any more money on this project.. It was fine as it was previously. 285 Oct 24, 2015 5:17 PM We have walked this route for many years and our usage has remained the same before and after 286 Oct 24, 2015 5:05 PM We walked every day on Sunset using the sidewalk. We would also be able to walk on to the bike lane if the sidewalk was crowded or we had to pass other pedestrians. This was more than adequate use of space. 287 Oct 24, 2015 4:51 PM same It is much easier walking than on the sidewalk. I can now walk and view the beautiful landscape without having to constantly look down at the sidewalk. I use to walk in the bike lane because I was often having 288 Oct 24, 2015 4:44 PM to go on and off the sidewalk to make room for other folks.. Now I can walk safely on the pathway. As a walker I love having a better view. I have also parked several times on the street. I haven't noticed a difference in backing out, but then I have always been cautious when backing out of a space. And before the pathway was put in sometimes there was room to park and sometimes there wasn't. 289 Oct 24, 2015 4:40 PM I walk on the sidewalk. I can see the water and I enjoy the landscaping on the east side of the street. 290 Oct 24, 2015 3:50 PM Parking to enjoy the view Before: Had to walk on the east side of Sunset on the crowded sidewalk. Couldn't appreciate the beach and near -shore view. After: 291 Oct 24, 2015 3:49 PM Lots of room to safely walk closer to the water with a better view and can make a loop by walking on the west -side and then back on the east -side (to enjoy the flowers in homeowner's yards). 292 Oct 24, 2015 3:43 PM same. occasional walks 293 Oct 24, 2015 3:41 PM Same usage - walk 2-3 times a week 294 Oct 24, 2015 3:18 PM No change. Walk the dog and photograph sunsets. I HATE IT NOW! Almost never go because it is so ugly. WAT too many 295 Oct 24, 2015 1:51 PM things going on, loved it when it was simple. Just like everything done in Edmonds it has too many people involed in the planning... but never the citizens that live and use it .... Did I mention how ugly it is? 0 Park & walk once or twice/week before, after only once month. Angled 296 Oct 24, 2015 10:47 AM Parking is too dangerous, nearly hit by car pulling out several times, drivers can't see We used to come to Sunset with our ice cream cones or coffee often, 297 Oct 24, 2015 6:47 AM at least once a week. Now we only come once a month, if that, because parking is such a problem. 105 Packet Page 297 of 391 1 /28/2016 298 Oct 24, 2015 6:09 AM I have always walked on the city sidewalk on the east side of Sunset, both before and after the installation of the walkway. 299 Oct 24, 2015 6:08 AM We used to use the east sidewalk exclusively, now we divide our walking between the two. 300 Oct 24, 2015 6:04 AM I started walking my dog on this pathway after the temporary walkway was installed. I walked a lot on the grass. Never walked on the road walkway. Sorry to say its stupid. I actually saw a man drive on it in between the curb 301 Oct 24, 2015 5:37 AM and parked cars. You people already know how people feel....... put it back the way it was, organic and easy....... Plus, add parallel parking the entire length!!!!!!!! I drove on sunset all the time before the new configuration was installed. Now I never drive there because of the danger of the cars 302 Oct 24, 2015 5:18 AM backing out of the stalls so close to the street. Also there is not enough room between the parked cars and the roadway to make driving past them safe 303 Oct 24, 2015 5:04 AM occasionally walk sunset both before and after I have only walked on it one time, otherwise I have used the sidewalk on the east side of the street or walked on the grass, either of which is 304 Oct 24, 2015 4:51 AM adequate for pedestrians. Bicycles should be on the road only as they are not safe mixed with the pedestrians on the temporary walkway of the sidewalk. 305 Oct 24, 2015 4:43 AM Continue to use daily 306 Oct 24, 2015 4:34 AM Much better now. 307 Oct 24, 2015 3:59 AM I use more now 308 Oct 24, 2015 3:48 AM Not much before often now that it is safe enough for my double jogging stroller! 309 Oct 24, 2015 3:29 AM About the same ... I walk/run almost daily We are long time residents of edmonds for almost 40 years we have always enjoyed parking on sunset to enjoy the sunset and taking photos. Now the parking is crazy with people all over the place. Hard to 310 Oct 24, 2015 3:23 AM maneuver with the angled parking and pedestrians crossing the street anytime and anyplace. Very unattractive place to go now. All we see driving north on the street are cars cars cars. The pleasant place we loved is dead 311 Oct 24, 2015 3:14 AM Walks every weekday morning; drive through at night I used to walk Sunset avenue on a regular basis and drive down the 312 Oct 24, 2015 3:06 AM avenue also to enjoy the view. The new set-up is unattractive and totally destroys the nice character of the street. Please change to the older format. 313 Oct 24, 2015 3:06 AM I love to walk this area of town with friends 106 Packet Page 298 of 391 1 /28/2016 314 Oct 24, 2015 2:49 AM No change - walk it 2x monthly; drive it 1 x monthly 315 Oct 24, 2015 2:19 AM Walking our dogs I used sunset more often before the reconstruction of the new walkway. Now we rarely use it, and as a motorist I frequently 316 Oct 24, 2015 1:40 AM encounter more pedestrians walking down the middle of the road. We do like the dog convenience stations. More trash cans near the south end would be good also. Parking should not be eliminated completely from the north end of the road. I have walked on Sunset several times a month for several years prior to the walkway. The temporary walk way has been an improvement since it is wider. I used to have to go on to the bike path on the street to get around slower walkers and people walking with prams/strollers. 317 Oct 24, 2015 1:31 AM The new walkway is much better. There are also no cracks or dips for driveways which make it easier/safer to walk or run. I use it more now. I also like to walk from the Marina park along the the marina to the Ferry/Brackett's Landing. It would be great to connect the two in a better manner than the current crosswalks at the ferry dock. 0 318 Oct 24, 2015 1:28 AM Same Have walked here almost daily for years. Love the new configuration. 319 Oct 24, 2015 1:23 AM I used to walk on the sidewalk because the trail was too narrow. I always walk on the west side now. It's lovely! I use it less... street too narrow with parking the way it is now. I don't 320 Oct 24, 2015 1:16 AM `Kant to back out of one of those spaces. Widen the sidewalk on the east a bit (I know ... $$$.)and leave the west side alone ... go back to the way it was ... it wasn't broken and you tried to fix it. Used quite often as both motorist and pedestrian, new walkway is 321 Oct 24, 2015 12:49 AM dangerous to walkers and difficult for drivers. I have had several near misses with bicycles and myself when walking drivers opening their car doors suddenly.... change it back the way it was. 322 Oct 24, 2015 12:46 AM Many times a week, walk and drive. 323 Oct 24, 2015 12:42 AM Same 324 Oct 24, 2015 12:37 AM I used it several times a week 325 Oct 24, 2015 12:35 AM I walk on the other side of the street now. It has lost its appeal for me Before the walkway, I would occasionally walk my dog along the 326 Oct 24, 2015 12:34 AM grassy part of the street. My dog has died, and I am slightly disabled so I primarily park on the street to take in the view. 327 Oct 24, 2015 12:16 AM Same use. Parking and watching a storm or a sunset. Sitting on a bench enjoying ice cream or conversation with our family. 328 Oct 24, 2015 12:13 AM Before the installation, I would always walk on the other side of the road. Now I walk on the west side of the road about 75% of the time. 107 Packet Page 299 of 391 1 /28/2016 329 Oct 23, 2015 11:49 PM Parallel Parking and viewing of Puget Sound and the bird activity It was the end of a walk my family would take up and down the 330 Oct 23, 2015 11:48 PM waterfront (to Marina Beach). Since the renovation I have walked along once or twice. It is now awkwardly crowded and strange walking in front of a row of cars with people in them. 331 Oct 23, 2015 11:45 PM I use about the same amount; sometimes for walking, most of the time running. 332 Oct 23, 2015 11:42 PM Usage same, but not as enjoyable due to all the parked cars! I drive Sunset Ave on a bi-weekly basis to take in the view as I head 333 Oct 23, 2015 11:28 PM out of the bowl. I walk the avenue once a week and am happy to use the old sidewalk. 334 Oct 23, 2015 11:19 PM About the same 335 Oct 23, 2015 11:16 PM I and it annoying to not have an actual walkway. It was difficult to walk on the dirt. More often I walked on the east side of Sunset. Except for the incident described above..) have only driven on Sunset 336 Oct 23, 2015 11:07 PM once since the re-design.0 See ABOVE for the reason, too risky. Walked it more before the addition. Though being able to walk on that 337 Oct 23, 2015 11:00 PM side is nice, it is not adequate or nice enough, should be a sidewalk. But not before you put sidewalks on 218 ST SW!!! 338 Oct 23, 2015 10:46 PM Limited 339 Oct 23, 2015 10:40 PM Much more relaxed and enjoyable, nice and wide. The old sidewalk is uneven and inconsistently landscaped -impedes movement 340 Oct 23, 2015 10:33 PM Before I walked Sunset almost every day regardless of weather, except snow days. Now I never walk there because it's so messed up 341 Oct 23, 2015 10:14 PM I do not go the Sunset Ave at all anymore. Everything that made it special for me is now gone.:( Before the walkway was installed, we used the existing sidewalk on the 342 Oct 23, 2015 10:12 PM east side of the street about 3 times weekly. After the installation we began using the temporary walkway because there is more room for passing in the walkway, there is no need to use the street for passing, and there is less chance of falling because of irregular surfaces. 343 Oct 23, 2015 10:02 PM I/we use the walkway more now because it is wider, better paved and closer to the water. About the same for walking. Sometimes I used too 344 Oct 23, 2015 9:58 PM park and look at the water for a few minutes on my way home. I don't try that anymore since it's seems0 more difficult to find an empty parking space. 345 Oct 23, 2015 9:53 PM We walk almost everyday along this path. 108 Packet Page 300 of 391 1 /28/2016 I frequently walked and/or drove along Sunset, occasionally parking briefly. It was fine. I loved meeting and greeting other walkers on the sidewalk. We were able to share. I also occasionally used the west 346 Oct 23, 2015 9:44 PM side of the street to walk or sit. Now, the crazy parking in the middle of the road seems suicidal. If more path is needed, please improve the dirt strip just a little. Couldn't it be a boardwalk? Please reinstate the road part of Sunset Avenue to its former state. 347 Oct 23, 2015 9:39 PM My husband and I would walk Sunset more often before the temporary walkway was installed. I don't enjoy walking by so many cars now. I have not really used it since it has been installed. I have always enjoyed going there to watch the trains and enjoy the beautiful 348 Oct 23, 2015 9:36 PM scenery. Since the path has been put in, the view has been decreased by a whole lot in my opinion. I would like to see the road put back in it's original form. before: sometimes daily, at least several times a week0 349 Oct 23, 2015 9:35 PM 0 after: never Before the change we used to come down there and walk multiple 350 Oct 23, 2015 9:24 PM times per week. Now with the changes I try to avoid the area for the most part and walk through maybe once per month. Walked on sidewalk but couldn't enjoy the view of the water as much, and tended to look at the houses instead. Love the new path and don't 351 Oct 23, 2015 9:22 PM know why it should be improved from what is now there. Seems money could be spent elsewhere to improve access to our beautiful waterfront! Thank you! Park at the north end and relax at on of the benches or tables with my 352 Oct 23, 2015 9:14 PM mom. We can no longer do that as she can not walk from the parking. She has a difficult time walking so she no longer is able to enjoy outside of her car. 353 Oct 23, 2015 9:03 PM before and after about the same, but prefer the new walkway and more so with improvements. 354 Oct 23, 2015 9:00 PM My wife and I walked along the sidewalk prior to the Walkway project and then continued our walking after installation. 355 Oct 23, 2015 8:41 PM Before 0. After few times a month. I walked both before and after the revisions. Both versions satisfied 356 Oct 23, 2015 8:30 PM me. It seems well balanced now - thanks for that. To take away or reduce pedestrian priority would be outrageous. Suggest you leave it alone. Thanks. 357 Oct 23, 2015 8:26 PM I use to go to Sunset Ave all the time. With the current configuration, I avoid it at all cost. The pathway is redundant. 358 Oct 23, 2015 8:16 PM Now I walk on Sunset. Before I did not. 359 Oct 23, 2015 8:12 PM I was really happy to discover it, I live in the Meadowdale area, but whenever I walk the waterfront, the farther I can go the better. :) 109 Packet Page 301 of 391 1 /28/2016 Sitting and walking around looking at trains from my warm car in the winter time and outside during the warmer months.0 After I have done more walking of it even in the cold weather and 360 Oct 23, 2015 8:10 PM mostly due to lack of parking where I want to park. 0 Additionally if there is no parking where I want to park I have driven around the block multiple time until the space becomes available or sit in car behind spot until it becomes available. I have found my walks more enjoyable since the walkway was installed. I love having the ample space on the west side of Sunset for all to enjoy. The narrow sidewalk on the east side was insufficient and 361 Oct 23, 2015 8:04 PM in my opinion, should be completely removed to allow for a wider vehicle lane. My parents live on Sunset, so I drive it regularly as well.... it is a little narrow at the angle parking area and the removal of the east sidewalk would help a lot in widening the driving surface. The majority of people don't use the east sidewalk any more anyway. 362 Oct 23, 2015 7:50 PM I continue to use it daily. My husband was on crutches: one day he was negotiating curbs and 363 Oct 23, 2015 7:44 PM uneven terrain and the next he was on the new flat surface. Much safer. Before: Used sidewalk most of the time but it was very inadequate. 364 Oct 23, 2015 7:42 PM Too narrow, especially with overgrown plants and ongoing construction obstructions. Had to walk in the street against traffic at times. New pathway a great improvement. I walked Sunset everyday and sometimes twice a day in the past. Now, it is too claustrophobic and congested. It is too much in too little 365 Oct 23, 2015 7:39 PM of space. I have had to change my walking to up in Woodway. I thought it was fine the way it was and that the pathway could have been naturalized and left for walking. I live nearby and frequently walk or bike on sunset. i use sunset even 366 Oct 23, 2015 7:29 PM more with the new walkway. the bike thing is a bit tricky, but there has not been too much bike traffic, so it's not a huge issue. 367 Oct 23, 2015 7:23 PM Love to walk, traffic seems fine. Not sure that the residents feel the same but it is the public waterfront. 368 Oct 23, 2015 7:18 PM Usage the same before and after. Several times per week - mornings and evenings0 369 Oct 23, 2015 6:55 PM Bring the grandkid and granddog and friends0 0 All folks I know really like this walkway 370 Oct 23, 2015 6:51 PM I continue to enjoy driving and occationally parking on Sunset. 371 Oct 23, 2015 6:47 PM Same as before... we live close by and walk it 3-4 times a week w/ our kids. 372 Oct 23, 2015 6:35 PM Used frequently before change.0 The change has ruined the ambience and we use it less 110 Packet Page 302 of 391 1 /28/2016 I am a daily walker from Casper to the dog park both before and after 373 Oct 23, 2015 6:35 PM the installation. I walked on the west side - on the grass and in the street - before the installation and much prefer and support the new configuration. iv been walking on sunset for more than 20 years! This new walkway is completely unessessary and has created all kinds of dangerous parking situations. It's been a waste of tax dollars. Allowing bicycles in the walking path is dangerous. The space between the sidewalk and the back end of angle parked cars is cramped. Not allowing enough safe distance for through traffic. I was driving through when a woman 374 Oct 23, 2015 6:31 PM with small children was trying to get something out of her trunk. Her children were running around next to her on the street. Had I not been going slow, it's likely i could have hit a child! Whoever designed this project is an idiot! It was perfectly fine the way it was. And why is there no parking on the north end of sunset???D Rumor has it that a resident living in the new house at the north end of sunset is th one who designed or proposed this project! Hmmm.D No parking in front of HIS house! 375 Oct 23, 2015 6:24 PM Long walks with my dogs throughout the week and visitors when they come in town 376 Oct 23, 2015 6:22 PM We use several times a week to walk between Caspers and the dog park. We love the new walkway. 377 Oct 23, 2015 6:05 PM Before the walkway in the street, I could watch birds quietly. Now dogs are tangled in my tripod legs, people are talking loudly, and inspire of the signage, I have to listen to radios or musical instruments. 378 Oct 23, 2015 5:58 PM about the same - still use the sidewalk too. 379 Oct 23, 2015 5:52 PM Park to watch sunsets. I'm unable to walk much. My wife and I walk the length of Sunset several times per week and this has not changed. Because of near constant construction that 380 Oct 23, 2015 5:41 PM closes the east side walkway, we have been forced to use the new walkway. Currently, I do not consider either walkway to be safe due to distracted and speeding drivers. Enforcement of traffic laws has been lacking. 381 Oct 23, 2015 5:35 PM Same amount, at least 3-4 times per week running and at least twice per week driving I'm an Edmonds resident since 1980. 1 run through the waterfront regularly and walk or ride bikes through the area with my children, following the same routes I followed as a boy with my parents. Sunset 382 Oct 23, 2015 5:25 PM was always part of those routes. That ended in September of 2014. We avoid the congestion on Sunset by travelling on second avenue. The current configuration is auto -centric and has ruined Sunset avenue. 383 Oct 23, 2015 5:21 PM Walked Sunset several times a week before changes. Have been there less than 1/2 dozen times since. 111 Packet Page 303 of 391 1 /28/2016 384 Oct 23, 2015 5:20 PM Same dog walking, picnicking but very hard to park near the one and only table, we need more tables. 385 Oct 23, 2015 5:18 PM Same 386 Oct 23, 2015 5:17 PM I use it about the same amount before and after the installation. 387 Oct 23, 2015 5:11 PM Same before and after Before --it was difficult to navigate and share the narrow sidewalk. Now- 388 Oct 23, 2015 5:05 PM -there is plenty of room for everyone and it's wonderful. Thank you from frequent pedestrians! I walk and run along the pathway and also park and look at the water, 389 Oct 23, 2015 4:57 PM mountains. Usage is the same now as it was before0 390 Oct 23, 2015 4:56 PM Use it more now --- easier to park. I use the temporary walkway as often as the original. The walkway 391 Oct 23, 2015 4:56 PM has been a huge improvement to walking safety and enjoyment of our special waterfront. 392 Oct 23, 2015 4:54 PM Before the change, we would use it weekly. Whether it be just driving down the road to see the view or to park and enjoy the view. Since the change, we don't use it as often because of how it is set up now. 393 Oct 23, 2015 4:53 PM Sporadic 394 Oct 23, 2015 4:51 PM We use it just the same but tend to use the walkway more than the sidewalk now. Before my family used it only for an extension on a walk or run if needed. With the increased pedestrian space, we spend more time on 395 Oct 23, 2015 4:45 PM the waterfront and intentionally incorporate it in our daily routine. Our child's stroller consumes the old sidewalk, forcing us to put our child closer to, or in the roadway to accommodate less agile pedestrians or to simply be polite to others enjoying the scenic public asset. I frequently walk my dog along Sunset. I find the new configuration 396 Oct 23, 2015 4:38 PM much safer and pleasant than the old. I use the new facilities a lot more than the old one. The previous configuration was really not safe, nor easy to use and damn dangerous. 397 Oct 23, 2015 4:37 PM I walk daily on the street for exercise and visit friends who live on the street. Same in both cases. 398 Oct 23, 2015 4:37 PM We almost never walked there before. Now we do a number of times each week.. We usually walk on the water side so we can see down to the beach. 399 Oct 23, 2015 4:32 PM Previously we used the sidewalk because the path was not walkable for us. 400 Oct 23, 2015 4:32 PM Unchanged -- I still enjoy walking on Sunset several times a month. 112 Packet Page 304 of 391 1 /28/2016 I walk on the sidewalk side most of the time. I find the cars often 401 Oct 23, 2015 4:31 PM intrude on the walkway space and the bicycles are sometimes not careful to avoid walker and dogs. 402 Oct 23, 2015 4:31 PM Almost daily I walk for about 25 minutes there. 403 Oct 23, 2015 4:25 PM Weekly 404 Oct 23, 2015 4:17 PM I use Sunset to get to and from the Sounder train. The new walkway is safer. I use it daily and it is great. It needs to be made permanent as a few 405 Oct 23, 2015 4:16 PM motorists use it for passing and for parking. Before Sept. 2014, I used the sidewalk on east side of Sunset. The new walkway is much better primarily because of the extra width and the view. 406 Oct 23, 2015 4:12 PM I used the sidewalk on the other side of the street, and I would walk on the small pathway that was provided on the other side, if possible. 407 Oct 23, 2015 4:10 PM regular walker, both with and without dog 408 Oct 23, 2015 4:10 PM Near daily walks both before and after the change. Never use the new path. 409 Oct 23, 2015 4:07 PM We walk, bike and drive on Sunset daily we live around the corner. Same usage before. I used this area more before the walkway was installed. I enjoyed 410 Oct 23, 2015 3:56 PM parking on Sunset Ave and looking out at the water. Water viewing spots are becoming more limited. Not happy with this. Used it more prior to the installation mainly because I enjoyed the 411 Oct 23, 2015 3:55 PM feeling of solitude0 as opposed to the other public spaces along the waterfront in Edmonds. 412 Oct 23, 2015 3:50 PM my usage increased when the walkway was installed 413 Oct 23, 2015 3:42 PM I walk and /or jog on this pathway daily. I am not a fan of the walkway at all. The road has become a cluster 414 Oct 23, 2015 3:42 PM and looks a mess now that the walkway is there. I do not see it as an improvement at all. have used it as an alternative route to drive home. do not use it as 415 Oct 23, 2015 3:37 PM such as it has become problematic with cars extending to far in the roadway, bikes going the wrong way and flipping you off if anything is said about obeying street signs. 416 Oct 23, 2015 3:36 PM No difference between before and after 417 Oct 23, 2015 3:33 PM walk on East side. 113 Packet Page 305 of 391 1 /28/2016 I walk on Sunset at least 1-2 times a week. I prefer to walk on the east side of the street, where there is a paved sidewalk. Also where I can stop and smell the roses in the Summer. Other pedestrians are 418 Oct 23, 2015 3:32 PM friendly, courteous and their dogs well behaved. Train noise is mitigated on the east sidewalk. Neighbors with homes along the way welcome walkers with a friendly greeting. Why change a good thing? We don't need any more cars, or additional "parking" on Sunset. Thank you. 419 Oct 23, 2015 3:29 PM It has increased. I like to walk my dogs there and the pathway helps tremendously. I would love to see it extended to 3rd Ave. It is now a safer, pedestrian friendly walkway. Not as crowded for more people to access and maneuver easier. Closer to the water. Before you had to walk in yards and the street because there was not enough room for everyone. Crossing the street to get closer to the water views could be dangerous for pedestrians and drivers without the new walkway. My husband and I use the walkway on a daily basis enjoying 420 Oct 23, 2015 3:20 PM the beautiful views, relaxing on the benches, visiting with friends, and occasionally sharing a meal. Adding more benches and tables would be nice as well as removing bikers from the path. Please keep the current configuration with some improvements. It enhances our beautiful, friendly city!0 0 Instead of walking on the sidewalk next to the homes, we walk down 421 Oct 23, 2015 3:09 PM the path. It is nicer to be closer to the water. Driving, though, has become more perilous as it is harder for drivers to see oncoming cars when backing out of the angled spots. I live in a neighborhood that is within walking distance. I still use the 422 Oct 23, 2015 3:09 PM sidewalk because I prefer to avoid cars aiming at me as they pull in to park. We know what can happen regarding the use of the gas and the brake pedals. 423 Oct 23, 2015 3:08 PM Always walk with pathway now. 424 Oct 23, 2015 3:00 PM Used it both before and after but had to walk in the dirt and mud before. About the sAmerican but feel the character of the street was taken 425 Oct 23, 2015 2:54 PM away and felt bD for the neighbors who have to deal w more people and bad it looks. Should still look like a small town area not a circus I never used it before. After it was installed I had knee surgery and 426 Oct 23, 2015 2:50 PM have used it a lot as a safe flat-ish place to walk and rehab my knee, while enjoying a stunning view!0 In the past, I walked on the sidewalk with a detour to the west side to 427 Oct 23, 2015 2:47 PM look at the view. Now I walk on the new walkway. I walk there more often now. 428 Oct 23, 2015 2:43 PM Drive sunset almost daily for the view. Occasionally park. 114 Packet Page 306 of 391 1 /28/2016 I use it more now for fitness walking but prefer that the city spend its 429 Oct 23, 2015 2:40 PM money on other sidewalk completion projects and simply repair and widen the existing sidewalk on the east side of Sunset. 430 Oct 23, 2015 2:40 PM I did not live here before the installation. 431 Oct 23, 2015 2:39 PM Walking 432 Oct 23, 2015 2:32 PM It feels safer now & I feel more comfortable walking there. I used the walkway a lot more before the temporary change. The 433 Oct 23, 2015 2:28 PM parking situation is horrible and dangerous. I also think the street is a lot more dangerous now - what with people having to back out of the angled parking spots into traffic. 434 Oct 23, 2015 2:25 PM I use it less. Very congested and unattractive. 435 Oct 23, 2015 2:13 PM bicycle before and after 436 Oct 23, 2015 2:05 PM 0 437 Oct 23, 2015 1:41 PM Minimum twice daily both before and after 438 Oct 23, 2015 1:30 PM We would walk our dog once a month and drive through once a month. 439 Oct 23, 2015 1:28 PM i use it more now since the improvments I walk Sunset on a regular basis. What I've observed since testing of the temporary walkway was installed is that more and more people are 440 Oct 23, 2015 1:28 PM supporting the project with their feet. It seems that each month, there are far more people on the west side of the street than the east side of the street. 441 Oct 23, 2015 1:22 PM Frequently before, seldom now. I detest the change.... waste of money. 442 Oct 23, 2015 1:16 PM Have parked along it several times. Walked portions of it and ridden bicycle along it several times. 443 Oct 23, 2015 1:14 PM Less 444 Oct 23, 2015 1:09 PM I have used it more. It is a well designed, enjoyable addition to the Edmonds area. 445 Oct 23, 2015 12:57 PM Used east sidewalk weekly. Use new path... never! It is the same. We walk almost daily along Sunset. I would be good 446 Oct 23, 2015 12:55 PM with the temporary walkway made permanent, or the sidewalk on the east side of the street replaced and made wider. Either way would provide a nice place for walkers. My walks on Sunset have not changed. I use it several times a week. 447 Oct 23, 2015 12:54 PM Having a wider pedestrian walkway has definitely increased the number of pedestrians, which is a wonderful thing. 448 Oct 23, 2015 12:27 PM Rarely before, more after. 115 Packet Page 307 of 391 1 /28/2016 449 Oct 23, 2015 11:44 AM I used it a couple of times a month 450 Oct 23, 2015 11:35 AM My wife and I when walking downtown Edmonds use Sunset Ave. We still walk on the existing sidewalk. 451 Oct 23, 2015 11:21 AM More likely to use now I'd drive along and wonder where to park and wondered why not a lot 452 Oct 23, 2015 11:20 AM of people and that this was odd. In So. Cal., when you own beachfront property, you have people right outside your windows. The Edmonds owners seem spoiled. Why should this stay secluded? 453 Oct 23, 2015 6:30 AM I do not use it. It was better as it was before I walk Sunset Ave frequently and frankly don't know why the sidewalk wasn't sufficient. As a resident I wonder why my tax dollars are wasted 454 Oct 23, 2015 6:14 AM on paths we don't need. I strongly object to the angled parking and feel for the homeowners whose property values have been diminished by obstruction of their views. 455 Oct 23, 2015 6:14 AM I mainly park my car along sunset either for reading, or to watch the sunset, for both before and after. I loved the simplicity of the look of Sunset before the change. it is so 456 Oct 23, 2015 6:01 AM weird, frustrating, ugly, miss -matched, nonsensical, etc. I cannot stand the way it looks, lack of flow, it totally ruins the feel of such a special street. 457 Oct 23, 2015 5:53 AM I drive down it daily. 458 Oct 23, 2015 5:36 AM Walking I wouldn't go for a sunset stroll there with me elementary and middle 459 Oct 23, 2015 5:32 AM school age children before, due to safety concern; now it is one of our favorite things to do in our lovely town. 460 Oct 23, 2015 5:05 AM Walking dogs once a week during summer months, both before and after. I have grown up in Edmonds for 40 years attended Edmonds High ... Sunset is a precious commodity ... I cruised it in the 70s took dates to it in the 80s..my grand kids now would love to see what I saw in the day.0 But there are limitations to the spaces and it is a good place just to 461 Oct 23, 2015 5:04 AM park and reflect so spaces are limited in the current situation.0 The parallel parking was a better solution.0 But it seems like money talks and the high end homes on the strip have priority over the citizens who live pain and use this area for relaxation and recreation.0 The elderly pa to there to see the water mountains and boat traffic. They paid their dues let let them use it. 116 Packet Page 308 of 391 1 /28/2016 I walk and drive on Sunset.- Before and after the Temp Installation. I think the OLD Sunset was fine. I specifically do not like the angled 462 Oct 23, 2015 4:59 AM parking. Sunset is now too narrow and congested with cars. Ideally NO parking would suit me fine. Perhaps 3 or 4 parking spaces with 15 minute time limits. No one should be allowed to park and leave their car there for unlimited time. The VIEW is the important feature. Sunset Ave is an absolute favorite of mine, and has been for years. It's where I come to think, reflect, read, and enjoy Edmonds. I think it was MUCH BETTER before this new walkway was put in. It was great to have that peace just sitting in your car with the windows down, enjoying the view... Or get out and sit on the bench. It wasn't crowded either. (Not like it has been!) If I want to walk along the water front, I do just that! I go down to Brackett's Landing, and walk from there to Marina Beach and back. That area is beautiful, well lit and a great 463 Oct 23, 2015 4:51 AM place for a walk or run anytime of day or night.0 Since the new pathway was installed, it's made traffic there terrible!! It's so difficult to maneuver in and out of the parking spaces, I hate having people walking in front of my car looking at me while I look out at the water, and I can only imagine how much the residents of the Ave hate all the traffic! I have used the walkway, and although it's nice, I would be perfectly happy walking on the sidewalk on the East side of Sunset Ave, and being able to go back to just having that peaceful place to pull up to in my car. 464 Oct 23, 2015 4:46 AM Before: we occasionally parked or walked to view water. After: avoid the area that's become an unsightly parking lot. 465 Oct 23, 2015 4:34 AM Before, occasionally. After installation about three times a week. 466 Oct 23, 2015 4:29 AM I used it the same amount before and after ... it is definitely safer and more pleasant to use after the installation! 467 Oct 23, 2015 4:26 AM The same, down there a couple of days a week. The parking set up now is disjointed. As a family, we use both the sidewalk and the temporary pathway. 468 Oct 23, 2015 4:25 AM Both seem adequate for pedestrian use. The parking however seems at time inadequate and not enforced if folks are not parking is designated spaces. 469 Oct 23, 2015 4:24 AM Prior to installment rarely, now visit and spend time & money in the city while enjoying the path on Daily basis. 470 Oct 23, 2015 4:03 AM Worked in Edmonds and go down there to park and eat my lunch and watch the water. Do the same thing now. 471 Oct 23, 2015 3:57 AM The new path is better and easier to use. 472 Oct 23, 2015 3:50 AM parking and view 473 Oct 23, 2015 3:45 AM No change. Prefer sidewalk on east side , end angle parking I am disabled and now rarely can use as a pedestrian. At times of 474 Oct 23, 2015 3:41 AM poorer health I had been able to easily look out over the water. Now the parking is further away and difficult to use. 117 Packet Page 309 of 391 1 /28/2016 475 Oct 23, 2015 3:36 AM 476 Oct 23, 2015 3:34 AM 477 Oct 23, 2015 3:31 AM 478 Oct 23, 2015 3:29 AM 479 Oct 23, 2015 3:14 AM 480 Oct 23, 2015 3:13 AM 481 Oct 23, 2015 3:10 AM 482 Oct 23, 2015 3:10 AM 483 Oct 23, 2015 3:10 AM 484 Oct 23, 2015 3:03 AM 485 Oct 23, 2015 3:01 AM I use it periodically. More during the summer months. Never. None before and several times afterwards Same amount of use, better experience since install. Same - once or twice daily. Used roadway We walk down to the waterfront 3-5 times a week. The improvements just make it easier and more pleasant for walking! I used it more before. It wasn't great but at least you could park,sit in your car and see something. Now it's so far back for parking and the path is wide. Keep the path, but return the street to the way it was before!!! PLEASE !!! Now bike on path; previously biked on narrow sidewalk or wrong way on street Remains the same -- better views with temp walkway I have walked Sunset for years; I also drive along there several times a month. Walking on the previous tiny path with all the other people and dogs was crazy. There wasn't room; yet there was so much room for the few cars in the road. The new configuration has refitted the area to more accurately fit the actual usage. I still drive Sunset, although admittedly I'm more careful than I was in the old days. That's not a bad thing!0 My usage decreased significantly since the installation of the walkway. 486 Oct 23, 2015 2:59 AM It is no longer a pleasant, relaxing place to walk. Parking is difficult and requires extra care because of the narrower street. 487 Oct 23, 2015 2:58 AM I come down to walk here about once every week or so. My routine has not changed since the installation. 488 Oct 23, 2015 2:57 AM SAME AS WE LIVE TWO BLOCKS AWAY 489 Oct 23, 2015 2:56 AM Minimal before, multiple times per week after Always use the new walk now and never the other old one on the east. 490 Oct 23, 2015 2:47 AM How about getting rid of the east walk and make the west side work even better? Much nicer to walk on west side up sunset and back on my walk 491 Oct 23, 2015 2:39 AM through Edmonds. Walk more in Summer, 2-3 times a week. Could improve the landscaping west side of path. 492 Oct 23, 2015 2:33 AM Same as after - just had to get used to being on the other side. 493 Oct 23, 2015 2:32 AM Same usage 118 Packet Page 310 of 391 1 /28/2016 494 Oct 23, 2015 2:28 AM I haven't used it much recently. When I did drive Sunset after the walkway was installed, it was not easy to figure out how to navigate it. 495 Oct 23, 2015 2:16 AM It has increased. Used sidewalk before and parked all along street where allowed. It 496 Oct 23, 2015 2:11 AM worked well. See no need to spend money on this project when there are so many other needs 497 Oct 23, 2015 2:00 AM My usage has not changed 498 Oct 23, 2015 1:55 AM almost side -swiped by wrong way drivers and all most run into angle - parking backups 499 Oct 23, 2015 1:51 AM Frequently walked then and now Before the installation, I used to walk my dog on the grassy area and sometimes across on the sidewalk; she died in 2013 so I had stopped 500 Oct 23, 2015 1:45 AM this pattern before the new installation. I also used to come down and park if there was a space, and I would either walk or sit and enjoy the scenery and fresh air. And sometimes I would walk over from my two- day -a -week office at 3rd and Bell. 501 Oct 23, 2015 1:28 AM I hate it. It makes me very crabby. 502 Oct 23, 2015 1:27 AM Would have to walk on roadway prior to install of walkway. After install walked in safer portion of walkway away from traffic 503 Oct 23, 2015 1:21 AM I walk there almost daily and it's such a weird configuration. Walk the path. And also take the road home. Think the stacked parking 504 Oct 23, 2015 1:14 AM angled at front is too hard for drivers to back out of. Also Still waiting for an understanding of the special treatment of some homeowners over others. We rarely visit since the installation. We used to park our car at least 505 Oct 23, 2015 1:11 AM once a week but no longer; it is too much of a hassle and frankly, the whole avenue is now an eyesore. 506 Oct 23, 2015 1:09 AM I only have been a resident for a few months, I walk it and drive it. It now is much like this survey, not adequate. 507 Oct 23, 2015 1:08 AM Hate it. Dangerous to drive behind the angle parked vehicles. 508 Oct 23, 2015 1:07 AM Same as before, 2-3 times a week, year around, for 30-60 minutes. 509 Oct 23, 2015 1:07 AM Husband and I go down to watch sunsets and cruise ships. Throughout the year. 510 Oct 23, 2015 12:58 AM Used to include it on my daily walks but no longer do that. 511 Oct 23, 2015 12:55 AM We use the walkway abou 3+ times a week. We prefer the walkway over the previous set up. 512 Oct 23, 2015 12:50 AM No change. Tend to walk on east side of street. 119 Packet Page 311 of 391 1 /28/2016 I rarely walked along Sunset prior to the installation of the temporary 513 Oct 23, 2015 12:45 AM walkway, due to the muddy path on the west side of the street and the more limited views on the east side of the street. Now I walk it several times a week. 514 Oct 23, 2015 12:29 AM Much greater usage after the change. Love love love the new walkway! 515 Oct 23, 2015 12:28 AM Waked four or five day a week. Weather permitting I have walked the new path at least twice a week. 1 516 Oct 23, 2015 12:18 AM didn't walk the sidewalk because I feel it is a trip hazard. I would walk on the edge of the street about twice a month. 517 Oct 23, 2015 12:16 AM I use it more, we have been a few times to enjoy the view 518 Oct 23, 2015 12:13 AM I used it almost daily before and after. it was difficult before and crowded before, now we can all share the space nicely. 519 Oct 23, 2015 12:05 AM My usage continued the same -several times a month. 520 Oct 23, 2015 12:05 AM I would stop and park(parallel) after grocery shopping or a visit to the library. If a nice sunny day I would walk. 521 Oct 23, 2015 12:03 AM I use the walkway to walk our sons dog .... I do this several times a year. I absolutely love the changes. It feels safer. 522 Oct 22, 2015 11:59 PM My partner and I go park and enjoy the view several times a month. Before, we seldom drove down the ave. 523 Oct 22, 2015 11:58 PM Often before but substantially more after the installation. Regularly walk my dog along the path. 524 Oct 22, 2015 11:54 PM Walk several times a month before and after install 525 Oct 22, 2015 11:51 PM No change 526 Oct 22, 2015 11:50 PM I walk on the sidewalk. So happy to have safe and easy access on the west side of subset. Really showcases what a beautiful asset (the waterfront/ views) we 527 Oct 22, 2015 11:48 PM have in edmonds for everyone to enjoy. Angled parking lets older less agile have the perfect view from their car while I still enjoy the view on my walk. 528 Oct 22, 2015 11:47 PM Walk there several times a week. Temporary walkway makes it easier to walk. I'm an Edmonds resident and have been retired for almost 9 years- 1 529 Oct 22, 2015 11:34 PM love the waterfront for the serenity and view --I walk and bicycle there -- Photographs of Sunsets --I park and read and visit with numerous others who do the same-- 120 Packet Page 312 of 391 1 /28/2016 I still use the sidewalk as opposed to the walkway. Interesting that I usually see more people on sidewalk than walkway. Before, Sunset 530 Oct 22, 2015 11:26 PM was for everyone, the elderly could park and sit on a bench near their car if walking was a problem. Now that opportunity is open to just a few. 0 My husband and I have lived here in Edmonds for 19 years and use to 531 Oct 22, 2015 11:25 PM `Valk routinely with our boys, who are now mid and late teens. We now walk our dogs. We have also, on occasion just parked to enjoy the setting while eating lunch. 532 Oct 22, 2015 11:24 PM I used it once before, none after. I prefer brackets landing. 533 Oct 22, 2015 11:24 PM I walk every day for exercise and enjoyment. 0 Used sidewalk and was very hard to manage with driveways, uneven 534 Oct 22, 2015 11:20 PM concrete and bikes. The new one is so much better being smooth, easy to walk and removed from traffic. 535 Oct 22, 2015 11:15 PM my usage is the same. My husband and I use it to run on when we go to downtown Edmonds and do a 4 mile run 536 Oct 22, 2015 11:05 PM My usage has increased since the improvement. I use it less frequently. But I would like to see it made permanent for only pedestrians and the parking reconfigured. What was wrong with 537 Oct 22, 2015 11:01 PM the parking on the north end? Did some residents not like cars parked in front of their home? So unfair for parking to exist at one end and not the other. Hmm. 538 Oct 22, 2015 11:01 PM Have stopped visiting Sunset due to TEMPORARY change. Highly discouraged with current walkway and set up. 539 Oct 22, 2015 10:54 PM I just moved to Edmonds this year so did not use it before. 540 Oct 22, 2015 10:52 PM Hate using it since the changes were made - just not safe! 541 Oct 22, 2015 10:51 PM Not wheelchair friendly 542 Oct 22, 2015 10:45 PM I have walked my dogs there before and after the changes. Frankly, I preferred the experience more before the changes were made 543 Oct 22, 2015 10:43 PM Walk frequently. Same before and after. 544 Oct 22, 2015 10:42 PM I try to walk in that area 3 or 4 times a week. I find I've used it much more after the installation as it is a much more pleasant experience. 545 Oct 22, 2015 10:39 PM I used it often before and still use it often. 546 Oct 22, 2015 10:26 PM about the same 121 Packet Page 313 of 391 1 /28/2016 Before the walkway I parked there regularly to look at birds. I rarely go 547 Oct 22, 2015 10:23 PM there since the walkway was installed, due to limited parallel parking. Much of the available parallel parking is occupied by construction related vehicles on week days. I was able to walk easily on the old path. The new one works. The 548 Oct 22, 2015 10:21 PM parking however, is dangerous and the change was NOT an improvement. 549 Oct 22, 2015 10:18 PM Used sidewalk before. Now use waterside new path This path is part of my daily walk or run. I appreciate the safety of 550 Oct 22, 2015 10:12 PM having a level surface with plenty of space around me. I don't appreciate bicyclists on this pathway. They interfere with my feeling of safety, especially when it is dark. I would only infrequently use the narrow dirt path to walk my dog 551 Oct 22, 2015 10:12 PM waiting for the ferry. Now my family uses it as a destination after walking through the port along the water. 552 Oct 22, 2015 9:59 PM I walk more since he temp. install. 553 Oct 22, 2015 9:56 PM Usage was higher before the changes. 554 Oct 22, 2015 9:50 PM Probably the same. The difference is now when I walk on the north side of the street, I'm not walking in mud. 555 Oct 22, 2015 9:47 PM We use it much more since the improvements were made. 556 Oct 22, 2015 9:25 PM No change. Like it better now though. Before the walkway was installed on the West side of the road I rarely 557 Oct 22, 2015 9:22 PM used Sunset Ave. Since the walkway was installed I use the walkway at least 1 to 2 times a week. 558 Oct 22, 2015 9:20 PM About the same. 559 Oct 22, 2015 9:15 PM I use it as often now as I did before the installation. 560 Oct 22, 2015 9:07 PM We drive by and look at the view. The walkway is a distraction. 561 Oct 22, 2015 9:04 PM Frequency unchanged; I tend to use the walkway rather than the sidewalk most of the time. 562 Oct 22, 2015 8:50 PM 10 times as much 563 Oct 22, 2015 8:39 PM Using it more after the installation. Old path was uneven, narrow and hazardous. Love the new path! 564 Oct 22, 2015 8:33 PM Avoided the walkway before, walk it regularly now 565 Oct 22, 2015 8:25 PM 2-3 Times a week after. Two times a month before. Great improvement!! 566 Oct 22, 2015 8:23 PM More usage 567 Oct 22, 2015 8:21 PM My usage is the same, but I enjoyed the walk more before. 122 Packet Page 314 of 391 1 /28/2016 568 Oct 22, 2015 8:20 PM About the same. Much better with new layout. 569 Oct 22, 2015 8:15 PM I drive down it about twice a month. Oe a month I park and enjo the view. 570 Oct 22, 2015 8:14 PM Regularly 571 Oct 22, 2015 8:14 PM Didn't walk on it much due to rough terrain and mud 572 Oct 22, 2015 8:12 PM No change in usage. 2-3 times per week 573 Oct 22, 2015 8:11 PM Have used about twice as much since installation thAn I did prior 574 Oct 22, 2015 8:10 PM I use the new walkway more than the old one because it seems safer for pedestrians. I also like the view of the water. Before the installation I would bring visitors down to watch the sunset 575 Oct 22, 2015 8:07 PM while parked in the angled parking. Afterwards I stopped using it for this purpose and find it puzzling that the city would eliminate parking spaces in a popular spot. I walk my dog(s) through Edmonds and on Sunset several times/week, 576 Oct 22, 2015 8:03 PM and have done so for 38 years of residence. I still prefer to walk on the sidewalk on the east side of the road. 577 Oct 22, 2015 8:02 PM Rarely I used the pathway several times a month in the old format. The new format is trying to make something like a mixed -used Green Lake- 578 Oct 22, 2015 7:56 PM esque experience. Bicyclists have plenty of other alternatives -keep this pedestrian exclusive so children can enjoy time without fear of bikes hitting them. I use it the same, but it feels a lot safer to me as a pedistrian. I use to 579 Oct 22, 2015 7:55 PM walk my dog in the bike lane since there wasn't a lot of room to walk on the skinny eastside walkway with my wife and another dog. 580 Oct 22, 2015 7:51 PM We walk it a couple times a week now and previously. 581 Oct 22, 2015 7:49 PM I use it daily now as I did before. It is more convenient now. 582 Oct 22, 2015 7:41 PM It used to be a nice drive along Sunset. Now I have no desire to go there. Occasional walker both before and after the change. Appreciate the 583 Oct 22, 2015 7:40 PM opportunity to walk on side of the street nearest the water, but widening the existing sidewalk on the east side should be considered if the cost is lower. 584 Oct 22, 2015 7:39 PM Walking 585 Oct 22, 2015 7:39 PM Used it more before installation. I have and will continue to use Sunset on an almost daily basis. It will 586 Oct 22, 2015 7:37 PM be even better when the year long sidewalk closure is complete and the western path is complete. Thanks. 123 Packet Page 315 of 391 1 /28/2016 I used to enjoy walking on sunset prior to the installation of the temporary walkway and the new angled parking. Now I find the configuration difficult to negotiate - I cross the street multiple times to navigate foot traffic - instead of just stepping off the sidewalk onto the 587 Oct 22, 2015 7:36 PM former east -side walkway. Additionally, I've had 3 instances where I've had to jump off the west -side walkway onto the grass as cars veer into the walkway to park; prior to realizing that it's not marked out for parking. As a driver, I now park a block or two away from Sunset because I find the angle parking difficult to navigate when backing out in a tight space and having to be aware of oncoming traffic. Living nearby I walked Sunset almost every day before installation and 588 Oct 22, 2015 7:35 PM continue to do so. It is such a better path than before; not the obstacles that sometimes happen on the sidewalk ( driveways, construction - seems to be a lot right now on Sunset ). Prior to the re -striping we came occasionally to watch the sunset especially in winter, parked the car and watched or got out and sat to watch.0 After the striping we do the same thing on rainy days but on days of 589 Oct 22, 2015 7:35 PM good weather we tend to drive there, look for parking, then drive to the park south of the marina or other cities parks. Due to the change in character of the street (larger houses replacing the Edmonds -size houses) we have been going to Lake Ballinger park more often. A more developed walkway would no change our use of the area but additional parking would allow us to use it more often. 590 Oct 22, 2015 7:34 PM Walk/jog for exercise 3-4 times/week using this stretch to enjoy the view. 591 Oct 22, 2015 7:28 PM Limited 592 Oct 22, 2015 7:28 PM I walk Sunset several times a week with friends. We prefer to walk on the original sidewalk, not the temporary walkway. 593 Oct 22, 2015 7:27 PM my usage of the walkway hasn't changed. although the area does seem more congested now, and less appealing. I use it basically the same: walking on the west side of the street. 1 594 Oct 22, 2015 7:16 PM very much appreciate that I'm no longer walking on a sometimes - muddy, always uneven path like before. Thank you! I walked both prefer wider west side walkway. Before sidewalks too 595 Oct 22, 2015 7:11 PM narrow and uneven. 0 596 Oct 22, 2015 7:07 PM I don't use it! I am afraid someone might not stop and hit me. 597 Oct 22, 2015 7:03 PM At least once a week, sometimes more 598 Oct 22, 2015 6:55 PM Less frequent due to less parking spots, lack of access to north end of street and dificulty of angled parking. I live a couple miles from Sunset so dependent on availability of parking to enjoy the view and scenery. 599 Oct 22, 2015 6:51 PM Same. No change. 124 Packet Page 316 of 391 1 /28/2016 600 Oct 22, 2015 6:49 PM Walk and run along sunset frequently. daily usage before. now only occasionally. it is a disaster and an affront to all edmonds. if the city wants to do this, then take the measures to remove the sidewalk on the west side of sunset, (which the city already admits will be part of a greater plan if the pathway on 601 Oct 22, 2015 6:48 PM the west side goes forward) or return it to what it was. it is clearly politics and annoying to citizens to see the echelbargers place on the north end of sunset now has no parking in front of their remodeled home but had it before. clearly there is a bias in the redesign to favor some homeowners and not others. 602 Oct 22, 2015 6:45 PM About the same. Since there is a sidewalk, I see no reason to add a walkway. I first moved to Edmonds in 1969 & Sunset was a Mess for many 603 Oct 22, 2015 6:44 PM reasons. It was fixed and your project is flawed & gives the appearance of favoritisim. Before I drove it at least once a day, and I enjoyed it. Now it is a nuisance, it visually is awful, and it has detracted from my ability to 604 Oct 22, 2015 6:36 PM enjoy the view. I wouldn't take my dog down there to walk now. Too confused and too many bikes, trikes, and strollers along with other dogs on leashes. It is a mess. The public process for the "temporary walkway" was and is a mess. The "getting information" after it was put in place has now become this kind of survey. It is pitiful. Get rid of it. 605 Oct 22, 2015 6:31 PM Probably the same Before the installation, my wife and I avoided this area like the plague. 606 Oct 22, 2015 6:27 PM I've got MS so it was difficult to walk in the uneven dirt and enjoy the beautiful views at the same time. I've used it quite frequently since the improvements. I often walk with my wife and two young children down the sunset, my 607 Oct 22, 2015 6:21 PM usage has not changed but my concern that my children my trip or get hurt has decreased greatly. 608 Oct 22, 2015 6:21 PM Before - hardly ever. After - at least 2-3 times a week and increasing as I become more retired. I use this walkway the same amount as before it was constructed. I personally dont like the cars so close to the walkway, lots of people sit in the cars and smoke, I hate breathing in their smoke while I run with 609 Oct 22, 2015 6:20 PM my stroller. also the crosswalk owards casters is bad ... first. most cars don't stop for me while I am waiting to cross. I do t use the parking there but imagine it is difficult to reverse into oncoming traffic, especially since most of the drivers parked I have seen in the morning are elderly. In the last year I have been a pedestrian on the lower part of Sunset numerous times, and have driven on the street only several times. 1 610 Oct 22, 2015 6:18 PM find its current incarnation, with various forms of parking and the bike path appearing and disappearing from specific locations along the street to be confusing. 611 Oct 22, 2015 6:10 PM Convoluted. Seems more congested. 125 Packet Page 317 of 391 1 /28/2016 612 Oct 22, 2015 6:06 PM Sunset was fine before it was messed with. Looks and functions very awkwardly now. 613 Oct 22, 2015 6:04 PM walked multiple times a week now I won't walk there at all. someone really screwed up big time. 614 Oct 22, 2015 6:03 PM Same, we regularly walk down from our home. 615 Oct 22, 2015 6:03 PM The same 616 Oct 22, 2015 6:02 PM I used it almost daily but now with parking changes I don't use it as often 617 Oct 22, 2015 6:01 PM None. Didn't know about it. I didn't walk on Sunset Ave prior to the installation of the walkway. My husband and I frequently enjoy the "temporary" walkway. As indicated 618 Oct 22, 2015 6:01 PM in question #5, we use the walkway several times per week when we are in town. It provides a means for people of all abilities (i.e. people in wheelchairs, parents pushing strollers and regular walkers like us. I am sick and tired of those people who complain about the project. 619 Oct 22, 2015 5:59 PM Much harder to cross sunset at high traffic times, people cannot seem to understand where to park also. 620 Oct 22, 2015 5:59 PM I walk for exercise and I enjoy walking on Sunset on a daily basis I am a runner, and very rarely do I use the temporary walkway. When 1 621 Oct 22, 2015 5:54 PM enter Sunset, I enter from the north and continue to use the sidewalk. If I am going to continue my run to the beach, then there are times when I do use the temporary pathway, but not all of the time. I used it much more before the changes occurred. The whole street is 622 Oct 22, 2015 5:51 PM extremely dangerous now, unless you confine yourself to the sidewalk on the east side of the street. The new configuration is also unsightly. Put Sunset back the way it was! I travel Sunset frequently to get to Cary Road and also to a friend that lives on Sunset by the angled parking. It is very difficult to get in and 623 Oct 22, 2015 5:50 PM out of their driveway now. The awkward placement of the few parking places at the north end of Sunset are difficult to navigate. Also there isn't enough parking on the north end. My wife and I are residents of Edmonds and enjoy a leisurely walk on 624 Oct 22, 2015 5:50 PM Sunset at least once a week. As enjoyable as the walks were, they are even better with the advent of the new striping and walkway. Please make it a permanent change. 625 Oct 22, 2015 5:50 PM I use it the same amount 626 Oct 22, 2015 5:49 PM I regularly jog walk n visit friends living on sunset. I love the new configuration. 627 Oct 22, 2015 5:48 PM walking, reading on benches, picnics 126 Packet Page 318 of 391 1 /28/2016 628 Oct 22, 2015 5:47 PM Same 629 Oct 22, 2015 5:47 PM I walk Sunset daily and I love having the new walkway away from the private sidewalk. 630 Oct 22, 2015 5:46 PM Drive thru now drive thru before 631 Oct 22, 2015 5:45 PM Walks with the family, running 632 Oct 22, 2015 5:44 PM Found it difficult to walk on dirt path, often used sidewalk across the street or walked in the street. 633 Oct 22, 2015 5:42 PM Always have used the sidewalk in on the East side of the street. 634 Oct 22, 2015 5:40 PM Less frequently because of hazard of angle parking, shift to 2nd now 635 Oct 22, 2015 5:39 PM About once a week. 636 Oct 22, 2015 5:39 PM Used it much more before, avoid it now. 637 Oct 22, 2015 5:24 PM My use is the same, but I feel so much more at east about the entire experience of running or walking up and down the roadway. About the same. I like the wider path now, but used to enjoy walking cb the sidewalk to smell the flowers and look at the activity. It's too bad 638 Oct 22, 2015 5:19 PM there can't be a wider sidewalk for walkers near the homes and a bike path closer to the water. I don't like walking so close to the parked vehicles. 639 Oct 22, 2015 5:00 PM I walk it 3-5 times a week.... Before and after the project 640 Oct 22, 2015 4:57 PM I used to bike Sunset as part of my commute. I now avoid it. Sharing the lane with pedestrians makes it unsafe. 641 Oct 22, 2015 4:50 PM none Use the bike lane to travel South and the roadway when riding North 642 Oct 22, 2015 4:31 PM on my bicycle in new installation,0 In old plan road against traffic on left lane riding South and on the Roadway going North on my bicycle 643 Oct 22, 2015 5:22 AM Not much. Have been away 644 Oct 22, 2015 4:40 AM The temporary walkway is an improvement and I walk on Sunset Ave more often as a result. 645 Oct 22, 2015 3:02 AM Before monthly... now rarely 646 Oct 22, 2015 2:00 AM same as now 647 Oct 22, 2015 1:57 AM As a resident it makes it much more challenging to drive and park now. 127 Packet Page 319 of 391 1 /28/2016 We love the new multi -use walkway. If more street width is needed, consider removing the planting strip on the East side of the street. 648 Oct 22, 2015 1:56 AM Sunset owners are great about maintaining their planting strips, but they are not necessary. We do not agree with any safety arguments regarding multi -use path on Sunset. It is far safer than a sidewalk and bike lane on the East side of the street. 649 Oct 22, 2015 1:39 AM The same but I would hesitate to try to park there.0 650 Oct 22, 2015 1:37 AM Casual walker The temporary walkway and angled parking are terrible! Please 651 Oct 22, 2015 12:30 AM remove assp!! I have been within inches of being hit (both walking and in my car) when someone is backing out of one of those angled spots. Terrible design and an eyesore! I regularly visit my friends on Sunset and the parking has become a 652 Oct 22, 2015 12:18 AM nightmare. There is 1 parking spot where my friends reside and navigating south to north is perilous. 653 Oct 22, 2015 12:12 AM Mostly pedestrian. Sometimes car. Very rarely bike. 654 Oct 21, 2015 11:45 PM I regularly walk Sunset Ave. Average about 3 times a month, love walkway improved safety, enjoyment and views after 2014. Just have to be more alert now. I have reduced my usage frequency 655 Oct 21, 2015 11:41 PM and don't plan on spending more time in the area as a result of the changes. I continue to walk Sunset several days a week, however, the temporary walkway/parking situation has not improved what was 656 Oct 21, 2015 11:15 PM previously offered. I do not believe the recent changes have done anything to make Sunset more user friendly. The parking looks awkward and unsightly. I live on 2nd ave - next to sunset ave. I like the new concept and if it 657 Oct 21, 2015 11:06 PM were made nice/new/premanent it would be a great upgrade to the community The previous walkway and bike path were often congested and 658 Oct 21, 2015 11:05 PM provided limited view of the Sound which I like about the new arrangement. 128 Packet Page 320 of 391 Sunset Walkway If you would like updates regarding the Sunset Avenue Walkway Project, please enter your contact information, or contact the Project Manager directly at Answer Options Response Response Percent Count Name Email Address Number Response Date 98.2% 275 100.0% 280 answered question 280 skipped question 484 1 Dec 15, 2015 9:11 PM 2 Dec 9, 2015 7:04 PM 3 Dec 1, 2015 11:35 PM 4 Dec 1, 2015 11:14 PM 5 Nov 25, 2015 6:03 PM 6 Nov 25, 2015 3:58 PM 7 Nov 25, 2015 5:49 AM 8 Nov 25, 2015 5:11 AM 9 Nov 24, 2015 7:25 PM 10 Nov 24, 2015 2:28 AM 11 Nov 22, 2015 9:40 PM 12 Nov 22, 2015 5:19 AM 13 Nov 21, 2015 4:40 AM 14 Nov 21, 2015 2:04 AM 15 Nov 17, 2015 4:46 AM 16 Nov 16, 2015 8:22 PM 17 Nov 16, 2015 6:59 PM 18 Nov 14, 2015 11:16 PM 19 Nov 14, 2015 7:47 AM 20 Nov 14, 2015 4:29 AM 21 Nov 14, 2015 3:53 AM 22 Nov 14, 2015 12:41 AM 23 Nov 13, 2015 9:36 PM 24 Nov 13, 2015 9:28 PM 25 Nov 13, 2015 9:03 PM 26 Nov 13, 2015 8:58 PM 27 Nov 13, 2015 7:35 AM 28 Nov 13, 2015 5:39 AM 29 Nov 13, 2015 5:36 AM 30 Nov 13, 2015 5:06 AM 31 Nov 13, 2015 4:58 AM 32 Nov 13, 2015 4:47 AM 33 Nov 13, 2015 4:04 AM 34 Nov 13, 2015 4:03 AM 35 Nov 13, 2015 3:07 AM 36 Nov 13, 2015 2:44 AM 37 Nov 13, 2015 1:28 AM 38 Nov 13, 2015 1:12 AM 39 Nov 12, 2015 11:32 PM 40 Nov 12, 2015 11:26 PM 41 Nov 12, 2015 11:19 PM 42 Nov 12, 2015 11:14 PM 43 Nov 12, 2015 9:58 PM Name Categories Email Categorie Address s WA! m net im Packet Page 321 of 391 44 Nov 12, 2015 9:33 PM 45 Nov 12, 2015 9:33 PM 46 Nov 12, 2015 9:24 PM 47 Nov 12, 2015 9:10 PM 48 Nov 12, 2015 8:54 PM 49 Nov 12, 2015 8:54 PM 50 Nov 12, 2015 8:51 PM 51 Nov 12, 2015 7:50 PM 52 Nov 12, 2015 7:46 PM 53 Nov 12, 2015 7:35 PM 54 Nov 12, 2015 7:23 PM 55 Nov 12, 2015 7:15 PM 56 Nov 12, 2015 6:56 PM 57 Nov 12, 2015 6:40 PM 58 Nov 12, 2015 6:38 PM 59 Nov 12, 2015 6:36 PM 60 Nov 12, 2015 6:24 PM 61 Nov 12, 2015 6:22 PM 62 Nov 12, 2015 6:20 PM 63 Nov 12, 2015 6:16 PM 64 Nov 12, 2015 6:13 PM 65 Nov 12, 2015 5:51 PM 66 Nov 12, 2015 5:41 PM 67 Nov 12, 2015 5:35 PM 68 Nov 11, 2015 10:22 PM 69 Nov 10, 2015 7:30 PM 70 Nov 9, 2015 5:20 AM 71 Nov 9, 2015 3:56 AM 72 Nov 8, 2015 10:19 PM 73 Nov 7, 2015 5:15 PM 74 Nov 7, 2015 8:13 AM 75 Nov 7, 2015 2:16 AM 76 Nov 6, 2015 5:16 AM 77 Nov 5, 2015 2:45 AM 78 Nov 3, 2015 8:03 PM 79 Nov 3, 2015 7:15 AM 80 Nov 2, 2015 8:58 PM 81 Nov 1, 2015 5:36 AM 82 Oct 31, 2015 9:08 PM 83 Oct 31, 2015 8:58 PM 84 Oct 31, 2015 4:44 PM 85 Oct 31, 2015 3:16 PM 86 Oct 31, 2015 1:17 PM 87 Oct 31, 2015 3:55 AM 88 Oct 31, 2015 2:10 AM 89 Oct 31, 2015 12:26 AM 90 Oct 30, 2015 6:29 PM 91 Oct 30, 2015 5:28 PM 92 Oct 29, 2015 10:15 PM 93 Oct 29, 2015 8:27 PM 94 Oct 29, 2015 12:31 AM 95 Oct 28, 2015 7:39 PM 96 Oct 28, 2015 5:10 PM 97 Oct 28, 2015 1:45 AM 98 Oct 27, 2015 7:23 PM 99 Oct 27, 2015 6:32 PM 100 Oct 27, 2015 5:56 PM 101 Oct 27, 2015 5:50 PM Packet Page 322 of 391 102 Oct 27, 2015 2:52 AM 103 Oct 27, 2015 1:29 AM 104 Oct 26, 2015 11:36 PM 105 Oct 26, 2015 11:21 PM 106 Oct 26, 2015 11:10 PM 107 Oct 26, 2015 8:36 PM 108 Oct 26, 2015 8:32 PM 109 Oct 26, 2015 8:27 PM 110 Oct 26, 2015 8:14 PM 111 Oct 26, 2015 6:10 PM 112 Oct 26, 2015 4:22 PM 113 Oct 26, 2015 1:49 PM 114 Oct 26, 2015 6:56 AM 115 Oct 26, 2015 12:49 AM 116 Oct 25, 2015 10:42 PM 117 Oct 25, 2015 9:10 PM 118 Oct 25, 2015 5:23 PM 119 Oct 25, 2015 5:19 AM 120 Oct 25, 2015 4:54 AM 121 Oct 25, 2015 4:22 AM 122 Oct 25, 2015 3:29 AM 123 Oct 25, 2015 1:19 AM 124 Oct 25, 2015 12:28 AM 125 Oct 24, 2015 10:49 PM 126 Oct 24, 2015 9:47 PM 127 Oct 24, 2015 9:23 PM 128 Oct 24, 2015 8:56 PM 129 Oct 24, 2015 5:17 PM 130 Oct 24, 2015 5:05 PM 131 Oct 24, 2015 4:51 PM 132 Oct 24, 2015 3:49 PM 133 Oct 24, 2015 10:47 AM 134 Oct 24, 2015 6:47 AM 135 Oct 24, 2015 6:09 AM 136 Oct 24, 2015 6:04 AM 137 Oct 24, 2015 5:18 AM 138 Oct 24, 2015 5:04 AM 139 Oct 24, 2015 3:14 AM 140 Oct 24, 2015 3:06 AM 141 Oct 24, 2015 1:40 AM 142 Oct 24, 2015 12:46 AM 143 Oct 24, 2015 12:37 AM 144 Oct 24, 2015 12:13 AM 145 Oct 24, 2015 12:08 AM 146 Oct 23, 2015 11:49 PM 147 Oct 23, 2015 11:45 PM 148 Oct 23, 2015 11:28 PM 149 Oct 23, 2015 11:19 PM 150 Oct 23, 2015 11:16 PM 151 Oct 23, 2015 11:07 PM 152 Oct 23, 2015 10:46 PM 153 Oct 23, 2015 10:14 PM 154 Oct 23, 2015 10:12 PM 155 Oct 23, 2015 9:58 PM 156 Oct 23, 2015 9:44 PM 157 Oct 23, 2015 9:39 PM 158 Oct 23, 2015 9:24 PM 159 Oct 23, 2015 9:22 PM Ti T Packet Page 323 of 391 160 Oct 23, 2015 9:14 PM 161 Oct 23, 2015 8:41 PM 162 Oct 23, 2015 8:30 PM 163 Oct 23, 2015 8:16 PM 164 Oct 23, 2015 8:12 PM 165 Oct 23, 2015 8:04 PM 166 Oct 23, 2015 7:50 PM 167 Oct 23, 2015 7:44 PM 168 Oct 23, 2015 7:42 PM 169 Oct 23, 2015 7:39 PM 170 Oct 23, 2015 7:29 PM 171 Oct 23, 2015 6:51 PM 172 Oct 23, 2015 6:35 PM 173 Oct 23, 2015 6:35 PM 174 Oct 23, 2015 6:31 PM 175 Oct 23, 2015 6:24 PM 176 Oct 23, 2015 5:41 PM 177 Oct 23, 2015 5:35 PM 178 Oct 23, 2015 5:34 PM 179 Oct 23, 2015 5:25 PM 180 Oct 23, 2015 5:21 PM 181 Oct 23, 2015 5:11 PM 182 Oct 23, 2015 5:04 PM 183 Oct 23, 2015 4:56 PM 184 Oct 23, 2015 4:54 PM 185 Oct 23, 2015 4:51 PM 186 Oct 23, 2015 4:45 PM 187 Oct 23, 2015 4:38 PM 188 Oct 23, 2015 4:37 PM 189 Oct 23, 2015 4:32 PM 190 Oct 23, 2015 4:25 PM 191 Oct 23, 2015 4:17 PM 192 Oct 23, 2015 4:16 PM 193 Oct 23, 2015 4:07 PM 194 Oct 23, 2015 3:42 PM 195 Oct 23, 2015 3:37 PM 196 Oct 23, 2015 3:20 PM 197 Oct 23, 2015 3:09 PM 198 Oct 23, 2015 3:09 PM 199 Oct 23, 2015 2:50 PM 200 Oct 23, 2015 2:47 PM 201 Oct 23, 2015 2:13 PM 202 Oct 23, 2015 1:41 PM 203 Oct 23, 2015 1:28 PM 204 Oct 23, 2015 1:08 PM 205 Oct 23, 2015 12:54 PM 206 Oct 23, 2015 11:35 AM 207 Oct 23, 2015 11:20 AM 208 Oct 23, 2015 11:01 AM 209 Oct 23, 2015 6:14 AM 210 Oct 23, 2015 6:01 AM 211 Oct 23, 2015 5:32 AM 212 Oct 23, 2015 4:51 AM 213 Oct 23, 2015 4:46 AM 214 Oct 23, 2015 4:34 AM 215 Oct 23, 2015 4:29 AM 216 Oct 23, 2015 4:25 AM 217 Oct 23, 2015 4:24 AM Packet Page 324 of 391 218 Oct 23, 2015 4:20 AM 219 Oct 23, 2015 4:03 AM 220 Oct 23, 2015 3:57 AM 221 Oct 23, 2015 3:50 AM 222 Oct 23, 2015 3:34 AM 223 Oct 23, 2015 3:01 AM 224 Oct 23, 2015 2:47 AM 225 Oct 23, 2015 2:39 AM 226 Oct 23, 2015 2:16 AM 227 Oct 23, 2015 2:00 AM 228 Oct 23, 2015 1:55 AM 229 Oct 23, 2015 1:28 AM 230 Oct 23, 2015 1:09 AM 231 Oct 23, 2015 12:58 AM 232 Oct 23, 2015 12:55 AM 233 Oct 23, 2015 12:18 AM 234 Oct 23, 2015 12:03 AM 235 Oct 22, 2015 11:58 PM 236 Oct 22, 2015 11:34 PM 237 Oct 22, 2015 11:26 PM 238 Oct 22, 2015 11:24 PM 239 Oct 22, 2015 11:05 PM 240 Oct 22, 2015 11:03 PM 241 Oct 22, 2015 10:51 PM 242 Oct 22, 2015 10:45 PM 243 Oct 22, 2015 10:42 PM 244 Oct 22, 2015 10:21 PM 245 Oct 22, 2015 10:18 PM 246 Oct 22, 2015 9:15 PM 247 Oct 22, 2015 8:39 PM 248 Oct 22, 2015 8:16 PM 249 Oct 22, 2015 8:15 PM 250 Oct 22, 2015 8:12 PM 251 Oct 22, 2015 7:55 PM 252 Oct 22, 2015 7:36 PM 253 Oct 22, 2015 7:35 PM 254 Oct 22, 2015 7:16 PM 255 Oct 22, 2015 7:03 PM 256 Oct 22, 2015 6:55 PM 257 Oct 22, 2015 6:51 PM 258 Oct 22, 2015 6:48 PM 259 Oct 22, 2015 6:21 PM 260 Oct 22, 2015 6:20 PM 261 Oct 22, 2015 6:01 PM 262 Oct 22, 2015 6:01 PM 263 Oct 22, 2015 5:50 PM 264 Oct 22, 2015 5:50 PM 265 Oct 22, 2015 5:39 PM 266 Oct 22, 2015 5:24 PM 267 Oct 22, 2015 5:19 PM 268 Oct 22, 2015 5:00 PM 269 Oct 22, 2015 4:31 PM 270 Oct 22, 2015 5:22 AM 271 Oct 22, 2015 4:40 AM 272 Oct 22, 2015 2:00 AM 273 Oct 22, 2015 1:56 AM 274 Oct 22, 2015 1:37 AM 275 Oct 22, 2015 12:12 AM .COI Packet Page 325 of 391 276 Oct 21, 2015 11.45 PM 277 Oct 21, 2015 11.41 PM 278 Oct 21, 2015 11:15 PM n 279 Oct 21, 2015 11:06 PM 3rens.org 280 Oct 21, 2015 11:05 PM Packet Page 326 of 391 1 /28/2016 This page intentionally left blank 134 Packet Page 327 of 391 1 /28/2016 Sunset Walkway Question 12: Please enter any additional comments here: Answer Options Response Count 334 answered question 334 skipped question 430 Number Response Date Response Text It is very difficult to drive on the street now! The parking spots on the northern Dec 16, 2015 6:35 AM part of the street appear to be in the middle of the road. There is very little room for cars Thank you for seeking our feedback. I commend everyone who has had the Dec 15, 2015 9:11 PM vision and fortitude to proceed with the sunset walkway improvements. Thank you! Dec 9, 2015 7:04 PM Get rid of those plants. Top trees at Bracketts Landing. I want to thank all of the friendly, prideful people that work for the city -making all of the improvements, taking care of the flowers, keeping it safe, clean, etc. 4 Dec 1, 2015 11:35 PM They all need a pat on the back for representing Edmonds in a positive way! What a complete cluster the whole new plan is. Bring back the old use. The 5 Dec 1, 2015 3:58 PM current is poorly designed and dangerous. It worked great before. Quit wasting our money. Bicycles and pedestrians successfully share many trails such as the Burke 6 Nov 29, 2015 6:11 PM Gilman/Sammamish River Trail. Everyone just needs to SHARE and not feel they are more entitled than any another user. I've commented before, and focused on the fact that this 'demonstration' has 7 Nov 27, 2015 2:06 AM changed a neighborhood into a 'park' with, apparently, more plans to increase The current parking set up is very confusing. It does not make sense to park in the middle of the lane. Out of town users are very confused by all the lane 8 Nov 26, 2015 2:49 AM markings and parking set up. Parking needs to be the entire length of Sunset Ave. 9 Nov 25, 2015 7:46 PM parking is hard for me now I'm 63 If, the walkway becomes permanent (not my choice), I strongly encourage the 10 Nov 25, 2015 6:03 PM City to install a crosswalk at the foot of Bell St. to the west side of Sunset. This project was temporary and should be discontinued. It has gone on too long and caused nothing but problems. The residents have put up with too much. There is no question here asking if it should be discontinued. It should 11 Nov 25, 2015 4:25 PM be, it was promoted as a test program and it failed. Put things back to where they were and do something useful like repairing streets. 135 Packet Page 328 of 391 1 /28/2016 12 Nov 25, 2015 5:49 AM The new sidewalk configuration is wider and seems safer to me. The grassy area on the west side of Sunset Ave has always been available for walking or jsut to sit & enjoy the view. I should stay the way it has always been ... Easy to enjoy. One last comment - All the painted stripes and diagonal 13 Nov 24, 2015 7:25 PM lines are unsightly, and confusing. Oisitors I was with to "show off Edmonds" asked what? why? - then - no parking or very little at north end of "Street" (as in for automobile use). The walkway configuration with angled parking beside it is strange. I suggest a very simple walkway on the left side, ie get rid of the mud with decorative gravel, and beautify the sidewalk on the east. Park areas, only, should be on the north end, and the south end of the walkway. Developing the walkway on 14 Nov 24, 2015 1:21 AM the west does not justify the expense. It was fine before and should not have been messed with so much. There could have been a much simpler improvement that would have satisfied more residents. The changes that have been made seem convoluted and unartistic. It feels more like an attempt to restrict automobile use than enhance pedestrian and bicycle use. The angle of the parking slots should be shallower to make 15 Nov 22, 2015 9:40 PM through traffic less risky. Anything more permanent should consider the use of the easment on the east side of the street as well as the west. This 'improvement' was a waste of money and super confusing to drivers and walkers. Please go back to a simple design. No artwork, what you like I may 16 Nov 22, 2015 5:19 AM not enjoy. No additional tables, benches keep the street fluid. I would love a longer path north. How about relocating the train and turn the tracks into a path? Get rid of all angle Parking. add some addition parallel parking along the 17 Nov 21, 2015 4:22 PM street. Make walkway a couple feet narrower Bikes should be like traffic, 1 way and on the street It seems that speed bumps along Sunset would do more to minimize traffic problems, hopefully slowing down the traffic that makes it their pathway to 18 Nov 21, 2015 4:40 AM avoid driving on 3rd. Or make Sunset local access and pedestrian only. 19 Nov 20, 2015 4:25 AM Feels so much more friendly than before the improvements. Better and safer for more people. 136 Packet Page 329 of 391 1 /28/2016 Can we improve the salmon runs, as well as add a 2-3 mile bike/walkway for exercise? The tide comes in and we just don't have a way to walk north from Main up to the park way up there. A 2-3 mile bike/walk from there would be 20 Nov 19, 2015 7:25 PM good. How about making one from the dog park all the way to the north edge of town along Railroad and Sunset Ave? Make it accessible for all who go there - and parking will be OK in train station for us weekend walkers? Thank you. 21 Nov 19, 2015 7:12 PM Huge improvement. Those people do not own the street and view. 22 Nov 19, 2015 6:41 PM Don't plant any palm trees down there. We are not california. 23 Nov 17, 2015 7:21 PM [paper survey] Street was fine prior. More Litter! The survey should be improved. For example, question #4 asks how often people use the walkway when it probably should ask how often they visit Sunset Avenue. Not all respondents will use the walkway on each visit. I use the sidewalk on the eastside of Sunset when walking. I'd prefer to park along 24 Nov 17, 2015 1:57 PM the curb when visiting via car - but can't do because of the walkway. I use the walkway only when running - because asphalt is easier on runners knees than concrete is. I prefer to run on the soil west of the curb when possible. 25 Nov 16, 2015 8:22 PM I like the improved pathway but it's not compatible with bikes. Would also recommend returning to original parking configurations Good effort but need to reduce width of pathway and not allow bikes. Also reduce visual impact of cars. Please put bikes back on the street. A better 26 Nov 16, 2015 6:59 PM walkway was needed since it wasn't ADA accessible, but wheelchairs, walkers, and mobility impaired folks don't belong on a pathway with bikes. 27 28 29 Nov 16, 2015 4:03 PM Parking on Sunset should be more evenly distributed along the street rather than having most of it on the South end. Nov 14, 2015 11:16 PM Reduce speed to 15 MPH and Paint 15 MPH on the roadway - nobody looks at the other signs ... Nov 14, 2015 7:47 AM thanks for the survey! I hope the residents on Sunset Ave have come around to seeing it's improvements. 137 Packet Page 330 of 391 1 /28/2016 30 31 32 33 34 35 Ki It would be a MAJOR setback to the quality of life along the waterfront in Edmonds if the temporary walkway is not made permanent. In the past I've been embarrassed to try to enjoy Sunset Avenue with guests because there was no continuous trail close to the water and a sidewalk too narrow to enjoy with more than one other person. I'm terribly discouraged by people who value Nov 14, 2015 3:53 AM parking more than walking along that glorious stretch of precious real estate in Edmonds. PLEASE keep this GREAT improvement that enables us to enjoy our waterfront a great deal more. So much development along the waterfront has been unfortunate, and this walkway begins to enable us to engage with the beauty of Puget Sound here in Edmonds. Speeding is frequently an issue north of the angled parking.0 Installation of a slight protective curb between the walkway path and the automotive roadway might add some margin of safety, and also discourage the occasional parking in the walkway.0 Nov 13, 2015 9:36 PM An informational sign similar to the beachfront park illustrating what you are looking at on the horizon to the west might be useful for visitors. i.e. specific Olympic peaks, entry to Admiralty Strait, Whidbey Island, etc.0 [paper survey] The street is 30' wide. When the delivery trucks, garbage trucks, emergency wehicles are present all traffic gets stopped wspecially when cars are parked on the street -- legally or illegally and many use the walkway to get around the stopped traffic. Who is paying for all of this? Has a Nov 13, 2015 9:28 PM grant been issued and for how much? Since the city considers this a seismic hazardous area on their critical area map why is the city willing to put so much money into this project? Nov 13, 2015 9:08 PM [paper survey] Nov 13, 2015 9:03 PM [paper survey] Upgrade trail west side with asphalt walkway upgrade east side. [paper survey] The sunset parking condition are dangerous - there needs to be a stop sign at the corner of Edmonds & Sunset - the sourh corner - to slow Nov 13, 2015 9:00 PM traffic. Parking limited at the north end causes congestion at the south end. Nov 13, 2015 8:59 PM [paper survey] Please do not waste any more money on this. Put back to original natural state. [paper survey] Therer are days in the summer now that there are a steady stream of cars jsut trying to park. Pedestrians walk from the walkway on the west across Sunset without looking for traffic. The former bike lane markings 37 Nov 13, 2015 8:58 PM are still visible & at times there are walkers or bikers in the former lane & cars right behind them. Basically the residents dislike the whole configuration but apparently the greater Edmonds population likes it. 138 Packet Page 331 of 391 1 /28/2016 [paper survey] Please do not mess with the present walkway. It allows many people to enjoy the view (your stated purpose). The present benches are 38 Nov 13, 2015 8:58 PM unused for 6-7 months of the year. The naturalness is a pleasure. To "beautify" or "improve" it would be not only costly but a great shame. Sunset is not a "promenade." 39 Nov 13, 2015 8:37 PM Sunset Ave does seem more crowded than before. Less room on the street. I'd run in the middle. I don't like the new walkway and how close it feels to the railroads. I would 40 Nov 13, 2015 7:06 AM prefer that the angled cars pull in closer and the walkway be by the houses. 41 Nov 13, 2015 6:22 AM Old parking was much better I believe Edmonds would benefit from more streets without motor vehicles (except access to residences and business on the street). Sunset Ave is one possibility for a pedestrian -bicycle street. Another possibility are the blocks 42 Nov 13, 2015 5:32 AM surrounding the fountain - make the sections of streets between Dayton and Bell as well as 4th Ave and 6th Ave pedestrian -bicyclist only. Thank you for your consideration and your good work. 43 Nov 13, 2015 4:03 AM Please bring sunset back to the way it was! 44 Nov 13, 2015 3:10 AM When will the temporary parking, lines, etc be removed? The city of Edmonds should think of bike safety and lanes all along the water front streets and tie in the bike routes that lead from the bike trail running along 45 Nov 13, 2015 3:07 AM 1-5 inter -urban trails. Including the Olympic View drive and 220th St. Marked Lanes? Some very bad intersections 220th and 9th (bad news). I sincerely hope you completely undo Sunset and put it back to the way it was.0 0 Also, why do only some of these questions have a place to leave a comment? 0 46 Nov 13, 2015 2:44 AM 0 Comment on question 3: Picnic tables, benches.... yes. Artwork... no. Why would you need that when the view is the art? 47 Nov 13, 2015 2:32 AM Please change Sunset back to the way it was. The new layout is very bad. Thanks. 139 Packet Page 332 of 391 1 /28/2016 [paper survey] With Sunset being changed from 3 hour to 4 hour parking it has become a parking lot. People park & unload their golf clubs or family and walk down to the ferry and the cars remained parked all day leaving people who 48 Nov 12, 2015 11:32 PM want to use the walkway without a place to park. The parking should be 2 hrs so more people can use the walkway and enjoy the view and offenders should be ticketed. Sight distance on the angle parking is a problem, and when I drive the street 1 often thing somebody will back up into my path. Also, the 20mph speed limit is 49 Nov 12, 2015 11:26 PM a must, but more enforcement is needed to crack down on speeders. 50 Nov 12, 2015 11:19 PM [paper survey] Put Sunset back the way it was. [Paper Survey] What we have now is singularly unattractive. My initial support 51 Nov 12, 2015 11:14 PM has waned as I see many problems with the parking and traffic in a residential area. 52 Nov 12, 2015 10:06 PM Make Sunset project permanent, then return south side walkway to its rightful property owners. The city owes it to all residents to redo the current plan. I'm all for change; but 53 Nov 12, 2015 9:58 PM this plan makes what had been a gorgeous stroll now a cluttered eyesore. Again, I would be hapoy to assist in your efforts. I would like the curb moved out about 6 inches to a foot and the area west of the curb made into a narrow foot path, although it get wider to the north. The 54 Nov 12, 2015 9:33 PM angled parking extended farther north, with something like 3 parking spaces and a 10-15foot space in-between. There will NEVER be 100% agreement on any design, so base it on factual 55 Nov 12, 2015 9:10 PM data/need rather than a few overly -emotional complaints. (It's the same ones complaining on just about every project/improvement.) I would like to understand what changes will be make on the Sunset walkway to make it permanent and what benefit that adds. I like the changes. It's nice to walk along the water without being separated by road and cars. Not sure what the issue is with bikes using the road. It's a one way street most of the 56 Nov 12, 2015 8:54 PM way. Bikes fall under the same rules as cars. It's a low speed limit and don't see a big issue for bikes sharing the road. Certainly safer than Olympic View Dr. where bikes share the road. 57 Nov 12, 2015 7:08 PM We're not Engineers or have knowledge of land stability -- but that is our biggest issue w/train track below! I am an 80 year Edmonds resident. Sunset Ave has always been important to 58 Nov 12, 2015 6:56 PM those who choose to relax, take a deep breath and enjoy the unobstructed view. 59 Nov 12, 2015 6:40 PM Please put it back like it was! 140 Packet Page 333 of 391 1 /28/2016 60 Nov 12, 2015 6:24 PM Please keep and improve this lovely walkway. Please take away all the angle parking, it makes it too congested and dangerous. It no longer has the small town"Edmonds kind of day" feel and 61 Nov 12, 2015 6:22 PM lifestyle. This is what we loved about Edmonds and why we moved here. 62 Nov 12, 2015 6:20 PM Thanks for a very good survey. The walkway is nice, however the angled parking, and then lack of spaces 63 Nov 12, 2015 6:16 PM further north doesn't make any sense. Parallel parking the entire way seems the way to go. Thanks for wanting feedback and conducting the survey and striving to make 64 Nov 12, 2015 6:13 PM Edmonds an even more vibrant, walkable community. It is one of the main reasons we chose to live in the area. 65 Nov 12, 2015 6:12 PM Great choice for community park. 66 Nov 12, 2015 6:08 PM I think it is fine. Much safer than a slippery dirt path. It's a little narrower but acceptable. Please do away with the walkway and angled parking and go back to the 67 Nov 12, 2015 5:51 PM scenic way it used to be. The "improvements" have ruined what was a beautiful, peaceful street that our city could be proud of. 68 Nov 12, 2015 5:41 PM Thank you for your efforts towards a successful project. I look forward to seeing an improved finished product someday! The walkway is well used on a daily basis. It is a wonderful addition to 69 Nov 11, 2015 10:22 PM Edmonds, offering residents and visitors a safe and inviting place to walk in our beautiful community. 70 Nov 11, 2015 5:18 AM It is great that this trial run was done, but there deffinately needs to be some change before a final vision happens When I turn onto Sunset I feel I have to be on extra "alert" in my vehicle as people are crossing or walking in the street, or bikes are darting around cars. 71 Nov 10, 2015 7:30 PM Getting by the angled parking makes getting to our home a stressful experience. 141 Packet Page 334 of 391 1 /28/2016 This survey did not hit the crux of the issue which is:0 1. Do you prefer the new configuration over the old configuration. My answer... No.0 2. Do you use the Sunset walkway more, less, or the same with the new configuration... My answer... (Much) Less.0 0 That said, I believe that Sunset Walkway could have been improved to enhance access on the west side and improve safety; yes, I have ideas. The 72 Nov 10, 2015 4:18 PM addition of combined bikes and pedestrians (to receive a grant) unnecessarily complicated the project from both a design and Community acceptance standpoint. It took a tranquil, open park and neighborhood (with unusual views for a City park without having to hike a hill/mountain) that served as a respite and created a congested, cluttered walkway that may compromise safety. The coupon (i.e., grant) is not worth it. Why the City was/is "married" to this project, I don't know. I understand that those who live on the waterfront don't want cars obstructing their view, or noise increased. I also see the importance of making the area 73 Nov 9, 2015 7:35 PM accessible to everyone. This walkway may make Edmonds more of a place that people love to visit, live by and work close to. I am for increased access and also beautification. I have taken pictures of parked cars in the NO Parking areas that do not allow residents to back out of there drives and see the police just drive by all the 74 Nov 9, 2015 5:20 AM illegally parked cars, What is the policy for illegal parking on Sunset? 75 Nov 9, 2015 3:56 AM It's awful and a total waste of money. 76 Nov 8, 2015 11:39 PM put it back the way it was 77 Nov 8, 2015 10:44 PM sunset ave should be put back the way it initially was. As a firefighter, the narrow roadway is a hazard, the daily glut of construction vehicles makes parking often impossible, people were coming here from 78 Nov 8, 2015 10:19 PM around the world for railroad photography but not much any more as Sunset has become so difficult, no parking near the picnic tables. Put it back the way it was. 79 Nov 8, 2015 10:06 PM The narrowing of Sunset Ave is also a safety issue for fire vehicles. If you eliminated one of the walkways you would have more space to work 80 Nov 7, 2015 9:58 PM with. The parking could be angled and separated every 15-20 cars with pods for benches. We do not need to walkways. Homeowners along sunset need the use of Sunset as we all use our streets; for parking, for backing out of driveways, and wide enough to get around 81 Nov 7, 2015 2:16 AM service trucks; and for their guests to visit without walking blocks to reach the homes. 142 Packet Page 335 of 391 1 /28/2016 82 Nov 6, 2015 5:47 AM Please change it back. Add more parking at the north end of Sunset. I recognize that a special place like Sunset needs to balance access to pedestrians and vehicles. I think widening the old dirt path into a sidewalk on the west side and returning the parking to the same as it was would give pedestrians a nice walking area on both sides of the street and allow more 83 Nov 6, 2015 4:45 AM space for vehicles and homeowners. Pedestrians should know that walking in the street is a hazard. They don't walk in the street on Main or 5th and we don't make special walkways in the street for the people who think they don't want to take the sidewalks. 84 Nov 5, 2015 8:41 PM Repair and update the sidewalk on the east side, and eliminate the temporary sidewalk now in use. The whole walkway project makes Sunset look ugly and rediculous. Where else in the world have you seen cars parked practically in the middle of the street? The slope of the walk means you have to walk on an uneven surface. 85 Nov 5, 2015 7:09 PM For an older person like myself, that is somewhat of a challenge. Why not pave the dirtpath already on the bluff, extend the curb out maybe a foot or so, and let bikes use the old bike lane on the east side of the street like they used to. "After installation" there is 1) really only paved area to walk on; 2) worry about bicycles because you can "encourage" safe biking courtesy but that isn't going to make it a reality. Common sense says that bikes and pedestrians shouldn't/don't mix (in our "me" society) and accidents do and will happen. And particularly if someone is riding their bike and trying to look at the view at the same time. Bikes should be on the street here, away from peds. And for the bikers sakes, I don't think that putting some paint on the road and calling it a bike lane despite no additional room or separation for cars and bikes, makes it one. That's just political hoo-haw of being able to say that X number of miles of bike lanes were added to a municipality. Fluff without true substance. At any rate, regarding Sunset Ave. use -- If a bicyclist wants to enjoy the view along 86 Nov 5, 2015 2:45 AM Sunset, they should get off and walk their bikes (and then I have no problem with them sharing a path if they are courteous as even walkers should be, in sharing it) until ready to resume their trip. 3) All of the angled in parked cars makes it feel like being in a parking lot. I don't like that from either side -- the W footpath, OR driving the now narrow street behind them, which at times is the best route for me to head north to get home-- hoping someone doesn't back out into my car. I typically now go even slower than the already slow posted speed so I can watch for those who aren't watching. Ambience -wise -- Before, even though there were some cars along here and there, one could feel like on a bit of a parkway with an open space feeling. If walking on the W side closest to the embankment, one had unobstructed view out towards the Sound, but also the option to occasionally turn and enjoy the colors and textures of the The space just isn't there to make changes. Leave it the way it was before instead of using tax payers money for something that still has problems. Use 87 Nov 3, 2015 9:35 PM our money in a more productive way. Plus allowing bikes on that area is BAD, accidents ready to happen. 143 Packet Page 336 of 391 1 /28/2016 I already receive email updates from Mr. Sibrel, Project Mgr. Thanks, and 88 Nov 3, 2015 8:45 PM keep them coming. They are appreciated, and I share them with friends, neighbors, other cyclists. Quit wasting money on something that has been in place for years with no 89 Nov 3, 2015 8:03 PM problems I used to live at 114 Casper st and the sidewalk worked fine back then make it a two way street again I can't enter a follow-up because I do not have an Email address. E:mail only limits access to many of us in Edmonds. I am totally against putting any more money into this project when the land does not belong to us. This is a dis- 90 Nov 3, 2015 7:42 PM service to the taxpayers. The railroad could demand access to this land at any time and we have spent money carelessly and that money cannot be retrieved. 91 Nov 3, 2015 7:25 PM Discourage parking & loitering. A walkway should be the goal, not a motorway, parking lot, ... There are people living here - it is not a park! I much prefer the walkway being on the sound side of the street as it is now. 92 Nov 3, 2015 7:15 AM Cars can still park and view but no longer monopolize the best side of the street. 93 Nov 3, 2015 1:49 AM The parking is too hard to navigate. It is dangerous for drivers and walkers, and bicycalists 94 Nov 3, 2015 12:55 AM Restore Sunset to its previous condition. 95 Nov 3, 2015 12:46 AM The City should not spend money fixing things that aren't actually broken. Temporary walk way?? really.. why didn't anyone consider putting in a real path off the road.. you know.. the one that was created by people not wanting 96 Nov 2, 2015 9:31 PM to walk in the road( it is well worn path in the grass...) Those of us who have lived in Edmonds for a long time are heart -broken over this change. The city has for some reason decided to accommodate out-of- towners and walkers, at the expense of the homeowners on Sunset Ave. I'm 97 Nov 2, 2015 8:58 PM sure that some of the new home owners on Sunset Ave now have 2nd thoughts about their very expensive purchase. We never wanted to be like Alki, we simply wanted a quiet waterfront. From a landscape standpoint, the City should have attempted to create a boardwalk and leave the parking as it was. This is a City street and now it is a 98 Nov 2, 2015 6:33 PM mess. I hate it and most of the people I know hate it. It makes the City Planners look like they have no idea what they are doing. No awards will be given for this configuration. 144 Packet Page 337 of 391 1 /28/2016 the way the parking is done currently it is hazardous and dangerous. The angle parking is so dangerous with and barely gives you room to back up from the spot. the homeowners on sunset can barely get out on one end, then on the other end it is wide open? The parallel is a joke. The parking should be returned to the way it was. There is none of the beautification the council members kept talking about.0 The use of sunset by the edmonds community is not what the general public think it is. Of course there are the people that come and go- which is great. 99 Oct 31, 2015 9:08 PM But then there are the cars (the yellow van, the red corolla) That never leave ALL day!! there are kids that park and drink with loud music at all times of the night, most all leave the cigarette butts behind, condoms, left over food. It is horrible. I have seen drug deals, and more inappropriate behavior than any one person not living here knows. It is eye opening. I never see it patrolled by the Edmonds police and I have never seen a citation been given for not following the laws!! Until you live here, you will never know. 100 Oct 31, 2015 8:58 PM The current walkway is a big improvement. The sidewalk on the east side is too narrow and unsafe. Sunset Avenue is not just another pleasant Edmonds residential street. It is a vital link in the citywide shoreline pedestrian and bicycle path system that must be protected and improved. This can be certainly be done with needed 101 Oct 31, 2015 4:44 PM permanent pathway improvements along the western edge while still accommodating the legitimate access needs of its adjacent homeowners. 102 Oct 31, 2015 3:16 PM The area has changed from just car/street usage to car/pedestrian. Please install speed bumps like in a parking lot to slow cars down. The angle parking is the #1 biggest problem to the changes that have been made. On a busy day, one weaves in and out while driving down Sunset and it's like maneuvering through a corn maze! The only way angle parking would 103 Oct 31, 2015 3:12 PM be feasible is to remove the new pedestrian walkway on the waterfront side to allow more room for parked cars and more of a straight shot for drivers commuting down Sunset. Why are only some houses views blocked, please send a answer to my email, 104 Oct 31, 2015 3:55 AM cause I can tell you why, but I want to hear how you guys justify blocking some houses and not others 105 Oct 31, 2015 12:26 AM Why does it seem as if this whole fiasco was the personal project and of a few for their benefit, without the consent of the people? 106 Oct 30, 2015 6:29 PM I am a strong supporter of the improvements on Sunset and would gladly add my voice in support! Thank you Edmonds. 145 Packet Page 338 of 391 1 /28/2016 Niemi : I like the path as it is now. Edmonds has many other problems that badly need attention but can not be funded now, such as dangerously uneven sidewalks, tree grates that are as much as 1.5" above the sidewalks in the 107 Oct 30, 2015 5:28 PM downtown area, traffic laws such as speeding and running stop signs that are not enforced, water runoff and missing speed limit signs to name a few. Enough has been spent on the Sunset project for now. I like the basic idea but there seems to be less room for cars to drive through. 108 Oct 30, 2015 4:01 PM It might be more appealing to paint the road bright green rather than yellow. It is disconcerting to have the lines all over Already on contact list. Seems like the "temporary" pathway may be adequate for some time to come and would like it to remain. Not aware of what improvements need to be added to call it permanent. Should continue to be a 109 Oct 29, 2015 10:15 PM walkway for walking and not used for picnics, extended viewing or other purposes. A few more dog waste reminders and waste cans for disposal would be welcome. Thank you for the survey. 110 Oct 29, 2015 8:27 PM Lets take care of important matters before creating new ways to spend funds. The current plan makes no sense and does not meet anyone's needs that I can see ... maybe the houses to the north ... the only improvement was to allow dogs on the water side which saves neighbors' yards. All parking needs to be 111 Oct 29, 2015 7:57 PM angled with bike lane next to sidewalk and pedestrians on the sidewalks and along the grassy strip/walkway by water. Current plan is much too confusing and ill-conceived for everyone which increases potential danger to all involved. If parking continues north of the angled parking, parking enforcement must be addressed. Both where people park and for how long. There are cars that park 112 Oct 29, 2015 6:01 PM 5 days a week, 8 hours a day - some empty, some with folks sitting in them or beside them as if it were a park. 113 Oct 29, 2015 12:31 AM The new walkway allows more people to walk along Sunset safely. This is a great addition to our city! 114 Oct 28, 2015 6:54 PM Leave walkway as is. Sadly, THESE SURVEYS ARE FATALLY FLAWED and must be discounted. There is no bar to completing the survey multiple times .... to test this I have now taken the survey twice!!!0 What a shame there were no steps taken to prohibit this. Also, the Council 115 Oct 28, 2015 6:21 PM has a duty to govern so given that most people will not take this survey, and that others may take it multiple times, the council in my humble opinion, should own the responsibility of governing and make the installation permanent for the majority of the folks in Edmonds to use. 146 Packet Page 339 of 391 1 /28/2016 It is shame that older people and others cannot enjoy one of the picnic tables or view on the north end of Sunset. Parking is just too far away. 0 More parallel parking should be allowed all along Sunset. I often see car parking in the no -parking areas which adds to the confusion.0 0 Angle parking is too dangerous. Speed limit through that area should be lower than 20mph.0 116 Oct 28, 2015 5:10 PM 0 I have yet to figure out the how the city determined the present design. I would not spend anymore money on this new, "temporary" design. I would recommend expanding the existing sidewalk, have a bike lane, move street west and have parallel parking all along Sunset. 0 I am for additional benches and picnic tables but not for "artwork, etc" (whatever that means). 117 Oct 28, 2015 4:48 AM Listen to all of the citizens. 118 Oct 27, 2015 10:18 PM this appears to be a project noone wants but satisfies a special interest We think signs should be posted for no smoking. It is awful to smell and 119 Oct 27, 2015 10:00 PM breathe in the cigar and cigarette smoke when using the walkway. The benches should be designated as NON-SMOKING SPACES. Stop with the surveys and meetings and general dithering and install the project as it was envisioned all those years ago! The vast majority of residents 120 Oct 27, 2015 8:57 PM and visitors will love it! Some residents and Council people don't want any change but most folks do as long as it has been well thought through like the walkway. 121 Oct 27, 2015 7:11 PM Please bring things back to the way it was. Not good for the residents and we are the ones paying taxes. The City Government works for their citizens. Installing this sidewalk to please 122 Oct 27, 2015 6:27 PM Lynnwood residents is not why you were elected. You need to listen to your voters, not the surrounding communities. 123 Oct 27, 2015 5:56 PM My original reaction was "tore down paradise and put up a parking lot" to quote Joni Mitchell. 124 Oct 27, 2015 4:38 PM It was so quaint before the city got involved -I have two friends who live on Sunset and it is difficult as a home owner there. 125 Oct 27, 2015 1:37 PM I love the new walkway and use it more than before I am specifically concerned that the city doesn't have any more than a one year right of way with BNRR for a major portion of Sunset Avenue. This is 126 Oct 27, 2015 12:04 AM insufficient to protect the city's financial investment in this project. 147 Packet Page 340 of 391 1 /28/2016 Edmonds City Council should have voted on this months ago and I think there is a deliberate stalling of this process, waiting for a new Council in January, 127 Oct 26, 2015 11:36 PM therefore the intent is to keep the street the way it is and impose on citizens the will of someone in the City, perhaps Mr Williams. I know that some of the residents on Sunset have been pretty worked up about the parkway and are very, very opposed to it. I think that they need to remember that the water view from Sunset is a public asset and not a private possession to be hoarded. I would have expected them to be glad to have the pedestrian & dog traffic moved from the narrow sidewalks (and lawns) 128 Oct 26, 2015 11:21 PM immediately in front of their homes and onto a purpose-built walkway across the street. I'm not sure what disastrous affects to their homes' characters (and property values) they are expecting or have attributed to the walkway, but I think they should just get over it. I have a vision for a truly improved and beautified Sunset Avenue. As the sidewalks are already in need of repair, how lovely would it be to not only refurbish them but expand them and make a true stroller's promenade? Future improvements could be the addition of downlighting for evening strolls. Think of it; people come to Edmonds to dine and then stroll along this part of our waterfront on a beautifully maintained sidewalk bordering some of Edmonds most charming homes and award winning gardens. 0 Please now contrast this with a wall of parked cars, a yellow stripe marking the safe area to walk and black asphalt as a path. I know which scenario I would think had the greater vision, use of money and artistic eye for a City known for it's art. Please don't sell us short. Sunset is now ugly, truly ugly on the west 129 Oct 26, 2015 11:10 PM side of the street. We can do better. Don't allow Sunset to be blighted by too many cars and paint on the road. Truly, it's bad enough that we allowed the cable companies to string their wares across our beautiful skies. Let's plan for a beautiful future.0 I'd also like to address the issue of handicapped parking: The South end of Sunset, south of Bell has many parallel parking spaces in an area that is wide and two-way. Please consider this area for handicapped parking. As we all try to help each other, let us work together to preserve the beauty for all of us: able bodied, handicapped, walkers and drivers. If I left anyone out, please forgive me. I meant no exclusion. Hopefully there is a mechanism for preventing more than one survey response per person! I would not put it past some of these crazy anti -sunset improvement activists to try to influence the outcome! Also, I urge the council to not base its decision entirely on these survey results since people who 130 Oct 26, 2015 9:42 PM benefit from the enhanced sunset may not be participating in this survey. The council has a responsibility to make a decision which will be beneficial to the most citizens, which in this case means improving or expanding the sunset modifications. Thank you. 148 Packet Page 341 of 391 1 /28/2016 The asphalt pavement is an improvement that enables greater enjoyment of 131 Oct 26, 2015 9:04 PM the sound and mountains attracting residents and visitors alike to the Edmonds waterfront. Would like to see the path raised on a board walk or similar with benches, parkette, art, bicycle parking spots.- a real destination vista! Sidewalk on 132 Oct 26, 2015 8:36 PM east side could now be narrower to provide more maneuvering room for backing cars. 133 Oct 26, 2015 8:32 PM Please reconfigure the parking! All of our friends have discussed the situation -- it is a constant conversation in town. I know that some residents on Sunset are against the pathway, however the waterfront is not owned by them and the public has a right to access. I think 134 Oct 26, 2015 8:27 PM this has been a great improvement and urge the City of Edmonds to make it permanent and improve it even further. Just avoided a very serious accident when car blew through 5-corners roundabout going South on 84th well over speed limit. He didn't even pause or look at me when I proceeded him to roundabout. I was on Main St. checking roundabout traffic before heading East to 212th. I've never seen cars fly through old intersection at a high rate of speed or even fail to stop. Thanks for 135 Oct 26, 2015 8:22 PM wasting over a million dollars of "free money" to make high speed accidents now possible. He was traveling so fast that sight view kept me from seeing him until I almost entered the circle. No telling where his car would have gone if he had bounced off my heavier car. Do you have a way of limiting peoples responses to this survey to one per household? I am fully in favor of the new walkway on Sunset Ave, have but noticed that a few outspoken critics are continually writing letters to the 136 Oct 26, 2015 8:14 PM Edmonds Beacon, deriding the project. What safeguards are there to prevent them from flooding this survey with their negative comments, thus skewing the results? Thank you SO MUCH for this survey! 0 137 Oct 26, 2015 1:23 AM Smart thinking and kudos to the city employee who spear -headed this way to reach the community. I don't believe the City needs a bunch of PhD's and piles of money to "study" the "problem" of usage on Sunset Ave. 1. Keep all traffic flow northbound for vehicles and bicycles. 2. Build wider sidewalks on the east and west sides of the avenue. 3. You don't need a bike path on the west side. 4. Add parking as 138 Oct 26, 2015 12:49 AM needed. 5. A few benches and bike racks where space allows, would be nice. 6. If cost is a problem, use asphalt to pave the west sidewalk. If you need any help with this project, I bill out at a very reasonable rate with a two hour minimum and lunch included, you pay for the lunch! 139 Oct 26, 2015 12:25 AM If the wlkway project could be widened, then maybe it would be safer to stop for a view and also safer to drive through for a view. 149 Packet Page 342 of 391 1 /28/2016 As a sunset ave resident I do support a walkway but the current configuration does not do this iconic street Justus. I know that we can do better. We need to 140 Oct 25, 2015 10:42 PM create cohabitation between parking walking and residents. It can be done 141 142 143 Oct 25, 2015 8:01 PM Put Sunset Avenue back the way it used to be. As always, change is difficult.... sometimes it is a good thing, adding or Oct 25, 2015 4:02 PM enhancing a situation. Other times, it does not add or enhance. This is a plus for our city and visitors. I feel the set up as it is now, with this experiment, is totally an accident waiting to happen. With the walkway being on the west side of the street, utilizing the middle of the street for parking, does not give consideration to persons living on Sunset for backing out of their driveways. Often it will take a couple of tries to avoid hitting that car or truck parked in the middle of the street! What is the consideration given in the event of a fire or for new construction, etc. A fire engine is huge, so are a lot of the dump trucks, cement trucks, etc. The street Oct 25, 2015 5:19 AM is much to narrow to justify all of this activity. It seems that there are very few people walking on the west side, most are still walking on the sidewalk in front of the homes. I don't know who's hair brained idea this was, but it, in my estimation does not make sense. 0 Then too, "handicap parking" seems to be at a premium. I noticed one towards the north end of Sunset that is all. I'd suggest putting in a permanent curb along east edge of walkway (so cars don't come on walkway) and provide parallel parking along entire length of 144 Oct 25, 2015 4:54 AM street. The walkway pavement should be changed to porous concrete or asphalt. Edmonds is viewed as a 'walking community' and this walkway promotes that view. 145 146 147 I do like the improved ability to walk there - before pedestrians often walked into the street because the space to walk was - for a lack of a better word - awkward at times. I think, for safety sake, if you keep the walkway, then you may need to switch to parallel parking and (unfortunately) lose some parking. Oct 25, 2015 4:22 AM Otherwise it feels like, due to the angled parking now being move further east, that it is less safe to back out -closer to the oncoming traffic. Maybe you also ought to consider some speed bumps to slow traffic, because speed signs don't seem to have an effect on some people. Oct 25, 2015 3:29 AM Thank you city of Edmonds staff and officials for continuing to make improvements to safe walking and biking throughout Edmonds! Oct 25, 2015 3:25 AM Want more spaces like Sunset! 150 Packet Page 343 of 391 1 /28/2016 I believe the new temporary layout of Sunset Ave is better for all pedestrians but I believe the angles parking is a real inconvenience and has the potential 148 Oct 25, 2015 1:19 AM of auto and bicycle accidents. I would like either it be located further west or eliminated. 149 150 151 152 153 Because of the failure of most people to obey the traffic laws I think it would be better and safer for everyone to disallow traffic for non-residents on Sunset. The public parking areas should be removed.0 0 Issues that are of greatest safety concerns are:0 -People speeding.0 -People driving the wrong way.0 -People parking in "No Parking" zones.0 -Limited access for emergency vehicles.0 Oct 24, 2015 9:47 PM -And Law Enforcement does little to enforce the law.0 0 It should also be noted that there have been multiple attempted break-ins and property has been stolen from residences on our street.0 0 In the event that the City of Edmonds makes the unfortunate decision to continue the public walkway and parking on Sunset, at the very least they should provide public restroom facilities. It is often that walkers use the porta- potties located at the new construction sites. I think additional benches would be fine , but not picnic benches nor art. I live Oct 24, 2015 9:23 PM the art around town, but in this setting I think art would distract from the focus of the natural, beautiful setting. Oct 24, 2015 8:56 PM The improvements are much nicer than it was before. Oct 24, 2015 8:52 PM The temporary walkway is ungainly, awkward, and unnecessary. This project has been a boondoggle from the beginning. Before anything was done, there should have been an agreement with Burlington Northern to use their property (has this even been agreed to yet??). There should have been a definite plan on how to navigate the "knuckle" at Caspers and Sunset. As far as I have heard, this hasn't been determined either. Even without these two Oct 24, 2015 8:38 PM key matters settled, the "temporary" pathway was put in without any type of procedure or criteria set to measure whether the pathway is feasible or not. If this little survey is supposed to be one of the "determining" factors whether the pathway becomes permanent or not, that is pathetic! The temporary walkway and parking situation would work if a few corrections were made. Adding additional parallel parking would benefit all. As it stands 154 Oct 24, 2015 5:05 PM now the few parking spaces available north seem to be sitting out in the middle of the road and can be very dangerous especially for newcomers to the town of Edmonds. 155 Oct 24, 2015 4:44 PM I am glad the path is there! 151 Packet Page 344 of 391 1 /28/2016 156 Oct 24, 2015 4:40 PM Leave it the way it was. Don't mess with a good thing. 157 Oct 24, 2015 3:49 PM Homeowners along Sunset Ave. SHOULD NOT have a bigger say in the final decision. 158 Oct 24, 2015 3:41 PM Sunset is a beautiful walkway and would love to see its view open without vehicles. 159 Oct 24, 2015 1:51 PM I wish it had stayed the way it was, simple, sweet and unassuming. Sunset Ave is a designated public park in Edmonds. I've heard the grapevine commentary about making it a non -parking area, and I am vehemently 160 Oct 24, 2015 6:47 AM opposed to it. The citizens of Edmonds should not have to subsidize a park for the residents of Sunset Ave. The temporary walkway has been a waste of city money and a danger to residents of Sunset Ave. I feel harassed by the City of Edmonds for pushing 161 Oct 24, 2015 6:09 AM this project on us. Previously, the bike lane on the east side of Sunset was also used by walkers and it is still used by walkers and bike riders. The line for the bike lane can still be seen. The two parking spots at the North end of sunset is rediculous. At least put in 162 Oct 24, 2015 5:18 AM parallel parking where the angled parking stops. If you can't take over the grass strip, put it back the way is use to be. 163 Oct 24, 2015 5:04 AM I think there is too much discussion and not timely action. this should have been resolved a year ago. I would eliminate the angled parking and provide staggered parallel parking the entire length of Sunset, similar to what was there originally, whether you keep the new pathway of not. I do not like to walk on the pathway with the congestion of people at times, much preferring the sidewalk on the east side of the street for that.0 n The angled parking is a safety hazard for cars backing out or when you are just driving down the street as you cannot see when backing out into the street. Even when driving slowly the potential for an accident is high due to the 164 Oct 24, 2015 4:51 AM angled parking design and limited space behind the parked cars.0 0 1 don't live on Sunset, but would be particularly unhappy if I did live on the south end with all the angled parking shoved in front of my house when the balance of the street has no parking at all. Again staggered parallel parking would be much safer and fair for all residents who live along Sunset. When I ride my bike on the roadway adjacent to the sidewalk, to avoid the congestion on the pathway, I have had several motorists shout at me that it is 165 Oct 24, 2015 4:43 AM no longer a bike lane and some even blast their horn as they pass!!! 152 Packet Page 345 of 391 1 /28/2016 166 Oct 24, 2015 4:34 AM Thank you City of Edmonds for your work on this project. Much appreciated. Whats wrong with using the existing sidewalk? Open space should be 167 Oct 24, 2015 3:23 AM cherished. The marina area is great for strolling and parking is adequate there Very hazardous driving through at night. Cars pulling out of angled parking 168 Oct 24, 2015 3:14 AM can't see well. 0 169 Oct 24, 2015 3:06 AM see above The driving lane in the section with angle -in parking is too narrow. I also see a lot of confused motorists parking along the curb on the house -side, and weaving all over the road on the north end of sunset due to lack of parking 170 Oct 24, 2015 1:40 AM lanes and markings. The street does not have a uniform plan or layout; it's erratic and for people unfamiliar with the area(read: tourists), it is confusing. 171 Oct 24, 2015 1:31 AM The new museum and businesses at Salish Landing are great - I can see connecting these with the walkway. The parking now sucks. Why do you have single random parking spaces. Bring back the parking there used to be. Not enough parking. Walkway should 172 Oct 24, 2015 1:28 AM be on the sidewalk and parking on water side. This new design does not make sense. 173 Oct 24, 2015 1:23 AM Please make it permanent and seek a bit more additional land from the railroad! Why does the parking not extend farther North on this street? How did those 174 Oct 24, 2015 1:16 AM last few houses not have THEIR view impacted? I hear this asked a lot whenever there is a discussion about Sunset. 175 Oct 24, 2015 12:37 AM the new walkway is an excellent idea! 176 Oct 24, 2015 12:35 AM This wonderful quaint street is "ugly" to walk on now. There is nothing that makes me feel welcomed on it Edmondsis a great, walkable city that encourages exploration of all it has to 177 Oct 24, 2015 12:16 AM offer: parks, beach, walking, eating, shopping and the arts. Keep up the good work! The angle parking is dangerous and difficult to navigate through. Also, backing 178 Oct 23, 2015 11:49 PM out is difficult due to the natural blind spot as oncoming vehicles are unseen. 153 Packet Page 346 of 391 1 /28/2016 This survey had no questions about changes on Caspers St. Last year the city said they agreed that not much planning had been done on the Caspers St. portion and I assume that no further planning or changes have been made. The existing sidewalk on the south side on Caspers is very close to the houses; changing or removing it will take traffic closer to those houses. Traffic appears to slow on Sunset but many vehicles speed up just as they make the turn. If more road space for driving is added on the south side of Caspers St. is 179 Oct 23, 2015 11:45 PM added speeding traffic may create a more difficult turn. Too many vehicles head westbound on Caspers, ignoring the signs until or after they see the "Wrong Way, Do Not Enter" sign; better signage should be used for the westbound traffic on Caspers; the local traffic warning does not do the job. This project would be an appropriate time to make corrections. Keep the sidewalks; maybe widen them; remove the temporary walkway; absolutely remove the angled parking; allow parallel parking the entire length 180 Oct 23, 2015 11:19 PM of Sunset. Instead of the council making the decision as to what to do with Sunset, there should be public hearings followed up with a vote of the entire community. 181 Oct 23, 2015 11:07 PM I've lived in Edmonds since 1942. I"m sure that doesn't matter, just a frame of reference.. I vote to restore the original design. 182 Oct 23, 2015 10:50 PM Widen the original sidewalk & keep the parking on the west side of the street 183 Oct 23, 2015 10:46 PM One of my favorite spots The city project has ruined what was once a wonderful part of the community, 184 Oct 23, 2015 10:33 PM available to everyone. Please put it back the way it was right away - I beg you. I really miss it 185 Oct 23, 2015 10:14 PM Thank you for taking comments from the public. We like the temporary walkway and would it to become permanent. Our only suggestions for improving it would be to (1) install a more permanent barrier between the street and the walkway and (2) move the diagonal parking spaces a few feet to the west, if possible without a major expenditure. 0 186 Oct 23, 2015 10:12 PM 0 Hats off to the city council and the public works department for their efforts with this project. Does the new walking path need to be so wide? Maybe part of it could be used 187 Oct 23, 2015 9:58 PM for a bike Iane.0 Please no more benches, picnic tables, etc. 154 Packet Page 347 of 391 1 /28/2016 Not to stuff the ballot box, but many friends I have spoken to concur with my dislike of the new configuration. There is a strong dislike for what the city has 188 Oct 23, 2015 9:44 PM done. Thank you so much for conducting a survey - many people feel this project will be foisted upon us without being given a chance to deliver a final (individual) opinion. I would like the City to reduce the number of parking spaces. I think the City should consult with the homeowners on the street for their input as to which (1) space in their direct view line should be eliminated. FYI, I don't know any 189 Oct 23, 2015 9:39 PM residents who live on Sunset, but this is what I would consider'fair' as the number of parking spaces are so heavily concentrated at the south end of the street. 190 Oct 23, 2015 9:36 PM Get rid of the path and PUT IT BACK TO THE WAY IT WAS! 191 Oct 23, 2015 9:24 PM Please change it back! Love, Love walking my dog on the new walkway nearer the water!0 And when it comes to more benches or tables, there are plenty of other areas 192 Oct 23, 2015 9:22 PM that fit that bill with great views of the water that should be explored instead of Sunset. I do not disagree with wanting to do updates down there. I just think it is only made for a few and not everyone. I have lived here 48 years and seen many 193 Oct 23, 2015 9:14 PM changes down there and this one is not user friendly at all. 194 Oct 23, 2015 8:30 PM Thanks to City staff and City Council for all you do - God Bless. 195 Oct 23, 2015 8:26 PM If anything should be done, return Sunset Ave to the way it was and make the current sidewalk a bit wider. 196 Oct 23, 2015 8:16 PM Please make the walkway on the west side of the street permanent. It is a big improvement! 197 Oct 23, 2015 8:04 PM See my answer to #10 regarding east side sidewalk removal to allow for a wider driving surface. Love the wide boardwalk on the west side Don't allow people to sit in cars with motors idling. Limit parking. Let walkers, cyclists, cars and homeowners co -exist. This works well in very populated and popular beach areas in CA. Hundreds of people walk by my house each day 198 Oct 23, 2015 7:44 PM and I accept that this is a public walkway. We should all be able to enjoy the view, not just the homeowners on Sunset. Thank you for making this change to expand the view and safety of the walkway to all in our community. 199 Oct 23, 2015 7:42 PM Keep new configuration as is and add improvements when justified. 155 Packet Page 348 of 391 1 /28/2016 I think it's great that more people can enjoy this part of Edmonds. Additional improvements would bring more traffic - and might be a time to consider 200 Oct 23, 2015 7:29 PM reducing the parking and making it more pedestrian / bike focused. 201 Oct 23, 2015 6:51 PM Restore the original driving lane, Use the existing sidewalk, or widen the existing sidewalk. 202 Oct 23, 2015 6:35 PM I would like to see it put back the way it was with the addition of some additional benches I support the walkway. But, I understand the concerns of those who see the angled parking as a problem. I suggest doing away with angled parking and add more parallel parking all the way north to Casper. I think that 5 - 10 parallel 203 Oct 23, 2015 6:35 PM places could be added north of the current diagonal parking and, then, change the current angled to parallel. iv been walking on sunset for more than 20 years! This new walkway is completely unessessary and has created all kinds of dangerous parking situations. It's been a waste of tax dollars. Allowing bicycles in the walking path is dangerous. The space between the sidewalk and the back end of angle parked cars is cramped. Not allowing enough safe distance for through traffic. I was driving through when a woman with small children was trying to get something out of her trunk. Her children were running around next to her on 204 Oct 23, 2015 6:31 PM the street. Had I not been going slow, it's likely i could have hit a child! Whoever designed this project is an idiot! It was perfectly fine the way it was. And why is there no parking on the north end of sunset???0 Rumor has it that a resident living in the new house at the north end of sunset is th one who designed or proposed this project! Hmmm.O No parking in front of HIS house! It concerns me how often the cranky squeaky wheel gets attention in Edmonds 205 Oct 23, 2015 6:24 PM and we keep kicking cans down the road with these fake controversies 206 Oct 23, 2015 6:22 PM Love, love, love the new walkway. Such an improvement over walking on the other side of the street. If you keep it the way it is now configured, you need to put in a couple of speed tables. Many motorists are speeding. Any accident is going to be on the driver backing out blind of one of these angled parking spots. That driver will 207 Oct 23, 2015 6:05 PM inevitably name the city in any subsequent lawsuit. Cheaper to just put in the speed tables now unless you return to the original configuration of this street. 208 Oct 23, 2015 5:58 PM Appreciate the efforts to improve Sunset and thanks for conducting the survey. 156 Packet Page 349 of 391 1 /28/2016 IF the temporary walkway is made permanent, there needs to be a barrier between auto traffic and pedestrians. In any case, the east side walkway needs to be improved. Ideally, I would like to see the east side walkway 209 Oct 23, 2015 5:41 PM widened, lighting moved to the west side, angled parking reconfigured and the temporary walkway developed for one-way bicycling. 210 211 212 213 214 215 Sunset Ave is a beautiful place for everyone to take in the views, walk, run, bike - this is EDMONDS! On a nice day, people are parked everywhere, traffic gets a bit heavy, cars are idling, and walkers/bikers are competing for space with autos. I feel sorry for property owners who pay very high property tax to have views obstructed by cars and so much traffic. Maybe close down traffic Oct 23, 2015 5:35 PM on weekends to give residents a break.0 Access to Sunset is one of the greatest gifts Edmonds has to offer, why not let people leisurely enjoy it instead of driving. ADA access could be in area near Rory's that is not blocking residents. Sunset avenue connects our town to the natural beauty of the Pacific Northwest. The current configuration is auto -centric and has ruined Sunset avenue. We have turned our jewel into a poorly configured parking lot! Be progressive! Encourage people to leave their cars by eliminating all parking, retaining only the northern parallel parking spots for handicap access. Redesign Sunset as a pedestrian friendly walkway that draws people into our Oct 23, 2015 5:25 PM beautiful downtown corridor.0 "To walk around a city is to experience its true essence —its soul, if you will. Your brain functions quite differently when you walk. It's good for your health, both physical and mental, and good for your fellow man, because you engage with the community you're walking among." - Scott Bricker, America Walks If I lived on Sunset I would be very upset about the changes. I've been trying Oct 23, 2015 5:21 PM to buy a house on Sunset for several years, if the changes are made permanent I would not live on Sunset. I wish getting an easement from the railroad to move the walkway west (to where the grass is) was an option. Is it? I do not think the space available for "the improvements" as laid out allow for this to be an improvement at all! I Oct 23, 2015 5:11 PM think we would be better off using the sidewalk already there (or widening the sidewalk 2 feet to make it a better walking and riding option) and making the parking more reasonable again. Thank you for asking for citizen input- I appreciate being asked! A lot of time, effort, and money was spent on this new0 Oct 23, 2015 5:05 PM walkway. Let's keep it the way it is so everyone can0 enjoy this beautiful area. Oct 23, 2015 4:56 PM I like what the City has done. The area is for ALL to enjoy. 157 Packet Page 350 of 391 1 /28/2016 This is a public asset that would be a worthwhile benefit to the community. Arguments about the projects impact on increased speeds and accidents are poorly constructed and seem to come from a selfish stance that the public asset should only be enjoyed by those that have the luxury to live on the adjacent property. As a property owner a stone's throw away from the project and a father to a new Edmonds citizen, this is a public asset that I enjoy and desire to see made safe and accessible for all existing and future generations. 216 Oct 23, 2015 4:45 PM Any cityscaping should be native and natural for the coastal environment (eliminating concerns about barriers to views, etc.) and the design should enhance the value of the asset to the public and the property owners (that are only there through the good graces of the taxpayers funding their public road access.) This is very do -able and the project has my full support. 217 Oct 23, 2015 4:38 PM Stop letting a few vocal people set the City's agendas. Keep the current configuration .................... I feel that if the walkway was redone in the way originally envisaged, if my 218 Oct 23, 2015 4:37 PM memory is right, it would raise property values and would be a great asset for the City. 219 Oct 23, 2015 4:32 PM The walkway needs to be narrower. Eliminate biking. Bikes can use the road. 220 Oct 23, 2015 4:31 PM It's a good addition to Edmonds waterfront. The current configuration is ugly; it makes the street too narrow, gives the 221 Oct 23, 2015 4:25 PM impression of disquiet and confusion to the area. It is city planning gone amok! I think that people who don't know that there's angle parking are suprised when they come down the road and see that it's angled. Also when cars are 222 Oct 23, 2015 4:12 PM driving down the road and cars, are backing up, accidents almost happen. I've almost been hit, because there is not enough room for the cars backing up into traffic. 223 Oct 23, 2015 4:10 PM This is the most ill-conceived, unsafe city project I've ever seen. Please get rid of it. 158 Packet Page 351 of 391 1 /28/2016 The biggest issue I have and it happened before the walkway several times a week and In the summer several times a day someone tries to drive the wrong way on Sunset. Most turn around on Caspers but I'm just waiting for an accident because it's a blind corner where they turn around. Maybe better signs? Before the new walkway I would always run across people in the middle of the street with dogs or skateboarding or just walking. Since the new 224 Oct 23, 2015 4:07 PM walkway I have not run across this once and I drive on Sunset up to 8 times a day. The only thing I do not like is frequently cars going under 10 miles per hour well after the angled parking which can be very frustrating. I have also noticed that people park in the walkway (I know across a double yellow) at least ones a week. So maybe more traffic control. It would be nice to have a sidewalk along the west side of Sunset Ave. but 225 Oct 23, 2015 3:55 PM formally turning it into a park, in my opinion is a bad idea and an irresponsible use of money. I have lots of scars from tripping on the stupid sidewalks and scrapping up my hands and knees. I LOVE running in the new pathway. I will lay down on it to 226 Oct 23, 2015 3:42 PM save it if I have to. Sick of the nasty homeowners who glare at people who love the pathway! 227 Oct 23, 2015 3:37 PM With existing waterfront parks and walkways, there is enough access to views and the water w/o ruining Sunset Ave. Leave the site alone -- no art work, no increase in benches... it should be left in 228 Oct 23, 2015 3:33 PM natural state not turn it into another tourist scene ... next thing - food truck!!!!! no no I have only heard positive comments about the improvements. It seems that a 229 Oct 23, 2015 3:20 PM few residents on Sunset are the loudest opponents. They are not the majority of Edmonds' citizens! Please listen to the majority,! 230 Oct 23, 2015 3:09 PM Is this a value producing/money making use of city funds? 231 Oct 23, 2015 3:00 PM Make it permanent and remove the walkways on the south side of street which I understand are in fact on private property. Thanks for the city's work on making this gem more usable. PS I enjoy a 232 Oct 23, 2015 2:47 PM bench occasionally, but I don't encourage making it into a picnic/group gathering area. And the view is enough art! 233 Oct 23, 2015 2:40 PM I would prefer only parallel parking. 234 Oct 23, 2015 2:39 PM do not like the configuration now. Preferred it the way it was. This layout does not permit adequate room for emergency vehicles. 235 Oct 23, 2015 2:33 PM the sidewalk is sufficient. Street is way too narrow with the walking path on the west side of street 159 Packet Page 352 of 391 1 /28/2016 236 Oct 23, 2015 2:32 PM I don't like the angled parking - I'd like the parallel style parking better & would like it all along Sunset Avenue. I think the whole approach to this project was not very well thought out. Were 237 Oct 23, 2015 2:28 PM the residents even consulted before this "temporary" change went into place? 238 Oct 23, 2015 1:41 PM See #9 above The only comments I hear against the project relate to the angled parking. Perhaps the parking could be parallel parking along the entire roadway 239 Oct 23, 2015 1:28 PM (leaving opening where homeowners need to access and leave their driveways) or space out the angled parking so cars can more easily observe oncoming cars driving northbound. In my opinion, complaints are coming from a few who are quite vocal. I believe 240 Oct 23, 2015 1:09 PM that many people like the Sunset pathway in the current design, but do not take the time to voice their opinion. 241 Oct 23, 2015 12:54 PM Sunset Avenue is a wonderful place to take a stroll on any Edmonds day. Please please remove the unnecessary parking! I do not support the current parking configuration along Sunset Ave. The 242 Oct 23, 2015 11:35 AM "tight" angled parking is a hazard and has no room for motorist error. 243 Oct 23, 2015 11:21 AM The sporadic parallel parking doesn't work. There should be parking along the whole length of sunset. More parallel parking should be added in the area north of the diagonal 244 Oct 23, 2015 6:14 AM parking. It can get quite crowded on certain evenings in the summer. 245 Oct 23, 2015 6:01 AM Why did it need to change in the first place? 246 Oct 23, 2015 5:36 AM I think Sunset is difficult to navigate by car and the whole thing is very awkward. Go back to how it was before this! 247 Oct 23, 2015 4:59 AM I would like to see Sunset go back to the OLD Sunset with the addition of more benches for viewing. I understand the desire for improvement, but some things are better left alone. I've always said that if I owned a house on Sunset Ave, I'd live there forever! 248 Oct 23, 2015 4:51 AM It's truly one of my favorite places ever, and I hate that going there currently just turns into a frustrating experience. Very disappointed to see what has and may happen to Sunset Ave: keep it 249 Oct 23, 2015 4:46 AM pristine, natural, simple. (As opposed to daylighting of willow creek area -- which would be spectacular, exciting and appropriate). 160 Packet Page 353 of 391 1 /28/2016 I love it. I am age 82 and live in Edmonds. The footpath is lovely for me as it is 250 Oct 23, 2015 4:34 AM level and the round trip is about the right length, the views are old server Please install no smoking signs next to all benches. It seems to be a popular 251 Oct 23, 2015 4:29 AM place for people to smoke. We have had to move because of it. The current parking, walkway and lines are confusing to drive and a hazard. 252 Oct 23, 2015 4:20 AM Shoukd have kept it as it was. The changes seem awkward and do not appear safe. Everyone should be able to enjoy Sunset Ave. People who live there knew 253 Oct 23, 2015 4:03 AM there was traffic and pedestrians when they moved there. It's part of the charm of Edmonds. The updated path is great - no changes are needed. There is no reason to add any other amenities to the area in terms of art or specialized benches. No 254 Oct 23, 2015 3:57 AM other area in a neighborhood gets that level of premium treatment. 255 Oct 23, 2015 3:10 AM Even though I'm a walker, I love to see how many people park just to enjoy the view and to find some peace! The addition of rose bushes to the west of the walkway is an odd choice. The view is the main attraction, there is no need for added "features" to enhance 256 Oct 23, 2015 2:59 AM the area. The roses have not been well maintained, and are non-native. 257 Oct 23, 2015 2:57 AM ADDING PICNIC TABLES, ART WORK WOULD BEGIN TO CLUTTER THE AREA; MORE BENCHES OKAY 258 Oct 23, 2015 2:47 AM Don't really need bike lane either with 20 mph speed limit. Bikes are as fast as cars. Make new walk wider 259 Oct 23, 2015 2:39 AM Continue on with the incremental improvements!!! It is already a permanent improvement. 260 Oct 23, 2015 2:32 AM Love the temporary improvements and hope they become permanent. YOU MUST HAVE SIGNS GUIDING PEOPLE TO PUBLIC RESTROOMS. PEOPLE URINATING AND POOPING ON OUR CONDO PROPERTY MUST 261 Oct 23, 2015 2:00 AM STOP. I have talked with the parks department and the mayor about this. please return it back to the way it was before... now it is crap and error-prone.0 0 Or block it off to all traffic and only allow non -vehicle traffic on it.0 262 Oct 23, 2015 1:55 AM 0 The railroad is NOT happy about this project! 161 Packet Page 354 of 391 1 /28/2016 I hope that the angled parking is going to be abolished as it is horribly dangerous. It is not possible to see when you back out, and I always worry 263 Oct 23, 2015 1:45 AM about hitting someone or something. Worse are the drivers who don't worry! Please remedy this awful situation. Thank you! 264 Oct 23, 2015 1:28 AM Please make the changes that will keep the street quiet and local. Respect the residents... and the visitors. You should work to level the ground on the west side where the grass is.0 0 265 Oct 23, 2015 1:21 AM Put the parking like it was before you screwed it up. Even if it is perception of favoritism it is inappropriate. Also listening to 266 Oct 23, 2015 1:14 AM residents and putting it on ballot to ensure it is not a special interest of personal relationships would demonstrate whT voters really want Having a name is completely unacceptable for a survey. Quit playing games 267 Oct 23, 2015 1:09 AM and favorites and do a proper process rather than favorits for a few. Put it back the way it was. Additionally, all parking should be angled. No parallel parking. Several groups of parallel parking areas all the way to 268 Oct 23, 2015 1:08 AM Caspers St. with clear yellow curbing for no parking areas. This allows for more parking. I think this project has been sadly mismanaged. If there had been a process similar to the marina beach/willow creek daylighting project the controversy 269 Oct 23, 2015 12:58 AM that has been so contentious could have been avoided. Very sloppy!!' 270 Oct 23, 2015 12:18 AM I hope the naysayers don't kill this project. 271 Oct 23, 2015 12:13 AM Please, no artwork on this area!!! The town is saturated with it now. It is so beautiful the way it is. 272 Oct 23, 2015 12:05 AM Thank you for asking for input. 273 Oct 23, 2015 12:05 AM I would say do not spend money on any art. The water, mountain views are the natural beauty I want to enjoy. 274 Oct 23, 2015 12:03 AM Thank you for taking the time and effort to gather our opinions. 275 Oct 22, 2015 11:58 PM I appreciate the city's forward thinking on this wonderful resource for all citizens. 276 Oct 22, 2015 11:26 PM Bring back the old Sunset and quit trying to Kirklandize Edmonds! 277 Oct 22, 2015 11:24 PM Please put the bicyclists elsewhere. 162 Packet Page 355 of 391 1 /28/2016 278 Oct 22, 2015 11:05 PM I really enjoy the improvement to the walkway, makes it easier to see the sunset while walking and I take all my visitors there to show it off. 279 Oct 22, 2015 11:01 PM I think the walkway is a great idea. Thank you for allowing input from the public. 280 Oct 22, 2015 11:01 PM We valued the walkway prior to change. It's a hot mess now!0 281 Oct 22, 2015 10:51 PM Go forward and get out of the view business. Not your job man!! Please move the paved walkway as far west as possible, remove the angled 282 Oct 22, 2015 10:45 PM parking and restore parallel parking like it was previously. That will recapture much of the ambience of the Sunset Ave experience. 283 Oct 22, 2015 10:43 PM Having a good walkway on the water side is a big improvement. The angle parking allows more users a good view. 284 Oct 22, 2015 10:42 PM I love it and can't for the life of me figure out why people complain about it. 285 Oct 22, 2015 10:26 PM Crack down on engine idling while playing with smart phone/smart device, listening to music or eating lunch. Get rid of the walkway, and return Sunset Ave to pre -walkway condition. I see about the same number of walkers on the sidewalk on the east side as on 286 Oct 22, 2015 10:23 PM walkway. I think the walkway is unnecessary and a bad idea. 287 Oct 22, 2015 10:21 PM Thank you for considering my input.0 288 Oct 22, 2015 10:18 PM I support the new changes to Sunset. This walkway is the perfect addition to the Edmonds waterfront. It is a beautiful place to walk side -by -side and hand -in -hand and to exercise in the early 289 Oct 22, 2015 10:12 PM morning before work. I appreciate Edmonds' efforts to provide accessible and safe places to walk and enjoy the lovely scenery. I especially love the roses! Thank you! 290 Oct 22, 2015 9:56 PM Thank you for having this survey. This project needs to be approved, put to bed, and not let a few noisy homeowners (with money) destroy and asset of the city. Finally, the 291 Oct 22, 2015 9:50 PM boardwalk, walkway, needs to be completed in front of the condos so we can walk from the west end to east end along the water. 292 Oct 22, 2015 9:25 PM City staff has worked hard at the development of this project and communicating about it. Good work. 293 Oct 22, 2015 9:22 PM I love it! Keep up the good work! 163 Packet Page 356 of 391 1 /28/2016 294 Oct 22, 2015 9:20 PM Much prefer being able to walk on the water side of the road. I love the concept of a "nice" Sunset, but parking on the left side is ridiculous. If all available curb space on the right side were to be used for parking, there should be ample parking most of the time. As things stand, cars frequently 295 Oct 22, 2015 9:04 PM park in unmarked spaces on the left, often making it hard for residents to exit from their driveways. If no cars were on the left, it would be easy to access all the private driveways, and folks would not park "illegally" in blocking good driveway access. 296 Oct 22, 2015 8:50 PM I see many more people with walkers and wheel chairs using the new walk way. 297 Oct 22, 2015 8:33 PM A great job on a great street! 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 Oct 22, 2015 8:15 PM I am disabled. Without the walkway there is no way for me to get out of my car an enjoy it. The terrain is unwalkable the old way Oct 22, 2015 8:12 PM I am glad to have the walkway My preference would be to return the parking to the way it was, remove the new walkway and instead widen the east sidewalk. I think it is short-sighted to Oct 22, 2015 8:03 PM build a walkway that could be removed at the railroad's whim. Oct 22, 2015 7:39 PM I believe the new temporary walkway is a big improvement from the narrow, uneven sidewalk. I really have found the new Sunset configuration to be less safe and less Oct 22, 2015 7:36 PM connected to our beautiful waterfront and community culture. The previous configuration was much more enjoyable. Thank you for this path! Even though this is called temporary, please don't Oct 22, 2015 7:35 PM take it away. Most of the opposition seems to come from the residents along Sunset. Absolutely, the most ill-conceived plan I've ever seen. I am in construction and have had required education in traffic control and design because of my work. The most ridiculous part of it all is the parallel parking/ diagonal parking/no parking then all of a sudden, parallel parking for 2 only then no parking again Oct 22, 2015 7:28 PM and then BAM, parallel parking for 2 only again. My question would be two fold: Who came up with this design disaster and who in their right mind approved it? This is the epitome of incompetent government.0 164 Packet Page 357 of 391 1 /28/2016 Thanks for asking for city-wide comments. I felt that the property owners across street were having an undue influence at council meetings toward undoing the improvements the city has made on the west side. ALSO, this is 305 Oct 22, 2015 7:16 PM an obvious place to post our city's "No Idling" signs. It gets pretty noxious in the winter months walking by the idling cars. Thanks again. 306 Oct 22, 2015 7:07 PM It was so nice before the current changes were made. Why not just level out the dirt path on the west side and leave the street like it was. As an Edmonds resident of 20 years, Sunset Ave use to be my favorite thing about living here. Sometimes things are left well enough alone, it saddens me 307 Oct 22, 2015 6:55 PM to see what has happened his last year in the name of "progress". Thank you for allowing more feedback and transparency. The concept is good, implementation was clunky. I hope that once this becomes revised and permanent, that the path goes all the way to the dog park someday. The harbour square and waterfront area is difficult to get to 308 Oct 22, 2015 6:51 PM and under utilized. A walking/biking path from Sunset to the dog park would begin to connect the spaces and people would use that path daily. 309 Oct 22, 2015 6:49 PM A permanent walkway would be a great improvement to Sunset. why are traffic and bicycle violations not being handed out down there? why 310 Oct 22, 2015 6:48 PM are people with disabled parking tags being hassled for parking on sunset for extended periods of time... 311 Oct 22, 2015 6:45 PM It was better the old way. Edmonds has been noted for successful projects . This is not one of them. 1 312 Oct 22, 2015 6:44 PM am surprised that DISABILITY ORGANISATIONS have not stopped it. Survey Monkey? Really?? Do you truly want public input or not? The City 313 Oct 22, 2015 6:36 PM spent more on the now dead plants down there, than on really evaluating that "temporary project." 314 Oct 22, 2015 6:21 PM Consider adding some overhang platforms to expand benches, tables, etc. (if safely built and railed) 315 Oct 22, 2015 6:03 PM There is way too much time and money being spent on this project. Don't we have a better use of our city's money? To me the biggest issue with the redesign is the seemingly random placement of the parking spaces (north of the new diagonal parking spaces). It's difficult 316 Oct 22, 2015 6:03 PM to know where it's safe to drive and whether the bike lane on the right hand side is still in use. Maybe this will be resolved in the permanent redesign? 165 Packet Page 358 of 391 1 /28/2016 317 Oct 22, 2015 6:02 PM Why change what wasn't broken. People are always looking to change things somethings don't need changing. I think you should go back to the parallel parking all the way down and just widen the sidewalk on the East side of Sunset to accommodate at least 4 people across with enough room for a bike lane. I hate the angled parking all at one end, it's very crowded and hard to back out most of the time. No one abides by the no parking rules during the summer time either along the 318 Oct 22, 2015 5:59 PM pathway. Time and time again on a summer evening people would be parked all the way down to the end whether it was allowed or not and I never saw anyone being ticketed or anyone patrolling that area for that reason. I just think there are other options for this than the one currently in place. I think the temporary pathway needs to be removed. I've seen elderly people with dogs have difficulty with their dogs when they start wandering toward the embankment. The old pedestrian/bike lane near the sidewalk was much 319 Oct 22, 2015 5:54 PM better, in my opinion, than the new walkway. The old parallel parking actually provided unobstructive views for the motorists. Now with the angled parking, there are always pedestrians walking in front of them. 320 Oct 22, 2015 5:50 PM Hate the new parking scheme. Heavily used by older people as a safe place to walk. Maybe put in a few more park benches, but not picnic tables or other amenities that would attract large 321 Oct 22, 2015 5:47 PM groups of people. I enjoy the solitary and peaceful aspect about it. Now, the pedestrian space is "equal"-ified with auto traffic, so much safer, thank you, and no longer just an add -on to the previous auto access -way with a muddy footpath on one side and a narrow sidewalk squeezed between parked cars and picket fences on the other. For me, this is a big improvement. I am willing to vote for cutting back on the dominance and public expense of 322 Oct 22, 2015 5:24 PM cars, roads and traffic to get from place to place. Thanks, Edmonds, it is a great improvement. Also a well -worded survey .... did you have a consultant or is there an especially talented engineer on staff ? The results should assist decision -making, finally, I hope. Really. 323 Oct 22, 2015 5:00 PM Number one problem is the pull in parking. Also, people are parking on the north end were there are no parking spots I suggest your contacting the (1) Edmonds Senior Center (2) Edmonds Businesses (3) Edmonds organizations such as Toastmasters (public and 324 Oct 22, 2015 4:50 PM business speaking club) and others for the input of each individual. 325 Oct 22, 2015 5:22 AM Thank you 326 Oct 22, 2015 4:40 AM Provide safe space for bicyclists. 166 Packet Page 359 of 391 1 /28/2016 327 Oct 22, 2015 3:02 AM It was more friendly before and did not need to be changed. Please return it to it's original state. Regarding artwork/benches: Obviously nothing that would block the views of Sunset residents (tall artwork, fences, etc). Also, we have noticed some new One -Way signs which are not artwork and seem completely unnecessary for 328 Oct 22, 2015 1:56 AM egress from a driveway (which was already entered from a one-way street. These should be removed (ugly/obstructing views). Thanks! 329 Oct 22, 2015 1:39 AM I think if the angled parking is to be permanent it should go all the way or be eliminated. This whole project is a waste of money that could have gone to repairing a few of the giant potholes around town! We have a lovely park at the waterfront. 330 Oct 22, 2015 12:18 AM Give Sunset residents their parking spaces back or, if this plan is a must, lower the residents property taxes to make up for their loss of parking. 331 Oct 21, 2015 11:45 PM It seems the complaints have come primarily from home owners on Sunset. We own the street, it is there for all of our benefit. Thank you. 332 Oct 21, 2015 11:41 PM Put a toll gate on both ends and charge admission to walkers, cyclists and autos. Treat all users the same. No freebies. Thank you. 333 Oct 21, 2015 11:06 PM I hope this gets pushed through! don't listen to the negative complainers. This would be a nice upgrade - do it! 334 Oct 21, 2015 11:05 PM I also love the Five Corners Roundabout! 167 Packet Page 360 of 391 AM-8318 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 02/09/2016 Time: 10 Minutes Submitted For: Ed Sibrel Department: Engineering Type: Forward to Consent Submitted By: Megan Luttrell Information Subiect Title Presentation of Bid Results for the SW Edmonds - 105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements 6. E. Recommendation Award the construction contract to Rodarte Construction in the amount of $492,275 and authorize a $73,840 management reserve for changes and unforeseen conditions during construction. Previous Council Action On June 23, 2015, staff presented the initial construction contract award for SW Edmonds - 105th/106th Ave W Storm Improvements Project. On July 7, 2015, bids were rejected and Council authorized staff to rebid the project in 2016. Narrative This project involves the retrofit to stormwater infrastructure within a residential neighborhood between 105th and 106th Avenues and 226th and 228th Streets. The project includes replacement of stormwater related infrastructure (e.g., stormwater piping, catch basins, manholes), installation of two water quality units, construction of a gravel bed infiltration facility, and decommissioning of existing infrastructure, as appropriate. This project will improve the quality of the surface water draining into the Deer Creek watershed. On January 26, 2016, the City received nine bids for the project. The bids ranged from a low of $492,275 to a high of $882,691.50. The bid and funding summary is attached as Exhibit 1. Rodarte Construction submitted the low responsive bid in the amount of $492,275. The engineer's estimate was $487,500. A review of the low bidder's record for responsibility and responsiveness has been completed. The 2016 low bid is $55,315 less than the low bid provided the first time the project was advertised for construction bids in June 2015. The project costs are being funded by the Stormwater Utility Fund (Fund 422). Attachments Exhibit 1 - Bid Summary Packet Page 361 of 391 Exhibit 2 - Proiect Area Map Inbox Engineering (Originator) Public Works City Clerk Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Final Approval Date: 02/04/2016 Form Review Reviewed By Date Robert English 02/03/2016 05:02 PM Megan Luttrell 02/04/2016 10:54 AM Scott Passey 02/04/2016 10:56 AM Dave Earling 02/04/2016 11:13 AM Scott Passey 02/04/2016 12:47 PM Started On: 02/02/2016 10:04 AM Packet Page 362 of 391 City of Edmonds 105th / 106th Street Storm Project Bid Summary 26-Jan-15 Construction Estimate & Bids Engineer's Estimate I Rodarte Construction I Shoreline Construction I R.L. Alia I Kamins Construction I Gary Merlino Construction $ 487,484.61 1 $ 492,275.00 1 $ 565,605.00 1 $ 581,920.00 1 $ 604,600.22 1 $ 634,195.00 Construction Funds Required Construction Contract $ 492,275 Mgmt Reserve (15%) $ 73,841 Const Mgmt & Testing $ 90,600 1 % for Art $ 4,923 Total Construction $ 661,639 Laser Underground I SRV Construction 1 3 Kings Environmental I Thomco Construction $ 672,005.00 1 $ 858,754.00 1 $ 876,827.50 1 $ 882,691.50 Avaiiame runaing 2016 Fund 422, Storm $ 716,800 Packet Page 363 of 391 ■- City of Edmonds Southwest Edmonds Storm Project 226-fH S T S W ■ Legend Sections Boundary Sections ;;� 26TH PL S W. IJ Edmonds Boundary CC IL] ArcSDE.GIS.STREET_CENTERLINEI � � Q "' � call other values> CD 2 L S r Sk, 5; 4 —_ 9; 71; 7 h State Highways <allnfnervawea> o 2-1! 2 J County Boundary ArcSDE.GIS. PROPERTY_WASHINI c t— ed_hillshade - High :254 ■ Low:0 ArcSDE.G IS.PROPERTY_CITIES Sy - ArcSDE.GIS.PROPERTY_CITIES 9L� 229M FL SW city of Edmonds City of Lynnwood City of Mountlake Terrace - CiN N Weed — a1:3,000 U Notes 0 125.00 250.0 Feet This ma p is user generated static output ma to and is for pu from an Internet Aping si reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, NAD_1983_StatePlane__Washington_North_FIPS_4601 Feet current, or otherwise reliable. © City of Edmonds THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR DESIGN OR CONSTRUCTION Packet Page 364 of 391 AM-8320 City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 02/09/2016 Time: 10 Minutes Submitted For: Mike DeLilla Department: Engineering Type: Forward to Consent Submitted By: Megan Luttrell Information 6. F. Subiect Title Presentation of a Professional Services Agreement with the Blueline Group for Capital Projects Construction Management, Engineering & Inspection Services Recommendation Forward this item to the consent agenda for approval at the next Council meeting. Previous Council Action None. Narrative The City issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ), in November 2015 to hire a consultant to support City staff with construction management, engineering and inspection services for various City funded capital projects that are scheduled to begin construction in 2016 and 2017. The City received statements of qualifications from six engineering firms and the selection committee chose The Blueline Group to provide services during construction based on their qualifications, experience and approach. The City has negotiated a consultant fee of $128,400. This agreement will allow Blueline to provide services for the first half of 2016's Capital Improvement Projects for which there is not enough staff to be able to inspect and administer these contracts. It is expected that by the second half of 2016 that the City will have hired a full time Senior Construction Inspector to cover these projects for the rest of 2016. If services are required in 2017 a separate scope and fee will be drafted in 2017. This contract will be funded by each respective project's utility fund. Blueline Group Agreement Inbox Engineering (Originator) Public Works City Clerk Mayor Finalize for Agenda Form Started By: Megan Luttrell Attachments Form Review Reviewed By Date Robert English 02/03/2016 04:35 PM Megan Luttrell 02/04/2016 10:54 AM Scott Passey 02/04/2016 10:56 AM Dave Earling 02/04/2016 11:13 AM Scott Passey 02/04/2016 12:47 PM Started On: 02/02/2016 10:55 AM Packet Page 365 of 391 Final Approval Date: 02/04/2016 Packet Page 366 of 391 s CITY OF EDMONDS DAVE EARLING 121 5T" AVENUE NORTH - EDMONDS, WA 98020 - 425-771-0220 - FAX 425-672-5750 MAYOR Website: www.edmondswa.gov l890 ., PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Engineering Division PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into between the City of Edmonds, hereinafter referred to as the "City", and The Blueline Group, LLC hereinafter referred to as the "Consultant"; WHEREAS, the City desires to engage the professional services and assistance of a consulting firm to provide consulting services with respect to Capital Projects Construction Management, Engineering & Inspection Services; NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual benefits accruing, it is agreed by and between the parties hereto as follows: 1. Scope of work. The scope of work shall include all services and material necessary to accomplish the above mentioned objectives in accordance with the Scope of Services that is marked as Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. 2. Payments. The Consultant shall be paid by the City for completed work for services rendered under this Agreement as provided hereinafter. Such payment shall be full compensation for work performed or services rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies, equipment and incidentals necessary to complete the work. A. Payment for work accomplished under the terms of this Agreement shall be on a time and expense basis as set forth on the fee schedule found in Exhibit B, provided, in no event shall the payment for work performed pursuant to this Agreement exceed the sum of $128,400. B. All vouchers shall be submitted by the Consultant to the City for payment pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. The City shall pay the appropriate amount for each voucher to the Consultant. The Consultant may submit vouchers to the City biweekly during the progress of the work for payment of completed phases of the project. Billings shall be reviewed in conjunction with the City's warrant process. No billing shall be considered for payment that has not been submitted to the City Engineer three days prior to the scheduled cut-off date. Such late vouchers will be checked by the City and payment will be made in the next regular payment cycle. C. The costs records and accounts pertaining to this Agreement are to be kept available for inspection by representatives of the City for a period of three years after final payment. Copies shall be made available upon request. 1 Packet Page 367 of 391 3. Ownership and use of documents. All research, tests, surveys, preliminary data and any and all other work product prepared or gathered by the Consultant in preparation for the services rendered by the Consultant under this Agreement shall be and are the property of the Consultant, provided, however, that: A. All final reports, presentations and testimony prepared by the Consultant shall become the property of the City upon their presentation to and acceptance by the City and shall at that date become the property of the City. B. The City shall have the right, upon reasonable request, to inspect, review and copy any work product during normal office hours. Documents prepared under this agreement and in the possession of the Consultant may be subject to public records request and release under Chapter 42.56 RCW. C. In the event that the Consultant shall default on this Agreement, or in the event that this contract shall be terminated prior to its completion as herein provided, the work product of the Consultant, along with a summary of work done to date of default or termination, shall become the property of the City and tender of the work product and summary shall be a prerequisite to final payment under this contract. The summary of work done shall be prepared at no additional cost. 4. Time of performance. The Consultant shall perform the work authorized by this Agreement promptly in accordance with the receipt of the required governmental approvals. 5. Indemnification / Hold harmless agreement. The Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold the City, its officers, officials, employees and volunteers harmless from any and all claims, injuries, damages, losses, demands, or suits at law or equity arising from the acts, errors or omissions of the Consultant in the performance of this Agreement, except for injuries and damages caused by the sole negligence of the City. Should a court of competent jurisdiction determine that this Agreement is subject to RCW 4.24.115, then, in the event of liability for damages arising out of bodily injury to persons or damages to property caused by or resulting from the concurrent negligence of the Consultant and the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers, the Consultant's liability, including the duty and cost to defend, hereunder shall be only to the extent of the Consultant's negligence. The Consultant shall comply with all applicable sections of the applicable Ethics laws, including RCW 42.23, which is the Code of Ethics for regulating contract interest by municipal officers. The Consultant specifically assumes potential liability for actions brought by the Consultant's own employees against the City and, solely for the purpose of this indemnification and defense, the Consultant specifically waives any immunity under the state industrial insurance law, Title 51 RCW. This waiver has been mutually negotiated by the parties. The provisions of this section shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement. 6. General and professional liability insurance. The Consultant shall obtain and keep in force during the terms of the Agreement, or as otherwise required, the following insurance with companies or through sources approved by the State Insurance Commissioner pursuant to Title 48 RCW. Packet Page 368 of 391 Insurance Coverage A. Worker's compensation and employer's liability insurance as required by the State. B. Commercial general liability and property damage insurance in an aggregate amount not less than two million dollars ($2,000,000) for bodily injury, including death and property damage. The per occurrence amount shall be written with limits no less than one million dollars ($1,000,000). C. Vehicle liability insurance for any automobile used in an amount not less than a one million dollar ($1,000,000) combined single limit. D. Professional liability insurance in the amount of one million dollars ($1,000,000). Excepting the Worker's Compensation Insurance and Professional Liability Insurance secured by the Consultant, the City will be named on all policies as an additional insured. The Consultant shall furnish the City with verification of insurance and endorsements required by the Agreement. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies at any time. All insurance shall be obtained from an insurance company authorized to do business in the State of Washington. The Consultant shall submit a verification of insurance as outlined above within fourteen days of the execution of this Agreement to the City. No cancellation of the foregoing policies shall be effective without thirty days prior notice to the City. The Consultant's professional liability to the City shall be limited to the amount payable under this Agreement or one million dollars ($1,000,000), whichever is the greater, unless modified elsewhere in this Agreement. In no case shall the Consultant's professional liability to third parties be limited in any way. 7. Discrimination prohibited. Consultant shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, national origin, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, veteran status, liability for service in the armed forces of the United States, disability, or the presence of any sensory, mental or physical handicap, or any other protected class status, unless based upon a bona fide occupational qualification. 8. Consultant is an independent contractor. The parties intend that an independent contractor relationship will be created by this Agreement. No agent, employee or representative of the Consultant shall be deemed to be an agent, employee or representative of the City for any purpose. Consultant shall be solely responsible for all acts of its agents, employees, representatives and subcontractors during the performance of this contract. 9. City approval of work and relationships. Notwithstanding the Consultant's status as an independent contractor, results of the work performed pursuant to this contract must meet the approval of the City. During pendency of this agreement, the Consultant shall not perform work for any party with respect to any property located within the City of Edmonds or for any project subject to the administrative or quasijudicial review of the City without written notification to the City and the City's prior written consent. Packet Page 369 of 391 10. Termination. This being an Agreement for professional services, either party may terminate this Agreement for any reason upon giving the other party written notice of such termination no fewer than ten days in advance of the effective date of said termination. 11. Integration. The Agreement between the parties shall consist of this document, the Scope of Services attached hereto as Exhibit A, and the Fee Schedule attached hereto as Exibit B. These writings constitute the entire Agreement of the parties and shall not be amended except by a writing executed by both parties. In the event of any conflict between this written Agreement and any provision of Exhibits A or B, this Agreement shall control. 12. Changes/Additional Work. The City may engage Consultant to perform services in addition to those listed in this Agreement, and Consultant will be entitled to additional compensation for authorized additional services or materials. The City shall not be liable for additional compensation until and unless any and all additional work and compensation is approved in advance in writing and signed by both parties to this Agreement. If conditions are encountered which are not anticipated in the Scope of Services, the City understands that a revision to the Scope of Services and fees may be required. Provided, however, that nothing in this paragraph shall be interpreted to obligate the Consultant to render or the City to pay for services rendered in excess of the Scope of Services in Exhibit A unless or until an amendment to this Agreement is approved in writing by both parties. 13. Standard of Care. Consultant represents that Consultant has the necessary knowledge, skill and experience to perform services required by this Agreement. Consultant and any persons employed by Consultant shall use their best efforts to perform the work in a professional manner consistent with sound engineering practices, in accordance with the schedules herein and in accordance with the usual and customary professional care required for services of the type described in the Scope of Services. 14. Non -waiver. Waiver by the City of any provision of this Agreement or any time limitation provided for in this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of any other provision. 15. Non -assignable. The services to be provided by the Consultant shall not be assigned or subcontracted without the express written consent of the City. 16. Covenant against contingent fees. The Consultant warrants that he has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the Consultant, to solicit or secure this contract, and that he has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts, or any other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award of making of this contract. For breach or violation of this warranty, the City shall have the right to annul this contract without liability or, in its discretion to deduct from the contract price or consideration, or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift, or contingent fee. 17. Compliance with laws. The Consultant in the performance of this Agreement shall comply with all applicable Federal, State or local laws and ordinances, including Packet Page 370 of 391 regulations for licensing, certification and operation of facilities, programs and accreditation, and licensing of individuals, and any other standards or criteria as described in the Agreement to assure quality of services. The Consultant specifically agrees to pay any applicable business and occupation (B & O) taxes which may be due on account of this Agreement. 18. Notices. Notices to the City of Edmonds shall be sent to the following address: City of Edmonds 121 Fifth Avenue North Edmonds, WA 98020 Notices to the Consultant shall be sent to the following address: The Blueline Group, LLC 25 Central Way, Suite 400 Kirkland, WA 98033 Receipt of any notice shall be deemed effective three days after deposit of written notice in the U.S. mails, with proper postage and properly addressed. DATED THIS DAY OF .20 CITY OF EDMONDS THE BLUELINE GROUP, LLC By David O. Earling, Mayor ATTEST/AUTHENTICATE: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Office of the City Attorney By Its Packet Page 371 of 391 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) )ss COUNTY OF ) On this day of , 20 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared , to me known to be the of the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC My commission expires: Packet Page 372 of 391 Exhibit 'A' to the Contract Agreement for Professional Services between The Blueline Group, LLC and the City of Edmonds for Construction Services for 2016 Projects, dated February 3, 2016. Task 001- CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION SERVICES Fee: Time and Expense (Estimated $91,800) Blueline will provide as -needed inspection services at the City's request during the 2016 construction season, and will coordinate construction management activities with the City. Services under this task are anticipated to include: 1. Review plans/specifications and visit the site. 2. Review materials delivered to the site to review compliance with City approved submittals. 3. Provide inspection for all aspects of the construction activity to review Contractor compliance with the contract plans and specifications. 4. Coordinate compaction and materials testing with the testing agency selected by the City under a separate contract. 5. Coordinate all testing with the City and Contractor for water and sewer projects. 6. Coordinate final connections with the City and Contractor for water main projects. 7. Record and report the progress of the construction operations to the City throughout the duration of the contract. 8. Furnish the City with verification of all quantities of materials. 9. Provide final project inspection including punchlists. 10. Provide as -built redlines to supplement the Contractor's redlines. 11. Monitor the Contractor's traffic control operations to review compliance with City approved Traffic Control Plan. 12. Be responsive to requests from citizens and businesses. Deliverables (to be submitted weekly during construction): • Inspector's Daily Reports. • Records of Force Account Work. • Weekly Tabulation of Quantities Placed (with all truck tickets attached). • Construction Progress Photos. It is anticipated that the City will: • Provide purity testing (with coordination provided by Inspector). • Review submittals and project schedules. Assumptions: • Projects include the CIPP (15 working days), 2016 Water (45 working days) and 2016 Sanitary Sewer (50 working days) projects. • The Contractor will provide construction staking for the projects. • The City or Design Engineering Firm will prepare as -built drawings based off of the as -built redlines. Mileage associated with onsite construction inspection has been included in this task. Packet Page 373 of 391 Exhibit 'A' to the Contract Agreement for Professional Services between The Blueline Group, LLC and the City of Edmonds for Construction Services for 2016 Projects, dated February 3, 2016. Task 002 - CONS TRUCT/ONADM/N/STRA T/ON SERVICES Fee: Time and Expense (Estimated $20,300) Blueline will provide construction administration services for this project during the construction period. Services under this task are anticipated to include: 1. Review plans and specifications and visit the site prior to the Pre -Construction Conference. 2. Attend Pre -Construction Conference. 3. Send out minutes from Pre -Construction Conference. 4. Review and approve Contractor progress schedules. 5. Review and approve contract pay estimates, and prepare pay requests for the City approval. 6. Prepare change orders, as needed. 7. Prepare and submit weekly reports (Statement of Working Days and Project Progress Chart). 8. Log affidavits/intents/certified payroll. 9. Provide project filing. 10. Provide RFI log. 11. Coordinate changes to drawings or specifications as necessary to respond to field conditions (As needed - coordinating with the City Project Manager). 12. Monitor construction to determine contractor compliance and prepare associated documentation. 13. General consultation and coordination on an as -needed basis to address construction questions. 14. Assist with preparing punch lists and final inspection. 15. Prepare recommendation of project acceptance. 16. Attend and conduct construction meetings as required. Provide meeting minutes to attendees. We assume at this point that a construction meeting will be held approximately every two weeks. 17. Additional construction inspection services and project management, as needed. Assumptions: • Projects include the CIPP (15 working days), 2016 Water (45 working days) and 2016 Sanitary Sewer (50 working days) projects. • The City or Design Engineering Firm will prepare as -built drawings based off of the as -built redlines. The City will be reviewing submittals and maintaining the submittal log. Mileage associated with construction administration has been included in this task. • If additional inspection time or project management is requested beyond the scope of Tasks 001 and 003, it will be billed under this task. Packet Page 374 of 391 Exhibit 'A' to the Contract Agreement for Professional Services between The Blueline Group, LLC and the City of Edmonds for Construction Services for 2016 Projects, dated February 3, 2016. Task 003 - PROJECTMANAGEMENT Fee: Time and Expense (Estimated $16,300) This task is for general coordination and meetings on the project, including: 1. Management of all tasks and staff for construction inspection services. 2. Communication with the City of Edmonds regarding the construction. 3. Budget tracking and providing weekly updates to the City. 4. Preparation of consultant monthly invoices for work performed during the previous month, including any pertinent backup materials. Assumptions: • Projects include the CIPP (15 working days), 2016 Water (45 working days) and 2016 Sanitary Sewer (50 working days) projects. • If additional inspection time or construction administration time is requested beyond the scope of Tasks 001 and 002, it will be billed under this task. GENERAL ASSUMPT/ONSAND NOTES 1. Scope and fees outlined above are based on the following information (any changes to these documents may result in changes to the fees): a. Correspondence between the Blueline Group and the City of Edmonds on January 1 1, 2016. 2. The client shall provide The Blueline Group with approved plans, contract documents, and any necessary inspection forms. 3. The fees stated above do not include reimbursable expenses such as large format copies (larger than letter/legal size), and plots. These items will be billed under a separate task called Expenses. 4. Compaction and materials testing will be billed directly to the City by the testing agency. 5. Time and expense items are based on The Blueline Group's current hourly rates. 6. Night time work will include a 25% surcharge. 7. Night time work will be performed as full-time inspections only (8 hrs/shift minimum). Packet Page 375 of 391 Job Number: 15-280 Date: February 3, 2016 Attachment `B' to the Contract Agreement for Professional Services between the City of Edmonds and The Blueline Group, LLC for Construction Services for 2016 Projects dated February 3, 2016 City of Edmonds 2016 Construction Services Prepared By: Deanna Martin, PE Checked By: Ken Lauzen, PE Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector Task # Task $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr Total Mileage Total Hours Total Cost Hours Hours Hours 001 Construction Inspection Services 0 $ 0 $ 808 $ 88,880 2,970 808 $ 91,850 002 Construction Administration Services 0 $ 132 $ 19,668 0 $ - 594 132 $ 20,262 003 JProject Management 98 $ 16,268 0 $ - 0 $ - 0 98 $ 16,268 Total 98 $ 16,268 132 $ 19,668 808 1 $ 88,880 $ 3,564 1,038 $ 128,380 Total Cost (Rounded) $ 128,400 The Blueline Group Packet Page 376 of 391 Attachment `B' to the Contract Agreement for Professional Services between the City of Edmonds and The Blueline Group, LLC for Construction Services for 2016 Projects dated February 3, 2016 City of Edmonds 2016 Construction Services Construction Inspection Services 001A Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector CIPP TOTAL Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Pre -Construction Conference & Prep 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 440 4.0 $ 440 2 FT Field (1 wk @ 40 hrs/wk) 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 40.0 $ 4,400 40.0 $ 4,400 3 PT Field (2 wks @ 20 hrs/wk) 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 40.0 $ 4,400 40.0 $ 4,400 4 Night Work Surcharge (25% assuming 1 wk FT night work) 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 10.0 $ 1,100 10.0 $ 1,100 5 Project Close-out, including punchlists, As -built Redlines 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 440 4.0 $ 440 6 Mileage (3 wks x 250 mi/wk @ $0.54/mi) $ 405 Total 1 0.0 $ 1 0.0 $ 1 98.0 $ 10,780 98.0 $ 11,185 *Assumes 15 total working days Construction Inspection Services 0016 Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector 2016 Water TOTAL Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Pre -Construction Conference & Prep 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,320 12.0 $ 1,320 2 Part-time field (9 wks x 30 hrs/wk)* 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 270.0 $ 29,700 270.0 $ 29,700 3 Project Close-out, including punchlists, As -built Redlines 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 8.0 $ 880 8.0 $ 880 4 Mileage (9 wks x 250 mi/wk @ $0.54/mi) $ 1,215 Total 0.0 $ 1 0.0 $ 1 290.0 $ 31,900 290.0 $ 33,115 *Assumes 45 total working days Construction Inspection Services 001C Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector 2016 Sanitary Sewer TOTAL Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Pre -Construction Conference & Prep 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,320 12.0 $ 1,320 2 Full-time field (10 wks x 40 hrs/wk)* 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 400.0 $ 44,000 400.0 $ 44,000 3 Project Close-out, including punchlists, As -built Redlines 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 8.0 $ 880 8.0 $ 880 4 Mileage (10 wks x 250 mi/wk @ $0.54/mi) $ 1,350 Total i 0.0 $ 1 0.0 $ 1 420.0 $ 46,200 420.0 $ 47,550 *Assumes 50 total working days The Blueline Group Packet Page 377 of 391 Attachment `B' to the Contract Agreement for Professional Services between the City of Edmonds and The Blueline Group, LLC for Construction Services for 2016 Projects dated February 3, 2016 City of Edmonds 2016 Construction Services Construction Administration Services 002A Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector CIPP Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS TOTAL FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Pre -Construction Conference & Prep 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 596 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 596 2 Weekly Admin Tasks (3 wks x 4.0 hrs/wk) 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,788 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,788 3 Pay Estimates & Change Orders (2 mo x 4 hrs/mo) 0.0 $ 8.0 $ 1,192 0.0 $ 8.0 $ 1,192 4 Mileage (3 wks x 50 mi/wk @ $.54/mi) $ 81 Total 1 0.0 $ 1 24.0 $ 3,576 1 0.0 $ 1 24.0 $ 3,657 *Assumes 15 total working days Construction Administration Services 002B Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector 2016 Water Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS TOTAL FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Pre -Construction Conference & Prep 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 596 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 596 2 Weekly Admin Tasks (9 wks x 4 hrs/wk) 0.0 $ 36.0 $ 5,364 0.0 $ 36.0 $ 5,364 3 Pay Estimates & Change Orders (3 mo x 4 hrs/mo) 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,788 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,788 4 Mileage (9 wks x 50 mi/wk @ $0.54/mi) $ 243 Total 1 0.0 $ 1 52.01 $ 7,748 1 0.0 $ 1 52.0 $ 7,991 *Assumes 45 total working days Construction Administration Services 002C Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector 2016 Sanitary Sewer Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS TOTAL FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Pre -Construction Conference & Prep 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 596 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 596 2 Weekly Admin Tasks (10 wks x 4.0 hrs/wk) 0.0 $ 40.0 $ 5,960 0.0 $ 40.0 $ 5,960 3 Pay Estimates & Change Orders (3 mo x 4 hrs/mo) 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,788 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,788 4 Mileage (10 wks x 50 mi/wk @ $0.54/mi) $ 270 Total 10.0 $ 1 56.01 $ 8,344 1 0.0 $ 156.0 $ 8,614 *Assumes 50 total working days The Blueline Group Packet Page 378 of 391 Attachment `B' to the Contract Agreement for Professional Services between the City of Edmonds and The Blueline Group, LLC for Construction Services for 2016 Projects dated February 3, 2016 City of Edmonds 2016 Construction Services Project Management 003A Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector CIPP Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS TOTAL FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Initial Project Setup, Review plans/specs 2.0 $ 332 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 2.0 $ 332 2 Review IDRs/documentation (3 wks x 2 hr/wk) 6.0 $ 996 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 6.0 $ 996 3 Budget Tracking & Invoicing (3 wks x 1 hr/wk) 3.0 $ 498 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 3.0 $ 498 4 Coordination with Staff and City (3 wks x 1 hr/wk) 3.0 $ 498 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 3.0 $ 498 Total 14.0 $ 2,3241 0.0 $ 1 0.0 $ 14.0 $ 2,324 *Assumes 15 total working days Project Management 003B Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector 2016 Water Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS TOTAL FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Initial Project Setup, Review plans/specs 4.0 $ 664 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 664 2 Review IDRs/documentation (9 wks x 2 hrs/wk) 18.0 $ 2,988 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 18.0 $ 2,988 3 Budget Tracking & Invoicing (9 wks x 1 hrs/wk) 9.0 $ 1,494 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 9.0 $ 1,494 4 Coordination with Staff and City (9 wks x 1 hrs/wk) 9.0 $ 1,494 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 9.0 $ 1,494 Total 1 40.0 $ 6,6401 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 40.0 $ 6,640 *Assumes 45 total working days Project Management 003C Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector 2016 Sanitary Sewer Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS TOTAL FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Initial Project Setup, Review plans/specs 4.0 $ 664 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 664 2 Review IDRs/documentation (10 wks x 2 hr/wk) 20.0 $ 3,320 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 20.0 $ 3,320 3 Budget Tracking & Invoicing (10 wks x 1 hr/wk) 10.0 $ 1,660 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 10.0 $ 1,660 4 Coordination with Staff and City (10 wks x 1 hr/wk) 10.0 $ 1,660 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 10.0 $ 1,660 Total 44.0 $ 7,3041 0.0 $ I 0.0 $ 44.0 $ 7,304 *Assumes 50 total working days The Blueline Group Packet Page 379 of 391 Attachment `B' to the Contract Agreement for Professional Services between the City of Edmonds and The Blueline Group, LLC for Construction Services for 2016 Projects dated February 3, 2016 City of Edmonds 2016 Construction Services Construction Inspection Services 001A Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector CIPP TOTAL Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Pre -Construction Conference & Prep 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 440 4.0 $ 440 2 FT Field (1 wk @ 40 hrs/wk) 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 40.0 $ 4,400 40.0 $ 4,400 3 PT Field (2 wks @ 20 hrs/wk) 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 40.0 $ 4,400 40.0 $ 4,400 4 Night Work Surcharge (25% assuming 1 wk FT night work 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 10.0 $ 1,100 10.0 $ 1,100 5 Project Close-out, including punchlists, As -built Redlines 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 440 4.0 $ 440 6 Mileage (3 wks x 250 mi/wk @ $0.54/mi) 1 $ 405 Total 0.0 $ 1 0.0 $ 1 98.0 $ 10,780 1 98.0 $ 11,185 *Assumes 15 total working days Construction Administration Services 002A Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector CIPP Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS TOTAL FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Pre -Construction Conference & Prep 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 596 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 596 2 Weekly Admin Tasks (3 wks x 4.0 hrs/wk) 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,788 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,788 3 Pay Estimates & Change Orders (2 mo x 4 hrs/mo) 0.0 $ 8.0 $ 1,192 0.0 $ 8.0 $ 1,192 4 Mileage (3 wks x 50 mi/wk @ $0.54/mi) $ 81 Total 0.0 $ 1 24.01 $ 3,576 1 0.0 $ 1 24.01 $ 3,657 *Assumes 15 total working days Project Management 003A Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector CIPP Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS TOTAL FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Initial Project Setup, Review plans/specs 2.0 $ 332 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 2.0 $ 332 2 Review IDRs/documentation (3 wks x 2 hr/wk) 6.0 $ 996 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 6.0 $ 996 3 Budget Tracking & Invoicing (3 wks x 1 hr/wk) 3.0 $ 498 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 3.0 $ 498 4 Coordination with Staff and City (3 wks x 1 hr/wk) 3.0 $ 498 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 3.0 $ 498 Total 14.0 $ 2,3241 0.0 $ 0.0 $ i 14.0 $ 2,324 *Assumes 15 total working days I CIPP TOTAL $ 17,166 The Blueline Group Packet Page 380 of 391 Attachment `B' to the Contract Agreement for Professional Services between the City of Edmonds and The Blueline Group, LLC for Construction Services for 2016 Projects dated February 3, 2016 City of Edmonds 2016 Construction Services Construction Inspection Services 0016 Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector 2016 Water TOTAL Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Pre -Construction Conference & Prep 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,320 12.0 $ 1,320 2 Part-time field (9 wks x 30 hrs/wk)* 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 270.0 $ 29,700 270.0 $ 29,700 3 Project Close-out, including punchlists, As -built Redlines 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 8.0 $ 880 8.0 $ 880 4 Mileage (9 wks x 250 mi/wk @ $0.54/mi) $ 1,215 Total i 0.0 $ 1 0.0 $ 1 290.0 $ 31,900 290.0 $ 33,115 *Assumes 45 total working days Construction Administration Services 002E Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector 2016 Water Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS TOTAL FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Pre -Construction Conference & Prep 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 596 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 596 2 Weekly Admin Tasks (9 wks x 4 hrs/wk) 0.0 $ 36.0 $ 5,364 0.0 $ 36.0 $ 5,364 3 Pay Estimates & Change Orders (3 mo x 4 hrs/mo) 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,788 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,788 4 Mileage (9 wks x 50 mi/wk @ $0.54/mi) $ 243 Total 0.0 $ 1 52.01 $ 7,748 1 0.0 $ 152.01 $ 7,991 *Assumes 45 total working days Project Management 0036 Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector 2016 Water Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS TOTAL FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Initial Project Setup, Review plans/specs 4.0 $ 664 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 664 2 Review IDRs/documentation (9 wks x 2 hrs/wk) 18.0 $ 2,988 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 18.0 $ 2,988 3 Budget Tracking & Invoicing (9 wks x 1 hrs/wk) 9.0 $ 1,494 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 9.0 $ 1,494 4 Coordination with Staff and City (9 wks x 1 hrs/wk) 9.0 $ 1,494 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 9.0 $ 11494 Total 1 40.0 $ 6,6401 0.0 $ I 0.0 $ 40.0 $ 6,640 *Assumes 45 total working days WATER TOTAL $ 47,746 The Blueline Group Packet Page 381 of 391 Attachment `B' to the Contract Agreement for Professional Services between the City of Edmonds and The Blueline Group, LLC for Construction Services for 2016 Projects dated February 3, 2016 City of Edmonds 2016 Construction Services Construction Inspection Services 001C Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector 2016 Sanitary Sewer TOTAL Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Pre -Construction Conference & Prep 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,320 12.0 $ 1,320 2 Full-time field (10 wks x 40 hrs/wk)* 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 400.0 $ 44,000 400.0 $ 44,000 3 Project Close-out, including punchlists, As -built Redlines 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 8.0 $ 880 8.0 $ 880 4 Mileage (10 wks x 250 mi/wk @ $0.54/mi) $ 1,350 Total i 0.0 $ 1 0.0 $ 1 420.0 $ 46,200 420.0 $ 47,550 *Assumes 50 total working days Construction Administration Services 002C Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector 2016 Sanitary Sewer Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS TOTAL FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Pre -Construction Conference & Prep 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 596 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 596 2 Weekly Admin Tasks (10 wks x 4.0 hrs/wk) 0.0 $ 40.0 $ 5,960 0.0 $ 40.0 $ 5,960 3 Pay Estimates & Change Orders (3 mo x 4 hrs/mo) 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,788 0.0 $ 12.0 $ 1,788 4 Mileage (10 wks x 50 mi/wk @ $0.54/mi) $ 270 Total 10.0 $ 1 56.01 $ 8,3441 0.0 $ 156.0 $ 8,614 *Assumes 50 total working days Project Management 003C Project Manager Construction Administrator Construction Inspector 2016 Sanitary Sewer Item # Description $166/hr $149/hr $110/hr TOTAL HRS TOTAL FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE HRS FEE 1 Initial Project Setup, Review plans/specs 4.0 $ 664 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 4.0 $ 664 2 Review IDRs/documentation (10 wks x 2 hr/wk) 20.0 $ 3,320 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 20.0 $ 3,320 3 Budget Tracking & Invoicing (10 wks x 1 hr/wk) 10.0 $ 1,660 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 10.0 $ 1,660 4 Coordination with Staff and City (10 wks x 1 hr/wk) 10.0 $ 1,660 0.0 $ 0.0 $ 10.0 $ 11660 Total 1 44.0 $ 7,3041 0.0 $ I 0.0 $ 44.0 $ 7,304 *Assumes 50 total working days SEWER TOTAL $ 63,468 The Blueline Group Packet Page 382 of 391 AM-8319 6. G. City Council Meeting Meeting Date: 02/09/2016 Time: 5 Minutes Submitted By: Kernen Lien Department: Planning Type: Information Information Subiect Title Introduction to proposed amendment to ECDC 20.03.002 regarding number of days for public notice Recommendation Hold public hearing on February 16, 2016 for proposed amendment to ECDC 20.03.002 regarding number of days for public notice Previous Council Action None. Narrative There is a discrepancy between a provision in the Edmonds Community Development Code and Washington State law regarding the issuance of a notice of application. RCW 36.70.B.110(3) requires notice of application to be issued at least 15 days prior to an open record predecision hearing. However, ECDC 20.03.002.13.2 only requires that a notice of application be issued at least 14 days prior to an open record predecision hearing. The proposed amendment is to make ECDC 20.03.002.13.2 consistent with state law and require notice of applications to be issued at least 15 days prior to an open record predecision hearing. Attachments Exhibit 1 - Proposed Ordinance Amending ECDC 20.03.002 - Notice of Application Exhibit 2 - RCW 36.7013.110 Form Review Inbox Reviewed By Date Development Services Shane Hope 02/02/2016 10:48 AM City Clerk Scott Passey 02/03/2016 08:33 AM Mayor Dave Earling 02/03/2016 08:35 AM Finalize for Agenda Scott Passey 02/04/2016 10:56 AM Form Started By: Kernen Lien Started On: 02/02/2016 10:28 AM Final Approval Date: 02/04/2016 Packet Page 383 of 391 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, CHANGING THE REQUIRED PERIOD FOR PUBLIC NOTICE PRIOR TO AN OPEN RECORD PREDECISION HEARING FROM AT LEAST FOURTEEN DAYS TO AT LEAST FIFTEEN DAYS, AND AMENDING ECDC 20.03.002 TO MAKE IT CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW. WHEREAS, RCW 36.70B.110(3) requires a notice of application to be provided at least fifteen days prior to any open record predecision hearing on an application; and WHEREAS, the Edmonds Community Development Code is not consistent with this requirement; and WHEREAS, the Edmonds City Council would like to make the ECDC consistent with state law; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EDMONDS, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Subsection 20.03.002.B of the Edmonds Community Development Code, a subsection of the section entitled "Notice of application," is hereby amended to read as follows (new text is shown in underline; deleted text is shown in strike through): B. Issuance of Notice of Application. 1. A notice of application shall be issued within 14 days after the city has made a determination of completeness pursuant to ECDC 20.02.003. 2. If any open record predecision hearing is required for the requested development project permit(s), the notice of application shall be provided at least fifteen474 days prior to the open record hearing. Packet Page 384 of 391 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, 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. APPROVED: MAYOR DAVE EARLING ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY: :• JEFF TARADAY FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. Packet Page 385 of 391 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, CHANGING THE REQUIRED PERIOD FOR PUBLIC NOTICE PRIOR TO AN OPEN RECORD PREDECISION HEARING FROM AT LEAST FOURTEEN DAYS TO AT LEAST FIFTEEN DAYS, AND AMENDING ECDC 20.03.002 TO MAKE IT CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW. The full text of this Ordinance will be mailed upon request. DATED this day of , 2016. 4840-7251-8158,v. 1 3 CITY CLERK, SCOTT PASSEY Packet Page 386 of 391 RCW 36.70B.110: Notice of application —Required elements—Integrati... http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=36.70B.110 RCW 36.70B.110 Notice of application —Required elements —Integration with other review procedures —Administrative appeals (as amended by 1997 c 396). (1) Not later than April 1, 1996, a local government planning under RCW 36.70A.040 shall provide a notice of application to the public and the departments and agencies with jurisdiction as provided in this section. If a local government has made a threshold determination (( )) under chapter 43.21 C RCW concurrently with the notice of application, the notice of application ((staafl)) may be combined with the threshold determination ((Of SigRifiGaR -o)) and the scoping notice for a determination of significance. Nothing in this section prevents a determination of significance and scoping notice from being issued prior to the notice of application. (2) The notice of application shall be provided within fourteen days after the determination of completeness as provided in RCW 36.7013.070 and include the following in whatever sequence or format the local government deems appropriate: (a) The date of application, the date of the notice of completion for the application, and the date of the notice of application; (b) A description of the proposed project action and a list of the project permits included in the application and, if applicable, a list of any studies requested under RCW 36.70B.070 or 36.70B.090; (c) The identification of other permits not included in the application to the extent known by the local government; (d) The identification of existing environmental documents that evaluate the proposed project, and, if not otherwise stated on the document providing the notice of application, such as a city land use bulletin, the location where the application and any studies can be reviewed; (e) A statement of the public comment period, which shall be not less than fourteen nor more than thirty days following the date of notice of application, and statements of the right of any person to comment on the application, receive notice of and participate in any hearings, request a copy of the decision once made, and any appeal rights. A local government may accept public comments at any time prior to the closing of the record of an open record predecision hearing, if any, or, if no open record predecision hearing is provided, prior to the decision on the project permit; (f) The date, time, place, and type of hearing, if applicable and scheduled at the date of notice of the application; (g) A statement of the preliminary determination, if one has been made at the time of notice, of those development regulations that will be used for project mitigation and of consistency as provided in RCW 36.70B.040; and (h) Any other information determined appropriate by the local government. (3) If an open record predecision hearing is required for the requested project permits, the notice of application shall be provided at least fifteen days prior to the open record hearing. (4) A local government shall use reasonable methods to give the notice of application to the public and agencies with jurisdiction and may use its existing notice procedures. A local government may use different types of notice for different categories of project permits or types of project actions. If a local government by resolution or ordinance does not specify its method of public notice, the local government shall use the methods provided for in (a) and (b) of this subsection. Examples of reasonable methods to inform the public are: (a) Posting the property for site -specific proposals; (b) Publishing notice, including at least the project location, description, type of permit(s) required, comment period dates, and location where the complete application may be reviewed, in the newspaper of general circulation in the general area where the proposal is located or in a local land use newsletter published by the local government; (c) Notifying public or private groups with known interest in a certain proposal or in the type of proposal being considered; Packet Page 387 of 391 1 of 5 2/2/2016 9:25 AM RCW 36.70B.110: Notice of application —Required elements—Integrati... http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=36.70B. I 10 (d) Notifying the news media; (e) Placing notices in appropriate regional or neighborhood newspapers or trade journals; (f) Publishing notice in agency newsletters or sending notice to agency mailing lists, either general lists or lists for specific proposals or subject areas; and (g) Mailing to neighboring property owners. (5) A notice of application shall not be required for project permits that are categorically exempt under chapter 43.21 C RCW, unless a public comment period or an open record predecision hearing is required. (6) A local government shall integrate the permit procedures in this section with environmental review under chapter 43.21 C RCW as follows: (a) Except for a threshold determination (( )), the local government may not issue (( +� threshold determination, u e)) a decision or a recommendation on a project permit until the expiration of the public comment period on the notice of application. (b) If an open record predecision hearing is required and the local government's threshold determination requires public notice under chapter 43.21C RCW, the local government shall issue its threshold determination at least fifteen days prior to the open record predecision hearing. (c) Comments shall be as specific as possible. (7) A local government may combine any hearing on a project permit with any hearing that may be held by another local, state, regional, federal, or other agency provided that the hearing is held within the geographic boundary of the local government. Hearings shall be combined if requested by an applicant, as long as the joint hearing can be held within the time periods specified in *RCW 36.70B.090 or the applicant agrees to the schedule in the event that additional time is needed in order to combine the hearings. All agencies of the state of Washington, including municipal corporations and counties participating in a combined hearing, are hereby authorized to issue joint hearing notices and develop a joint format, select a mutually acceptable hearing body or officer, and take such other actions as may be necessary to hold joint hearings consistent with each of their respective statutory obligations. (8) All state and local agencies shall cooperate to the fullest extent possible with the local government in holding a joint hearing if requested to do so, as long as: (a) The agency is not expressly prohibited by statute from doing so; (b) Sufficient notice of the hearing is given to meet each of the agencies' adopted notice requirements as set forth in statute, ordinance, or rule; and (c) The agency has received the necessary information about the proposed project from the applicant to hold its hearing at the same time as the local government hearing. (9) A local government is not required to provide for administrative appeals. If provided, an administrative appeal of the project decision, combined with any environmental determinations, shall be filed within fourteen days after the notice of the decision or after other notice that the decision has been made and is appealable. The local government shall extend the appeal period for an additional seven days, if state or local rules adopted pursuant to chapter 43.21 C RCW allow public comment on a determination of nonsignificance issued as part of the appealable project permit decision. (10) The applicant for a project permit is deemed to be a participant in any comment period, open record hearing, or closed record appeal. (11) Each local government planning under RCW 36.70A.040 shall adopt procedures for administrative interpretation of its development regulations. [1997 c 396 § 1; 1995 c 347 § 415.1 NOTES: *Reviser's note: RCW 36.7013.090 expired June 30, 2000, pursuant to 1998 c 286 § 8. 2 of 5 Packet Page 388 of 391 2/2/2016 9:25 AM RCW 36.70B.110: Notice of application —Required elements—Integrati... http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=36.70B.110 RCW 36.70B.110 Notice of application —Required elements —Integration with other review procedures —Administrative appeals (as amended by 1997 c 429). (1) Not later than April 1, 1996, a local government planning under RCW 36.70A.040 shall provide a notice of application to the public and the departments and agencies with jurisdiction as provided in this section. If a local government has made a determination of significance under chapter 43.21C RCW concurrently with the notice of application, the notice of application shall be combined with the determination of significance and scoping notice. Nothing in this section prevents a determination of significance and scoping notice from being issued prior to the notice of application. Nothing in this section or this chapter prevents a lead agency, when it is a project proponent or is funding a project, from conducting its review under chapter 43.21 C RCW or from allowing appeals of procedural determinations prior to submitting a project permit application. (2) The notice of application shall be provided within fourteen days after the determination of completeness as provided in RCW 36.7013.070 and, except as limited by the provisions of subsection (4)(b) of this section, shall include the following in whatever sequence or format the local government deems appropriate: (a) The date of application, the date of the notice of completion for the application, and the date of the notice of application; (b) A description of the proposed project action and a list of the project permits included in the application and, if applicable, a list of any studies requested under RCW 36.7013.070 or 36.70B.090; (c) The identification of other permits not included in the application to the extent known by the local government; (d) The identification of existing environmental documents that evaluate the proposed project, and, if not otherwise stated on the document providing the notice of application, such as a city land use bulletin, the location where the application and any studies can be reviewed; (e) A statement of the public comment period, which shall be not less than fourteen nor more than thirty days following the date of notice of application, and statements of the right of any person to comment on the application, receive notice of and participate in any hearings, request a copy of the decision once made, and any appeal rights. A local government may accept public comments at any time prior to the closing of the record of an open record predecision hearing, if any, or, if no open record predecision hearing is provided, prior to the decision on the project permit; (f) The date, time, place, and type of hearing, if applicable and scheduled at the date of notice of the application; (g) A statement of the preliminary determination, if one has been made at the time of notice, of those development regulations that will be used for project mitigation and of consistency as provided in RCW ((36.70B.040)) 36.70B.030(2); and (h) Any other information determined appropriate by the local government. (3) If an open record predecision hearing is required for the requested project permits, the notice of application shall be provided at least fifteen days prior to the open record hearing. (4) A local government shall use reasonable methods to give the notice of application to the public and agencies with jurisdiction and may use its existing notice procedures. A local government may use different types of notice for different categories of project permits or types of project actions. If a local government by resolution or ordinance does not specify its method of public notice, the local government shall use the methods provided for in (a) and (b) of this subsection. Examples of reasonable methods to inform the public are: (a) Posting the property for site -specific proposals; (b) Publishing notice, including at least the project location, description, type of permit(s) required, comment period dates, and location where the notice of application required by subsection (2) of this section and the complete application may be reviewed, in the newspaper of general circulation in the Packet Page 389 of 391 3 of 5 2/2/2016 9:25 AM RCW 36.70B.110: Notice of application —Required elements—Integrati... http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=36.70B. I 10 general area where the proposal is located or in a local land use newsletter published by the local government; (c) Notifying public or private groups with known interest in a certain proposal or in the type of proposal being considered; (d) Notifying the news media; (e) Placing notices in appropriate regional or neighborhood newspapers or trade journals; (f) Publishing notice in agency newsletters or sending notice to agency mailing lists, either general lists or lists for specific proposals or subject areas; and (g) Mailing to neighboring property owners. (5) A notice of application shall not be required for project permits that are categorically exempt under chapter 43.21C RCW, unless ((a public comment period „r)) an open record predecision hearing is required or an open record appeal hearing is allowed on the project permit decision. (6) A local government shall integrate the permit procedures in this section with its environmental review under chapter 43.21 C RCW as follows: (a) Except for a determination of significance and except as otherwise expressly allowed in this section, the local government may not issue its threshold determination(( or issue -a decision or -a recommendation on a project permi )) until the expiration of the public comment period on the notice of application. (b) If an open record predecision hearing is required ((and the enrol gGVeFRmon+'c +hre6hold determination . equi. es public notice under chapter 43.2''��)), the local government shall issue its threshold determination at least fifteen days prior to the open record predecision hearing. (c) Comments shall be as specific as possible. (d) A local government is not required to provide for administrative appeals of its threshold determination. If provided, an administrative appeal shall be filed within fourteen days after notice that the determination has been made and is appealable. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this section, the appeal hearing on a determination of nonsignificance shall be consolidated with any open record hearina on the project permit. (7) At the request of the applicant, a local government may combine any hearing on a project permit with any hearing that may be held by another local, state, regional, federal, or other agency ((provided that)) if• a The hearing is held within the geographic boundary of the local government((. Hearings s" be combined of requested by an applieant, as )): and b The joint hearing can be held within the time periods specified in *RCW 36.70B.090 or the applicant agrees to the schedule in the event that additional time is needed in order to combine the hearings. All agencies of the state of Washington, including municipal corporations and counties participating in a combined hearing, are hereby authorized to issue joint hearing notices and develop a joint format, select a mutually acceptable hearing body or officer, and take such other actions as may be necessary to hold joint hearings consistent with each of their respective statutory obligations. (8) All state and local agencies shall cooperate to the fullest extent possible with the local government in holding a joint hearing if requested to do so, as long as: (a) The agency is not expressly prohibited by statute from doing so; (b) Sufficient notice of the hearing is given to meet each of the agencies' adopted notice requirements as set forth in statute, ordinance, or rule; and (c) The agency has received the necessary information about the proposed project from the applicant to hold its hearing at the same time as the local government hearing. (9) A local government is not required to provide for administrative appeals. If provided, an administrative appeal of the project decision((, eem"ined +")) and of any environmental determination ((s)) issued at the same time as the project decision, shall be filed within fourteen days after the notice of the decision or after other notice that the decision has been made and is appealable. The local government shall extend the appeal period for an additional seven days, if state 4of5 Packet Page 390 of 391 2/2/2016 9:25 AM RCW 36.70B.110: Notice of application —Required elements—Integrati... http://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=36.70B. I 10 or local rules adopted pursuant to chapter 43.21 C RCW allow public comment on a determination of nonsignificance issued as part of the appealable project permit decision. (10) The applicant for a project permit is deemed to be a participant in any comment period, open record hearing, or closed record appeal. (11) Each local government planning under RCW 36.70A.040 shall adopt procedures for administrative interpretation of its development regulations. [1997 c 429 § 48; 1995 c 347 § 415.1 NOTES: Reviser's note: *(1) RCW 36.70B.090 expired June 30, 2000, pursuant to 1998 c 286 § 8. (2) RCW 36.70113.110 was amended twice during the 1997 legislative session, each without reference to the other. For rule of construction concerning sections amended more than once during the same legislative session, see RCW 1.12.025. Severability-1997 c 429: See note following RCW 36.70A.3201. 5 of 5 Packet Page 391 of 391 2/2/2016 9:25 AM